THE RIGHTEOUS PREDATOR

I have insight into the heart of evil, because, although, by the grace of God, I have been spared from an upbringing that would immerse me into the culture which would feed into it, I am, to a large extent, cut from the same cloth.

When a predator sees a grass eater, its instinct is to sneak up on it, tear its jugular, rip it limb from limb and consume it.

Now, we, as human beings, were designed to be predators. We have eyes on the front of our heads. We have digestive systems that can process meat. We have brains that operate more efficiently when we eat flesh. We were meant to hunt things, and tear flesh from bone. This is what we are. People can subsist on vegetables and be perfectly healthy, but in order to do so, they must eat a very wide variety of vegetables to get all the same nutrients; nutrients that we can get wholesale by eating raw meat (cooking meat damages its nutritional value, although it does kill anything it may be infested with).

I don’t say this to attempt to refute vegetarianism, which can be made to work, but merely to point out that, biologically, that is not what we are designed (evolved and/or created) to be.

All of that having been said, over time, civilization has successfully bred out the predator instinct from a large portion (the majority, I would say) of the population. We have relinquished our predator instinct in favor of a herd mentality. Rather than focusing on developing a relationship with a few strong people and subsisting by consuming the weakness out of the herd, our nature has been inverted to seek validation, comfort, and protection in large groups — the psychology of the herd; the grass-eater.

For those of us that are left, who have not succumbed to this, who are still capable of thinking for ourselves (another attribute associated with the predator-individualist), there is a strong psychological tension at work.

We see our fellow human beings, and we experience, on the one hand, a human fellowship, yet, on the other hand, we perceive in them (in their attitudes, values, philosophy, and psychology) the nature of herd.

We experience desires that offend our conscientious natures.

But those that fall prey to their desire to eat their fellow human beings ultimately becoming something else, entirely — they lose the predatory nature, and become parasites.

The nature of the predator is to take out the weak. This strengthens the herd. In corporate America, the healthy predator will frequently be in a managerial/executive position. If they are not, then they frequently experience alienation and frustration, since their coworkers will tend to have more of a herd mentality, which will be completely foreign to them.

The nature of the parasite is to take out the strong. Why? Because they have become accustomed to people willfully feeding themselves to them via the various fraudulent systems they’ve designed, and the self-confident, and intellectually independent strong (i.e., the predators) pose a direct threat to that system, which enables them to continue to enjoy a position on the top of the human food chain without having to work for it, or be worthy of it.

The entire system is unnatural, twisted, and unjust, and it undermines the viability of the human race by promoting weakness and the herd mentality. It is disgusting to independent thinker — as well it should be — and it is enabled by the philosophy of the city; the system whereby we huddle together into vast population centers until we are piled on top of each other like sheep around a shepherd; instead of being the rural, land-owning entrepreneurs we are supposed to be.

Do you hate Wal-Mart, Monsanto, MTV, and all of these unnaturally huge corporations that are making us weak and stupid?

I blame the herd mentality.

FASCIST!!

People are very quick to throw this word around.

It really amounts to an ad hominem attack.  It is seen as inherently pejorative; and perhaps rightly so, and it is frequently thrown around quickly and (as in my case) inaccurately.

http://forums.philosophyforums.com/threads/introducing-transegoism-59732.html

This same guy later deleted one of my posts, which had been both polite and on subject in a different thread.

Retaliation much?

POWER GAMES

If you are close to power, then you need to understand that your standing with those around you is always fluid.  You need to be comfortable with that, and understand that as much as it may seem to be the case that those close to you are your friends, they are not.  They are there because they like power.  If you happen to be in their way, then watch your back; even as you carefully maintain your smiling, relaxed demeanor.  This situation is not cultural; it is biological, and it is hard wired.  This is how it always has been, and how it always will be.

MONEY-POWER

Money and power are inherently related.  This is common knowledge.  What is not common knowledge is the reason why this is the case.  And the reason this is the case is quite simple.

Power is the ability to exert influence over how others choose to expend their time, effort, and resources.

Money is an accepted, demarcated representation of time, effort, and resources.

Ergo, money and power relate to one another on a directly proportional basis.  An amount of money is a strong indicator of power, as well as being a source for the same.

An indicator: because, under normal circumstances, money is acquired by being able to constructively guide (or influence) human action.

A source: because it amounts to a direct means of accomplishing the same.

An insidious implication: when money stolen (or redistributed, which amounts to the same thing; subject of a future post), what is actually occuring is not merely theft, but also enslavement; because you are taking by force that which legitimately represents the time, effort, and resources of other people.

Contrast this to trade, which amounts to an agreement of equivalency; i.e., an agreement that a certain amount of time and effort on the part of one party, is equivalent in value to a different amount of time and effort on the part of another.

Tangential conclusion: people say that Capitalism is injust, and distributes income inequitably.

The former is not true; because the system in its strict sense, allows only for such economic relationships which each party (legitimately) in question is willing to voluntarilly agree to.

The latter is a partial truth: not everyone is «equal» in a capitalist system.  This is, for the most part, a function of the fact that not all people are equal.  Some are smarter.  Some are harder working.  Some have unique talents.  Some people seem to think this is unfair.  Such an attitude is not merely petty and resentful, but also counterconstructive.  These people should be thankful that these people are so much smarter, hard-working, talented, and wealthy than them, because this enables them to create a world that is much more pleasant to live in for everyone; they are able to do this because they understand how to allocate themselves and their resources.  If the socialists had their way, these people would be severely handicapped and we’d all suffer for it.

Caveat to the tangential conclusion: we do not live in a Capitalist society.  We live in a Fascist society.  If you do not understand the distinction (and many do not), then don’t worry; I will clarify it in a future post.