Mystics & Artist-Prophets:

.

---

.

Superpowers – Elon; Neo-Demagogue – Stealing Words then Casting Spells: The stealing of words can be used as a utility insofar as to invert its meaning alongside grifter intellectuals implying doubt over known facts, notably, that fascism has always been right-wing. They re-energise terminologies like “National Socialism”, indicating fascism as a nationalist socialist movement. By the very nature of that doubt assumes polarisation, there is no ambiguity it’s not amorphous; fascism has never been a socialist movement. There is no uncertainty to have about Hitler’s policy, and to introduce such a fallacy imports an indeterminate factor like doubt, it’s ludicrous because we do know.

Robert O Paxton’s “The Anatomy of Fascism” states: “The ultimate fascist response to the Right-left political map was to claim that they had made it obsolete by being ‘neither Right nor Left,’ transcending such outdated divisions and uniting the nation.” This is a claim many intellectuals have used to muddy the waters about the clear fact that it is right-wing. Claims that think otherwise usually come from [think tanks] anarcho-capitalist Institutions and poorly researched authors and podcasters. It is the response of the fascist to cast doubt about facts or to claim it is neither left nor right, and this goes beyond Agrippa’s split in reason, as the former is more agenda-driven.

Left-wing politics is about social equality and egalitarianism, often opposing social hierarchies as a whole or certain social hierarchies. Right-wing politics is a range of political ideologies that view certain social orders and hierarchies as inevitable, natural, or desirable, typically supporting this position based on natural law, economics, authority, property, religion, or tradition. Inequality is seen as a result of traditional social differences or competition in market economics.   

There were no cooperatively foreign businesses owned by all the people for the people and distributed to the people. Redistribution was not high on the Nazi regime of things to do. It shouldn’t confound it with doubt – where, for the most part, was a bid to appease the middle-left and centre-left of the Communist Party of Germany by calling themselves Nationalist Socialists. The Nazis did the very opposite of left-wing politics by privatizing industry as enriches businesses and political elites without benefiting consumers or taxpayers.

The Nazis loosened gun laws for –non-Jews and abortion was becoming less severe, leading to the Nazi’s rise – and when they took power, they heavily punished Aryans [a term stolen from theosophy] and encouraged it for undesirables. As for healthcare, they had a system in place since 1883, but the Nazis made it more exclusionary. The book – The Third Reich in Power states: “Nazi ideology neither did nor in principle favours the idea of social welfare.” … “The Nazi Party frequently condemned the elaborate welfare system they had grown up under the Weimar Republic.”

The Nazi Dictator himself said he stole the word socialism back from Marxists as they confused the meaning: “I shall take socialism away from the socialists” – as he believed socialism came from Germany. Of course, he was lying – the same lies and blatancy Trump promoted in his campaign, and only now, his followers are finding out.

Elon claims the Nazis were socialist lefties, a claim that is incongruent with the fascist movement in South Africa during the Apartheid. A time, in which Elon grew up, we would assume that experience alone would impart firsthand examples and reinforce the disingenuousness of that comment. It is a fact the Nazis killed over a million civilians because of their political affiliation – most of them socialists and communists.

Right-wing grifters like Jordan Peterson would have you believe national socialists’ killing other socialists is expected to undermine the tolerant left position. We’ve established the title ‘national socialism’ is an oxymoron, and it was really about the Nazi regime going against the basic foundations and mechanism of socialism. They wanted to roll back the industry into industrial serfdom. It’s important to recognise that a billionaire industrialist is saying that the Nazis were socialists, and one of the bad things about the Nazis is that they were so far-left socialists – it is just Nazi propaganda. The Nazis crushed the workers and exalted the bosses. Elon lies for the Nazis while literally saying the Nazis lie; it’s not surprising, as commonly shared knowledge perceived most industrialists and capitalists will always go against the labour class.     

Right-wing pundits like Jordan Peterson, Ben Shapiro, Dave Rubin, and the whole PragerU groups of conservatives are flying monkeys of Elon’s & Trump’s shame and guilt. They rely on instrumental reason that doesn’t exist or utilitarianism used as reason where humanity’s moral encapsulation is transfixed one way.  Jordan Peterson had said he hadn’t read beyond “Communist Manifesto,” and he props up this document so much. Hence, it extends to a type of utility whereby all human capacity and thought are boxed in this Communist Manifesto and no other. How about reading Marx’s several or more books? – They cannot because it offers better rebuttals to their narrowness and debunks his instrumental reason guise as postmodern neo-Marxism.     

In his latest work, “Don’t Burn This Book”, Dave Rubin compares socialism to Nazism and fascism by claiming that Benito Mussolini was “raised on Karl Marx’s “Das Kapital”.” This assertion overlooks Mussolini’s later actions to imprison and silence Marxists and other perceived “enemies of the nation.” Similarly, Ben Shapiro’s “How to Destroy America in Three Easy Steps” recycles familiar critiques of Marx’s labour theory of value, ironically praising John Locke for rightly stating that property ownership is an extension of one’s labour. Locke argues that when we remove something from its natural state and mix our labour with it, we make that property our own. This critique of Marx, especially by Peterson, Rubin, and Shapiro, is notable; they often repeat clichés about the importance of hard work and spirited debate without engaging with his ideas.

Anti-woke has become as extreme as woke itself to a point it’s more devastating to the populace that despises it. As much as Woke is abominable, it doesn’t go beyond reimaging already appreciated artworks and destroying the imaginative faculties of the original artist. It’s got to the point where corruption [and neo-fascism] in the form of a Coup has a stranglehold on government that affects the populace, the same populace that put those managers of that government into power. We know Elon’s guilty, but because half the populace is so demoralised, all he has to do is spell cast an (x)tweet deflection where it composes woke subtlety. His guilt is deflected onto the system of deep government and the courts, and we know he bought his position and bought the courts that appointed Trump into position. The administration uses the same process of spell casting merely to deflect the blame into woke – and people living in a post-truth world believe it without question. Most are young manosphere-loner gamers who don’t know any better. Unfortunately, it is with ignorance and lack of grace that their neo-fascist government is stealing from them and destroying their livelihood.    

.

Elon’s company, Tesla, is well known for rampant racism or racial discrimination, often paying out lawsuits that have been made against Tesla. His cars usually pass unregulated safety checks, causing possible harm to civilians. When cases were brought to attention, data and evidence were wiped out from the Tesla cars that housed that information. Even before Trump entered office, he claimed to deregulate everything as it burdened the populace. The kind of deregulation needed, especially concerning safety, he had made anti-sematic (x)tweets, and he had told advertisers to “F” off, which later he recounted as advertisers have foundational standing regarding profit and what holds social media platforms in business. Post-inauguration, Wall Street is backing out, his Tesla sales have become toxic, and sales have dropped.

This puts his wealth into question, whether it’s all fluff, as he is trying to procure data illegally [in a coup] through the treasury. Through the utilitarian justification of a non-government institution [DOGE] employing a young group of computer nerds to hack and steal data. Not through accountants, economists, civil servants and lawyers, but nerds. He is equal in debt as he is paid in shares, and the latest surveys indicate his Tesla Company is heading towards bankruptcy. This motivation was long in the works as it has something to do with an attempt to buy out openAI, which he is in a legal lawsuit. He wants to own it so he can create a Chabot called GSAi together with DOGE, and he wants to use its [AI] technologies to cut costs and modernise the US government. I wouldn’t be surprised if he’s archetypically aligning himself as a digital megalomaniac overlord as a roost just to loot the treasury and siphoned money into his pockets. Or to privatise government systems [treasury systems [in some weird App model] undermining an already competent process. Or siphon money to go towards their version of the Sovereign Wealth Fund; external to a global version of the sovereign fund that they are already part of.

Superpowers – Elon; Neo-Demagogue – Nonconformist Leader of Nerds & Post-Truth-(ers): MAGA cults, nationalist white supremacists, right-wing Christian & conspiracy- theory fundamentalist groups, and traditional conservative right-wing Christians are beyond reason at this point. They are fully demoralised and live in a “post-truth” environment. In the great theatrics of debate and the appeal to vote – collectively, they were the majority voters. Post-election, most of those voters, in their ignorance, had faith in their government that they wouldn’t lie about promises; little did they know. Some are regretful that they voted against their interest; these are policy voters who have appealed to labour. They can vote either way. The independent voters are complicit in the demise of a failed system, or maybe they understand that left and right, like Communism and Fascism, are seen as utility for marginal dialectic on the extremes of reason. If anything else, [independent voters] are responsible for speeding up their/your demise rather than slowing down projected inevitability. It’s the remaining 30 per cent that is left over the “post-truth” types, immovable voters, which raises a lot of fundamental and philosophical problems.   

Qanon had flooded information to a populace about conspiracy theories, and instead of awakening them, it initiated them towards a cult. They were unable to discern decades of conspiracy theory in one setting. This means they are missing intellectual mechanisms for questioning theoretical conspiracism in expressing any unstructured doubt. For instance, in the hierarchy of evil, the Democrats are the culprit, as opposed to the polar other [Republicans]. Or an external other in the form of a mystery, such as pagan-like apocryphal myths or secret state-cult groups who collectively consent to demonic angel worship. Instrumentalism’s reason is redirected, where all evil is compressed into one political party. This behaviour positions them as abnormal in an apocalyptic [revealing] world [as opposed to normal behaviour] – where they are more engendered by post-magical thinking rather than rational thought. The right-wing further bolsters misinformation that they relay and often create on social media. When you have a demagogue and neo-demagogue that reinforces their speculation, it only spurs them further into their delusion.  

There is a clear distinction between the abnormal cults imbued in “post-truth” and truthers who have been in the game for three decades or more; they are just helpful esoteric seekers of knowledge more than anything else. Not only have Post-truthers created an evil left-absolutism, but they are also inflexible. Any attempt to educate or use sensible explanations gets caught up in the weakening structures of the argument accompanied by misleading or misunderstood ideologies like “postmodern neo-Marxism” – “cultural Marxism” or anti-woke sentiments, and so forth, arguments as sterile [or proven wrong] as the ideologies are as irrelevant. The digital platform has created bubbles of subsets where there is a split in the method of self-criticism as it’s more a source of a self-justifying medium that generates its own logic.

We’ve established that the right wing is “post-truth”, and the circumstance of post-truth gets its foundation in postmodernism, which is not entirely correct. Three prominent understandings of postmodernism are understood:

• Frederick Jamison who said it was the weakening of history and the lack of depth and the waning of effect.

• Jean Francois Lyotard describes it as a rejection of grand narrative like the universal structures like progress.

• Derrida claims there is nothing outside of text, so any claims to universal truths is undercut.

When contrasted together, we assume the world is fiction or fabrication, a difficult notion for anyone to grasp, even left and right thinkers, as it imparts a transient universe that questions an objective universal truth.

Post-truth typifies postmodernism as scepticism, then becomes exclusionary [especially in the right wing], further reinforced by Christian-conspiracy-fundamentalism, resulting in a right-wing post-truth worldview. Post-truth is a general characteristic of our age rather than postmodernism itself, as it is predominantly led by propaganda alongside neoliberal valorisation of the individual. However, you don’t want to entangle postmodernism with the relativity of individual subjectivity. It’s not a consequence of postmodernism because you must imply that it’s a consequence of scepticism. Postmodernism is more of an aesthetic and philosophical project than a consumerism and mass culture characterised as neoliberalism.    

It’s not postmodern to be sceptical about scientific evidence of climate change; it is scepticism – climate change is utilitarianism guise as instrumental. Its semantics are more astute, where a stronger focus towards pollution and deforestation has better merit. It feels disingenuous to arouse environmental risks solely on climate change. Postmodernism is not equal to failure in neoliberalism; however, neoliberalism is a failed concept and continues to be so. Trumpisim is a cult that uses scepticism and lies as a utility that gets misconstrued as postmodernism. Scepticism in itself is also not a failure nor a full believer or disbeliever because it just seeks.      

Agrippa’s split in reason has never been as relevant to modernity as it strengthens history; it also exemplifies a depth or perspective that’s refreshing and contrary to modern functions of rationality as it illuminates the imagination. He rejected aspects of Scholasticism and was a complete scholar and believer of Geocentrism. He indeed rejected the looming Illuminati council’s agenda of instrumental reasoning that would later become a pure reason for a heliocentrism worldview. He is a historical sceptic and a modern surrogate character for seekers of truth. In these assertions, besides some details, the former or the latter is a fact. Moreover, it’s a postmodern argument [for modernity] as it questions the grand narrative of your cosmology. Your answer is as close as possible to a totalising rational truth.        

You cannot move beyond postmodernism or even scepticism because it assumes the mechanism of the world has been explained fully through rational absolutes [science]. Moving beyond postmodernism via post-postmodernism is a failure to grasp the mystery, to turn blind to the unexplainable because you cannot grasp postmodernism in the first place. Such a denial appeals to right-wing conservative intellectuals and academic science types who advocate scientism’s success but fail to do so as it is a guise to prop technocracy that will ultimately lead to totalitarianism.

Conservatives’ antipathy towards postmodernism develops into an anti-oppressive movement [anti-woke]. They feel it undermines various meta-narratives like Christianity & science. Also, the kind of meta-narratives and hegemony of race, class, gender, and sexuality; however, you can reject all of this hegemony without buying into lousy philosophy. Implies postmodernism is a bad philosophy. It isn’t good if it’s misunderstood or if one is to purposely reframe where it’s tunnelled through a false assumption of power.

When Lyotard equates to power and reason, often labelled postmodern, it serves as an activist strategy against the coalition of power and reason. However, this equation is frequently misunderstood. We do not have to fight against this coalition; rather, it is an inevitable part of both knowledge and power. It can be seen as neither inherently good nor bad but encompassing both qualities. Derrida and Foucault were not primarily focused on acquiring power. Their interest lies in analysing how power operates within society. While Derrida discusses power, his method of deconstruction is not intended to gain power. Instead, it aims to challenge claims of absolute knowledge and critically examine the trends of knowledge acquisition in Western philosophy. Similarly, Foucault’s examination of genealogical history does not focus on how to gain power but on how power has been used, abused, and transformed throughout history.

Conservatives’ habitual antipathy towards postmodernism (ironically) enables postmodernism through their conservative philosophy. Examined when right-wingers claim that wokeism is derived from postmodernism [it’s the same false instrumental reason regarding socialism in the national-socialism argument discussed before]. It’s a Straw-man argument to fight against “wokeness,” according to Woke, any equality are the fault of a system of power dynamics, but to the conservatives – none are, as wokeness has its roots in postmodernism. As it was originally, Marxism focused on economics, socialism, communism, etc., but it got warped into being [Marxism] about culture and race.

By that logic, Cultural Marxism and Wokeism are the same – as is Cultural Marxism to SJW as Postmodernism-Neo-Marxism is to Political Correctness. Yet many right-wing adherents claim superiority as if they were the true custodians of various liberation movements. It’s often a reactionary movement from liberation movements that are politically correct or have updated it to something more repudiable. Nevertheless, actual liberation movements have always relied upon careful marshalling of facts and evidence to make up for the fact that they don’t have power and wealth. Reject the mechanism, not postmodernism, in which objective facts and truths are repurposed through right and wrong, and doing so plays into the hands of forces of darkness.   

As a reminder [and it’s important to know & memorise], wokeness didn’t come from postmodernism; wokeism was derived from the new-atheist movement. Wokeism was a critique of Marcuse, who uttered culture war rhetoric and identity politics. Still, the founder of the Frankfurt School saw it as unremitting criticism that was oppressive and dehumanising, and the critique was barred. This critique still proceeded to flood modernity, predominantly in the media, creating many reactions and destabilisation.  

It is post-truth, not postmodernism that encourages people’s apathy and ignorance; scepticism brought them there in the form of conspiracy theory and incorrect interpretations of symbols, myth, and hidden history allowed what Ralph Keys calls a reinforcement of opinion; echo chambers existing in an ethical twilight zone. It is only relevant to postmodernism as it describes our modern age, and as it relates to post-truth populists, it is an age without reason. In essence, post-truth politics signifies a shift from focusing on evidence-based arguments to a landscape where raw emotion and manufactured outrage often dictate popular discourse. I would argue that this is more scepticism and claim that post-truth is the reaction of being overwhelmed by evidence-based arguments that are simulated or fake but perceived as empirical, and the drive to make it spurs an unconscious endorsement of an agenda. At the same time, they cannot discern when it is evidence-based fact.    

Ironically, the reaction towards woke had been superseded by its response to anti-woke, as it does more harm than anyone could predict. The divide between the rich and poor becomes extremely split and is managed by something else, not economics but a beast. Entities that prints money and then sell it back into the marketplace by those who caused the crisis. Economists and intellectuals warn the populace by any means so that the citizenry does not fall into the trap of more populism and allow the populace to divide us. Post-US-election illustrates the warning didn’t work. Anti-woke, post-truth [and alt-right] populism have symbiosis marriage, but cannot fathom that merely changing the mermaid’s Ariel from white to black is far more concerning than evaluating Oligarchs, demagogues and their corruption. Or by the utility of reason, attaching activists to judges as “activist-judges,” as this modern jargon will delegitimise the competency of judges. All a while disregarding the corruption of judges who empower the presidency role with immunity.    

After the economic crisis of the 30s in the United States, social security and health care had been a way to establish a safety net to keep an ensuing collapse from happening. Despite its mismanagement in the decades to come, it was a success. However, the rational systems of the time allowed themselves to be dismantled over imposing values that would lead to a crisis. They kept tinkering and collecting money from the citizens’ money jars as a substitute for the problem itself. As a result, this beast from the sea grew through power and depredation of guilt – the hand in the Cookie/Conspiracy Jar made apparent.

Elon’s Coup as he takes hostage the US’s Treasury & Social Security with his band of merry men of coders. It was not approved by Congress, making it illegal. It is interesting to know that the tinkering of Social Security is not new; what has changed? It’s a spectacle. It has a theatre about it. It’s as theatrical as 9/11 was an inside job; in a Post 9/11 apocalyptic modernity, you wouldn’t have it any other way. US Oligarch hates its citizens, which is not surprising as they see themselves as a country themselves. These merry men are anti-government fundamentalist post-truthers on a false-heroic anarchist perception of romanticism, probably on a speed high – love to prop up anti-government Oligarchs who think they are beyond the law. Through payouts for corrupt judges, Trump negotiated a get-out jail card based on executive orders. This means any illegal actions supersede it by claiming it was part of that order, which co-extends to Elon.           

Back in the day, they introduced deregulation and paper speculation as a means of growth, but it would eventually produce inflation, to which control is added to the real economy, resulting in unemployment.  That would lead to low employment standards; this instability in job creation would lead to new inflation with higher interest rates. The recycling of this methodology would garner the idea that public debt as an economic tool was the answer but only positions them from hero to villain. It’s a kind of managerialism that keeps them perpetually either on the edge of recession, neither in it nor in a depression.

Managerialism that perpetuates the assumption that private sector is superior economically to the public, a false claim. Economic debt is the responsibility of the government, the treasury, and the Federal Reserve. However, it’s not relevant and merely a subset; as a whole, the government needs to raise money to pay the interest on its enormous debt. As the division gets wider between corporations and people, between the rich and the middle class, the bulk of the wealth is in the hands of corporations and the rich. Corporations and the rich had removed the burden of taxation from themselves and onto the people. People protest, so they find solutions by taking a percentage of social security, but predominantly, government managers borrow money because they don’t dare to tax the rich. The US’s biggest borrowers are China & Japan. Though it would seem this, Elon’s Coup has all the hallmarks of light-speeding the US economy to depression. It’s no surprise Trump shows his favourability towards Russia, and Russia is China’s ally.

Indeed, they are the villain, but in a post-truth age and digital expediency, they fashioned themselves a heroic model. This was only possible due to the ignorance and apathy of the people, where a slight majority are deeply anti-government in the first place. There is Nihilism in post-truth. There is no reconnection with others of the spirit.  Scepticism positions them where they are, but as absolute as fundamentalist, they are incapable of recognising important grand narratives. It’s hopeless to hope for mutuality, respect, dialogic conceptual thinking, and mutual understanding that are neither left nor right. 

.

Superpowers – Elon; Neo-Demagogue – Heir to the Rocket Man King: Often, the villains don’t see themselves as villains. They typically believe their actions, however harmful they may seem to others, are justified by their own personal motivations and immoral code. They essentially view themselves as the hero of their own story, fighting for a cause they believe in, even if it requires extreme methods.

In the 1948 operation paper clip, the US intelligence agencies executed at the end of World War 2 brought 1600 Nazi scientists and engineers over to the United States to help fight the Cold War. One particular scientist, Wernher Von Braun, helped build the V2 Rockets, which is relevant to the wealthiest man in the world. Von Braun wrote a book called Mars Project in 1952, whereupon the third of the book illustrates technical drawings of Rockets. In the book’s narrative, humanity goes to Mars; a character says we must become multi-planetary – this is sediment Musk parallel.

When they got to Mars, they realised a colony already existed there, and the colony’s leader was called “the Elon” Musk’s father, Errol Musk, stated as a child growing up in apartheid South Africa, he read these science fiction books to Elon.  Errol, being a vast Wernher Von Braun fan, named his son after the leader of the Mars colony, Elon. The colonists on Mars didn’t live on the surface but underground because the surface was too hostile – their civilisation was subterranean. We have a parallel with Elon’s Hyper-loop project, a project to create a high-speed railway between San Fransico and L.A. It was a closed loop tunnel reminiscent of the Tunnel described in the Mars Project book – to which “the Elon” was in charge.  

.

In the book, society on Mars is described as a technocracy, and “Elon is essentially a dictator, and his advisors and people around him were technocrats. An ensemble of engineers, scientists, venture Capitalists, etc., is the only one equipped to handle such challenges led by this benevolent dictator. As we already stated before, Elons maternal grandfather, Joshua Haldeman, was the leader of a pro-Hitler fascist movement in the 1930s and 1940s. And they called that movement Technocracy Inc.; they wanted a society ruled by technocrats, just like in the novel. Elon had described himself as title-King in his SEC filings for Tesla, but he ultimately sees himself as a benevolent dictator.

All these billionaires are Elon’s sphere, and Elon himself follows the philosophy of long-termism and describes effective altruism – it’s the idea that billionaires are so much more intelligent and more capable than the rest of us. And that they should make decisions for us. So they can make hard decisions for society – even if people get hurt.  His worldview seems to be shaped by science fiction fantasy written by a NAZI rocket scientist. It draws from the “dark enlightenment,” an ideology promoted by Curtis Yarvin, who argues against democracy in favour of a monarchic technocracy.

Curtis Yarvin copied the fictional theme of the totalitarian government of Orwell’s government of 1984. They perceive villains in science fiction stories or speculative fiction as heroes. The tech Oligarchs seek to emulate them because they believe how they got rich correlates to their intelligence. Though they merely inherited the position of CEO / salesman, the real inventors and engineers go unnoticed. They promote this adage of people or populace of their countries to get over the dictator baggage of history – [Examined when Elon addressed the fascist right-wing supporters in Germany]. The way to get over this baggage in history is by installing a CEO as a shadow president/leader and destroying government from within through what they call RAGE (retiring all government employees). It’s very reminiscent of what’s happening now in the US.   

The current administration of the United States is floating the concept of a North American Empire constituting Canada and Mexico as this tethered empire of a Globalist enterprise run by a pseudo-science version of the divine right of kings. Elon has set himself up for this ever since he was a child fascinated by the concept of being a dictator king illustrated by a fictional narrative a Rocket scientist wrote.  

.

Silicon Valley’s collective ideology is libertarian and has now turned authoritarian as they believe democracy is obsolete and that they are living in post-constitutional America. Where there is a motivation to initiate or motivate the populace for a Technocratic Feudal Monarch, they write about seizure control of technology and computers and financial payments as the essence of moving one form of government to another. However, the ideologue of modern science has become split as one side overreaches to scientism myth-making, and the other a snail pace of rationalism. As a whole, science is not responsible for ethical or political frameworks..

A Monarch system does not allow morality and common sense to be guided by reason; ironically, these merits make a strong King. The science’s overreach is the illusion of [technological] evolution when it’s equal in engineering as a toymaker creating robot dogs. Reason had created notions of applied data to failed constructions as it was merely an elaborate structure over falsehood. It also allowed us to host events for new authoritarian leaders. Later, we referred to them as absolute dictators, as they aimed to produce examples of false responsible democracy. This is our western inheritance, while the rest of the world struggles with other problems caused by different forces. Despite that, we are still connected, and we develop policies that consider those links. Their hopes for a Monarch still need to analyse itself or reform its society against the rest of the world, which will never give up its civilisation through democracy.

When Curtis Yarvin was asked why he believed FDR was a dictator? He replied: FDR ran the New Deal like a start-up. FDR disapproved of one of the secretary’s lists of projects in the Oval Office, and later, they wrote in their journal FDR ran the Oval Office like a CEO. Anecdotes are not a good reason to suggest FDR was a dictator; they are mere indications that his management method was cooperative. These rich tech nerds view reality within tech and power as drastically different from how the government is run. It is strange how utilitarianism is used as a reason, like technological feudalism, which is different from feudalism because the common ground is technocracy. Cynicism, ambition, rhetoric, and worship of power were characteristics commonly found in the courts of the eighteenth century. This is what the modern elites want to live by; it’s just further propelled by tech oligarchs who can make it realised.       

Elected or non-elected elites who disregard the public cooperate with established democratic systems while neglecting the contributions of the populace and failing to recognise a shared moral code. They rely on heroic appeals, contractual arguments, and administrative methods. When engaging with the public, they find it easier to appeal to the lowest common denominator within each individual. This reinforces their contempt for the public, as they assume people can do nothing better. They overlook that the public, like its individual members, is capable of outstanding achievements and significant failures. Citizens are often limited by their time and knowledge; they are busy with jobs and families and may hesitate to go beyond their areas of expertise. Despite this, the public maintains a strong trust in their elites, believing that these leaders have been trained and selected to usher in an age of reason. Unfortunately, the elites often reward that trust with a betrayal of those they are meant to serve.

Superpowers – Elon; Neo-Demagogue – Rocket to the Eye of Providence is not a Seat in Heaven: It took four and half centuries to break the eighteenth century’s power of divine revelation, only to replace it with divine revelations of reason. They are genuinely godless in a sense; they are evolutional, the ascent through transformation – while symbolically and mythically enamoured with angelic worship of the watchers types – who gifted them with technology. They are deeply technocratic – reinforced by A.I adaptive behaviours, basically worshipping numbers in a vortex or an abyss. It’s lullian number magic – superseded by A.I number generators; they worship an A.I god. So, we are back trying to break away from divine revelation written in code, but this time, it has firmly placed itself in rational modes of technology and knowledge. Can mystery be reasoned with?

Post-constitutional America up against a post-truth populace who are broadly patriotic does not seem to align but does so in their shared ignorance. And it’s in ignorance, not postmodernism, that sways people to deny or have the option of referring to truth. Postmodernism has become a scapegoat regarding that sensibility; in that regard, postmodernism is closer to analysing post-truth than the espousal of post-truth. It’s difficult to understand that postmodernism is not interested in eradicating the distinction between truth and lies – or even the abolition of the topic of truth from the realms of philosophy. When discussing truth in a postmodern lens, truth becomes this transient object, always grasping at it throughout time. In its history, it displaces questions of time with questions of truth – a part of that history is deconstruction. As a result, Derrida conjured issues that were more relevant to higher education.        

Lyotard recognised a change of tense in cultural productions, and he called it “future anterior”, a notion of looking forward or forward-lookingness. It was about being concerned or exercising things to come or what a futurist monstrosity would be ushered in. Humankind grew out of his self-interest and built rockets and satellite technology with a burning desire to answer whether there was a primeval space god. Technology has a bad habit of assuming we matured out of self-structure, and only scepticism can reassure us that moon landings were studio-made. Hyperreal space is mythology where Elite’s relationship with the future is fundamental, and the truth is secondary. We never went to the moon, and we will never go to Mars, and Elon’s hope for a future in which space travel is as common as a trip downtown in your car will never be realised. It is a fictional detachment of self-interest of childhood imaginations, though that is also the selling point of NASA.         

What had been conceived as hyperreal polar shifts may indeed be magnetic upheavals together with a combination of the north [centre-pole] high mountain’s plasma and volcano, creating a bubble shield of magnetic particles that will overflow and soon need to be released like a corkscrew. In the past, Genesis mythology says it blew a hole in the sky. A sky reminiscent of concentric circles like an eye, and in it’s this momentary opening to which you find the technocratic elite’s true scope – is to pierce through that eye’s opening. Why? They believe they can buy their way into heaven, as they intuitively know such a place is not for them, so they plan to immortalise their souls. They make deals with fallen entities [fallen angelic beings] so the entities can once again be among the stars. As a result, they are gifted with power, technology and the promise of immortality.

This claim does not fall under the jurisdiction of truth, nor is it post-truth, either considering it’s an analysis or even postmodern since it has a speculation of myth towards it, ever pushing the absurdity of a heliocentric grand narrative. Derrida’s idea imparts that news, fake news, truth, post-truth, conspiracy theory, conspiracy truth, mysticism, synchronicities, journalism, etc., all have a future orientation, producing the event that purports to record it. Somehow, the achievement of an event makes it happen. It’s the living world answering back at you. It gives it a future orientation; regarding post-truth, news bears a relationship with the future, and that news itself changed its tense [future anterior]. It does not represent events that have occurred in the past; it represents events still to come. Derrida’s deconstructive move is to take an opposition but to relocate that opposition inside one of its terms; this was the only challenge to the concept of truth. The distinction between truth and lies emerges from the concept of the lie. The idea of post-truth suggests that truth must be a lie – if post-truth can be understood, the separation of truth and lies is necessary to defend the truth. Relocate heliocentrism back to its centre. Here, you can find the distinction between truth and lie inside the concept of the lie. 

What is normal behaviour regarding our humanness if we can’t uncover its truth? Post-truthers and the alt-right have taken it to the extent that it’s abnormal and exclusionary. Romanticism and scepticism are no longer imbued towards conspiracy theory and ufology but are instead galvanised to a 4chan love child of fascistic ideologues. Capitalism plays a part also plays a part in their despair, but dam if they care as culture wars instil like dispensary for their deep-seated hate. To break them from 40 years of demoralisation is by its method of scepticism and reason, and to have empiricism overshadow their ideologies that get passed down to the younger generation – enthralled by their logic of arbitrary power and superstition of knowledge. This is difficult as the function of argument is co-opted into a virtual/digital dictatorship of terminology. We have to rummage through the garbage to get to the pearl of knowledge, reach its basic foundations, and rediscover ourselves by questioning it – and maybe it would resonate with those people as well.

Knowing all too well, the spilt will always be there, but the truth doesn’t have to be all-encompassing. Take Astrology; star constellations signifying gods and myths embedded in animal imageries have been around since the dawn of civilisation. Those patterns in the stars are made to have allegories; it doesn’t mean we recognise them as literal – it doesn’t mean it’s useless either. It became a utility that allowed navigation for ships that sailed to sea. As a metaphor, it works, and truth becomes less of a key principle – the function has the meaning of truth than what rational truth might strive for.       

.

.

.