Know Thyself
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

Know Thyself

Nothing in Excess
 
HomePortalSearchRegisterLog in

Share
 

 Domestication

View previous topic View next topic Go down 
Go to page : 1, 2, 3  Next
AuthorMessage
Guest
Guest



Domestication Empty
PostSubject: Welcome To The Human Farm Domestication EmptyWed Aug 24, 2011 8:17 pm

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]


After the agricultural revolution when it concerns human history, is it surprising that shortly after the birth of human slavery came to be?

Ever since then human civilization has had a definite feature of it's existence that is constantly reoccurring which is human beings farming other human beings.

When we think of the human social hierarchy between masters and slaves, what do we really think of?

I think of farmers and those who are reduced to cattle like labor of whom are being farmed.

Civilization or society becomes a relationship of farmer and the farmed.

The master is really the farmer enslaving those who becomes their domesticated laboring cattle or oxen.


All social relationships or behavioral social hierarchy revolve around this domestication paradigm.

Civilization is a farm labored by those reduced to the existence of cattle for those in sole control of it that live like farmers off of their labors.

Social domestication is the process of breaking individuals down into submissive like obedience when it concerns the process of transforming them into human livestock.



[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
Back to top Go down
Guest
Guest



Domestication Empty
PostSubject: Domestication Domestication EmptyMon Nov 28, 2011 3:44 am

Should individuals, races, sexes, classes and cultures choose to dominate, to submit, or to be free?

Civilization requires more than just intelligence, it requires domestication, slavery of people, places and things. Ants and bees domesticate their environment, in addition to specializing and collaborating, but they do so instinctively, we do so intelligently.

The Master/slave dialectic, in addition to interdependence (large tribes) is more efficient and has replaced the predator/prey, the hunter/hunted dialectic, in addition to independence (small tribes). A surplus of goods can now be extracted. How much surplus does one require? How much is healthy? Some choose to maximize consumption, some choose to minimize.

Slavery can manifest in subtler ways than mere brute force, when dealing with members of our own species e.g. capitalism, religion, etc.

How much should we domesticate people, places and things, and how much should we allow ourselves to be domesticated?


Last edited by eyesinthedark on Tue Nov 29, 2011 10:41 am; edited 2 times in total
Back to top Go down
Guest
Guest



Domestication Empty
PostSubject: Re: Domestication Domestication EmptyMon Nov 28, 2011 4:10 am

Civilization has advantages and disadvantages, there's been times when I've contemplated living more simply.

This is what I meant by the dilemma of civilization-

Intelligence + dexterity trumps all, or nearly all other qualities- speed, strength, endurance, agility, stamina (actually, humans have superior stamina as well).

This current, relative monopoly on intelligence has offset the balance, the equilibrium of nature. Like playing a game of rock paper scissors where rock can crush paper and scissors.

The ancients comprehended the supreme dilemma even better than we do today. The fall of Aryan Atlantis (assuming it happened) was more fresh in their minds. Where as Nietzsche tells the more left brain tale of master/slave morality, the ancients tell more right brain tales.

It is Prometheus' fire, Pandora's box and Eve's apple. With knowledge comes the power to destroy nature and create artifice, to convert more and more nature into artifice.

It has to do with our natural needs- physical, emotional and mental. Primitive man is closer to deprivation, Civilized man is closer to decadence. At the dawn of the French revolution, it was said 90% of the people died of starvation, and 10% of the people died of gluttony. Who was better off? I suppose I'd rather die of gluttony, but...

The advantage of civilization is- it gives 1 access to more resources. 1 is more able to satisfy their basic needs. The disadvantage is- it gives 1 access to more resources. 1 is more able to satisfy their basic needs.. and more, much, much more, way beyond what is required. In addition to the depletion and the destruction of that which we're dependent on, our environment, abundance and affluence can be detrimental to our own health.

Should the victors (rich, white men) share their spoils with the unfortunate, the vanquished, give back the surplus they've took from nature (after all, they don't need it, right?), or should they hoard it, and take even more, take as much as the earth can bare, increase their wealth and power at the expense of all who live under the sun.. and beyond?

Now, socialism is not necessarily slave morality (you could call it challenger morality), if the slaves take by force and unhypocritically, rather, it becomes slave morality when they attempt to convince the rich/powerful to share with them, or when they deceive (unless of course it is genuine) themselves into thinking they'd share if they were in their place.

The rich/powerful can also be hypocritical, and seek to justify their reign beyond will to power, beyond survival of the fittest, monarchs and capitalists have been known to do this.. or is it genuine?

Is slave morality a hoax, a scam? Or do rich men have nothing to lose by being charitable, and their souls to gain? Western civilization, 500 years of raping, pillaging, plundering and swindling, was it all for not? Should we have never set sail for America?

Europeans freed themselves from bondage, but then we proceeded to enslave the whole earth. Now the greens and liberals want to give it back. Who's right, who's wrong and.. why?

Perhaps the European, being the superior man, is more capable of love and hate, ferocity and tenderness. Nothing can stop the European, perhaps, except himself, or extraterrestrial intervention. High civilization may weaken, atrophy man, his body and his spirit. Perhaps atrophy, in addition to slave morality, is natures way of correcting herself, and reestablishing equilibrium. However, equilibrium may not be desirable. Is there a way to keep European man strong, healthy, in spite of circumstances that make him girlish and contented?

Should the white race specifically, or the human race in general, go on exploiting nature and other humans.. or should we power down our economy?
Back to top Go down
Guest
Guest



Domestication Empty
PostSubject: Re: Domestication Domestication EmptyTue Nov 29, 2011 1:40 pm

I think we need to start with a definition of civilization.
I'll post mine if you post yours.
Back to top Go down
Guest
Guest



Domestication Empty
PostSubject: Re: Domestication Domestication EmptyTue Nov 29, 2011 4:05 pm

The thing about me is, I spend more time on the big picture than the details..
if you haven't noticed.

I define civilization as-

1. When man passes from the predator/prey dialectic to the master/slave dialectic.

2. When man passes from sparse, independent tribes to dense, interdependent tribes.

3. This affords man, or at least some men, a surplus. He can either save his surplus, live a more leisurely life, live a more luxurious life, or all of the above. In addition, he can have more children than he otherwise could of had, he can significantly increase his numbers. Perhaps this is too vague.
Back to top Go down
Guest
Guest



Domestication Empty
PostSubject: Re: Domestication Domestication EmptyTue Nov 29, 2011 4:07 pm

1. I mean that man passes from a subsistence hunter/gatherer society to a superfluous agrarian/herdsman society. He takes a vested interest in that which he preys on. No longer does he merely consume it (plants and animals), he produces and protects it from other animals and men. In short, he monopolizes his prey. The slave (domesticated plants and animals) is no worse off than before, in fact, in many ways, the slave is better off.
Back to top Go down
Guest
Guest



Domestication Empty
PostSubject: Re: Domestication Domestication EmptyTue Nov 29, 2011 4:29 pm

2. The master is better off too, in many ways. He no longer has to locate, chase and catch his dinner and compete with other predators, at least, not as much. This affords him a surplus, as I mentioned before. He can either devise and implement ingenious ways of storing food for the winter (putting into jars, and preserving it with oil, salt), he can work less, he can eat more, he could procreate more, or all of the above.

3. Also, and this is where the denser, more interdependent tribes come into play, for the first time, a luxury class can be formed, a class of men busying themselves with something besides agriculture. The agrarians/herdsman can support this class via their surplus. This class can provide the agrarians/herdsman with all kinds of goods and services. Blacksmiths, artisans, builders, makers of cookery and pottery, brewers, prostitutes, artists, musicians, entertainers, writers, bankers and merchants, all kinds of motherfuckers, dependent on the agrarians/herdsman for sustenance, the necessities of life, in exchange they provide them with the superfluities, the luxuries of life.


Last edited by eyesinthedark on Tue Nov 29, 2011 4:34 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top Go down
Guest
Guest



Domestication Empty
PostSubject: Re: Domestication Domestication EmptyTue Nov 29, 2011 4:33 pm

eyesinthedark wrote:
The thing about me is, I spend more time on the big picture than the details..
if you haven't noticed.

I define civilization as-

1. When man passes from the predator/prey dialectic to the master/slave dialectic.

2. When man passes from sparse, independent tribes to dense, interdependent tribes.

3. This affords man, or at least some men, a surplus. He can either save his surplus, live a more leisurely life, live a more luxurious life, or all of the above. In addition, he can have more children than he otherwise could of had, he can significantly increase his numbers. Perhaps this is too vague.

Do you mean that a civilization forms when man begins to think about profit?
Back to top Go down
Guest
Guest



Domestication Empty
PostSubject: Re: Domestication Domestication EmptyTue Nov 29, 2011 4:43 pm

When man becomes a humanist, when he believes humans are entitled to more than just the basics. Yes, all this begins to gradually, incrementally alter his worldview. No longer does he percieve the universe as cyclical. Something new is happening, he says. It may take thousands of years for him to figure it out. He begins to percieve time as linear, not cyclical. Where as before, he thought of himself as essentially no different than the animals, now he begins to view himself as a God, he begins to despise nature. He sees himself as existing apart from nature, and in many ways, this is true, for now he has settled, he has slowly shaped the world around him, the world revolves around him now, everything is altered to the point where his very environment accommodates him.

Yes, civilization itself is a kind of greed, a hubris, a profound zeal and lust for life, an arrogance, a pride, all the things the bible warns against, now, do you know how the bible came to partially oppose the project of civilization? Sigh, it is Voltaire vs Rousseau, it is the hedonists vs the cynics.
Back to top Go down
Guest
Guest



Domestication Empty
PostSubject: Re: Domestication Domestication EmptyTue Nov 29, 2011 5:04 pm

Now, all was not well, there was trouble in paradise.

1. Overpopulation was one of them. You see, there was only so much fertile land for man to cultivate, yet cultivating the land allowed man to spawn more children than ever before, it allowed him to do more than merely replace himself. Eventually, he ran out of arable land, man began to starve, and violent competition between man began increased.

2. The soil began to erode, and man's problems further increased. The soil began to dry up, like an old woman's cunt.

3. Obesity was on the rise.

4. Atrophy, sloth and lack of exercise were also on the rise.

5. Man's paranoia began to get out of hand. He saved more, far more than he required. Hoarded more and more wealth. In addition to sloth, workaholism began to increase, greed and fear of going hungry. Man began to think too much about the future, ignoring the present.

6. The towns and cities became a cesspool of degeneracy and filth. Where as before, they only afforded man with a few luxuries, now, they were a wonderland of disease and destitution. Prostitutes, drunkards, opiate addicts, gamblers, materialists, faggots and other derelicts. Before, when man was aligned with the sacred flow, if you didn't work, you didn't eat, now, an entire class of cripples, retards and lazy, parasitical shit fucks formed. These bums were dependent on the thrifty/diligent for support. As their numbers increased, they grew like a cancer, like a plague upon the productive. They weakened/infected society with their recessive genes. Also, these fucking "pets" suddenly showed up, dogs and cats, fucking freeloaders, everywhere.
Back to top Go down
Guest
Guest



Domestication Empty
PostSubject: Re: Domestication Domestication EmptyTue Nov 29, 2011 5:46 pm

Now, believe it or not, all the aforementioned was only half the problem.

Enter the raiders, the warlords, the liars, cheaters and thieves, royalty and, the priestcraft.

These classes were just as parasitical as the bums that came before them, the difference being, beggars can't be choosers, raiders can.

You see, in the hunter/gatherer and subsistence agriculture period of man's history (since human flesh couldn't be harvested for long, as cannibalism = disease, or so I've heard), man didn't have sufficient goods to support a permanent class of raiders, there was little or nothing to steal. Whatever man had, he required for that day. When man made a kill, he and his family immediately ate it. Now, with the advent of superfluous agriculture, an entire class of parasites could subsist off the excess fat of the villages, towns and cities.

It began with raiders, just as man hunted animals, now man was hunting man. At first, it began as nomadic, barbarian hordes of traveling raiders, sometimes entire tribes dedicated to the sole pursuit of raping, pillaging and plundering, for they did not know, nor care to know how to farm. Hunting humans has advantages and disadvantages. The ultimate prey is civilized man, he's the most difficult kill, yet the most satisfying and rewarding, for he accumulates and acquires so many goodies.

Then one day, the raiders became more sophisticated. They began to farm man, they began to cultivate man, just as man farmed beast.

Now, only the very smartest and strongest could farm man. Those who were successful were men of quality, not quantity. They acted like mafia, they offered protection, both from themselves and from other would be raiders, warlords and chieftains, and from common, petty thieves.

In many ways, rather than a flux, a free for all, the world began to resemble a pyramid. A warrior priest class arose wherever civilization could be found. At the top of the pyramid was the king, queen, princes and princess, followed by the priestcraft, the nobles and knights, the artisans and merchant bankers, and finally the peasants. Those at the top were entitled to the most surplus, those at the bottom were entitled to the least. This was in stark contrast to the relative equality that existed prior to the advent of civilization.

Although, look to nature, even there, the quantity is usually the plants and herbivores, and the quality is omnivores and carnivores.
Back to top Go down
Satyr
Daemon
Satyr

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 36826
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 58
Location : Hyperborea

Domestication Empty
PostSubject: Re: Domestication Domestication EmptyTue Nov 29, 2011 6:05 pm

Civilization:

The sum of habits, traditions, language, techniques, mythologies, beliefs, values, principles shared by a group of organisms.
Usually a product of shared history, resulting in a common heritage and bloodline, but increasingly passed on as abstract thoughts and ideas and ideals considered "self-evident" truths, and called memes.
In the latter case no bloodline or common genetic heritage need be present, as the meme has usurped the genetic influence by eliminating or weakening its effect on the minds it seduces or incorporated or assimilates into its unity.

A civilization often exhibits itself through art, which is a representation of this community of minds.

Since until recently replication could only happen via sexual reproduction using sexual the female has been the gatekeeper of a cultural identity.
A female represented the center of the family's tradition, as she inherited, accepted and passed on this cultural past as she found it, never adding to it or subtracting from it.
The decline of the western family, with this hypothetical emancipation of women, has merely been about another form of abstraction which has been sold to females and then to effete males who seek for a correction to their natural inadequacies...and that is the abstraction of the masculine spirit in the form of an institution.

When the males in a civilization lose control over their females they've lost, for all intensive purposes, their future. The bloodlines they represent are destined for extinction.
That's why the seduction, control and manipulation of females, including later on of effeminate males, has been the first concern of any civilization.
This is the only significance and power women posses.
The "emancipation" of females in modernity has been about detaching them form previous cultural roles so as to then be included into the newer ones, under the dominion of an other masculine entity which no longer cares about genetics and bloodlines, or the past for that matter, since it is wholly abstracted into an idea which can infect any mind from any background across any border.
It is the dominion of the meme over the gene.

We see this mostly in the Caucasian populations of North America.
Here the State, or the meme which is abstracted into a secular form of Judeo-Christianity, represented by the abstraction of resources which is money, this loss of control is more evident.

At this stage of a culture's lifespan the feminine aspects take over, the motherly spirituality which is characteristic of every civilization in decline, throughout history.
For instance the Dionysian feminine spirituality of Greeks was a symptom of its decline, (also symbolized by Demeter and Aphrodite) accompanied by the decline in the Apollonian aspect.




_________________
γνῶθι σεαυτόν
μηδέν άγαν
Back to top Go down
http://satyr-s-sanatorium.forumotion.com/
Guest
Guest



Domestication Empty
PostSubject: Re: Domestication Domestication EmptyTue Nov 29, 2011 6:37 pm

Before I proceed with warriors, I should mention that selfishness and exploitation already existed in the villages, and especially the towns, before the warrior class fully established themselves as the top dogs. Already through free and fair/exploitative trade, a hierarchy was emerging, but it was not as pronounced and coercive as the hierarchy the warriors created. This is for 1. As I mentioned earlier, there's more surplus goods in the villages, and especially the towns, and 2. Towns and cities are more genetically diverse than villages and small, hunter/gatherer societies, therefore, blood is less thick between the inhabitants, and there's more genetic inequality.

Now, at first, royalty and the priestcraft didn't bother to justify themselves. In their mythologies, the commoners existed for their sake, not the other way 'round. The peasants existed to feed the Gods, as it were. They were born and fit for slavery, nothing more. Still, the cyclical world view mostly remained intact, as it did before, when the warriors were not in charge. Then, something happened, a linear world view emerged, along with a justification. The warriors, utilizing the talents of their priests, began to justify their existence, in part so the commoners would be less likely to rebel, in part so they could sleep at night, for instilling fear in the commoners, decapitation and severing limbs was a dirty business. They said, the commoners were parasites on the earth, therefore, (reminds me of the matrix.. art imitating life) the warriors were restoring the natural order of things, the Gods needed blood, they needed to be sacrificed, and kept from the vices I mentioned earlier. The kings and the priests were restoring morality, restoring balance. God was on their side. An innovation, whoever was servile, frugal, modest, etc, like the Christian virtues, would be rewarded in the next world, we see this innovation even in Greece, Plato and Socrates talk of it. Whoever was greedy, would face hell in this world and the next. Of course, who was watching the watcher, who would keep the nobility from their vices? Some kings were moderate, others were unrelenting, unmerciful. They took as much as they could and even more. In Greece and Rome, where the populations of producers were of higher quality and less servile than the populations of producer inhabiting the middle east, Egypt and China, the Indians however had some quality populations as well, they rebelled, and I'll finish this story later.
Back to top Go down
Guest
Guest



Domestication Empty
PostSubject: Re: Domestication Domestication EmptyTue Nov 29, 2011 10:48 pm

What Satyr describes is merely culture, not civilization. Civilization begins with superfluous agriculture. Superfluous agriculture permits small or large (depending on whether it is pre-industrial or post-industrial agriculture) classes of people to busy themselves with something other than the production of food i.e. textiles, writing, education, medicine, government, etc.
Back to top Go down
Guest
Guest



Domestication Empty
PostSubject: Re: Domestication Domestication EmptyTue Nov 29, 2011 11:21 pm

To make a long story short.

In the age of matter, morality wanes, and wealth and power waxes. Individuals, classes, species and subspecies compete for dominance. Man exploits animal, plant and the earth, using sophisticated tools and machinery. In this way, the age of matter is more, masculine. Morality falls by the way side. Now, technology has allowed man, particularly rich, white men, being more intellectually and technologically advanced, to exploit everyone and everything else. This isn't necessarily an inherently, evil thing, however, it has gotten out of hand. Technology has allowed man to exploit nature to a degree never before seen. With civilization comes opportunities for self indulgence. We are past the point where such things our beneficial, for the earth and man. It is no longer healthy for man to increase his consumption. If man does not learn to moderate himself, and cease being a cancer upon the earth, and upon himself, he must be controlled for his own good, and the good of everyone else. Who can stop man, aside from the Gods? Why other men.

In the age of spirit, a philosopher/priest class attempts to persuade man to live a more frugal, harmonious life, less competitive and more just. We do not necessarily want to make everyone and everything equal, as it was before civilization, rather, we wish to make civilization more balanced, more sustainable. Now, if the philosopher/priest class cannot convince man to control his appetites, than we must take control of the government and force man to be moral. This isn't about the proletariat, small businesses, or the bourgeoisie, this isn't about communism, capitalism, or corporatism, this isn't about Nazism or affirmative action, this is about a global, neo feudalistic sophocracy. The age of Heraclitus and Aristotle is coming to an end, the age of Parmenides and Plato has only just begun. In another sense, we are the masculine class, for the men of quality will dominate the men of quantity, quell their appetites and put an end to their greed. Rights shall be replaced with privileges.. citizens shall become serfs.

The Minoan period gave way to the Mycenaean, Classical Greece to Hellenistic Greece, the Roman Republic to the Roman empire, and the American Republic to the American empire. The new world order is already making plans for this at Denver Airport and in Astana. Perhaps a philosopher like myself can play a role.

The age of Hermes shall be replaced by he age of Athena.
Back to top Go down
Satyr
Daemon
Satyr

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 36826
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 58
Location : Hyperborea

Domestication Empty
PostSubject: Re: Domestication Domestication EmptyTue Nov 29, 2011 11:44 pm

eyesinthedark wrote:
What Satyr describes is merely culture, not civilization. Civilization begins with superfluous agriculture. Superfluous agriculture permits small or large (depending on whether it is pre-industrial or post-industrial agriculture) classes of people to busy themselves with something other than the production of food i.e. textiles, writing, education, medicine, government, etc.
No, little boy...culture literally means to cultivate.

A "culture" is a growth...emerging out of organic material, out of environmental conditions, and spawning methods, techniques, tactics, symbols which are then referred to as civilization.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

I draw your attention to these segments of the latter definition:
Quote :

1. an advanced state of human society, in which a high level of culture, science, industry, and government has been reached.
2.
those people or nations that have reached such a state.
3.
any type of culture, society, etc., of a specific place, time, or group: Greek civilization.
4.
the act or process of civilizing or being civilized: Rome's civilization of barbaric tribes was admirable.
5.
cultural refinement; refinement of thought and cultural appreciation: The letters of Madame de Sévigné reveal her wit and civilization.

Ergo to be civil is what comes after one learns to cultivate.
The very word "culture" has an organic element to it; a primal taste to it.
Civilization is more urban, and artistic and about manners which have been cultivated.

It helps if you actually learn the language, the instrument, you are using.

By the way, much of what you are attempting to deal with has been talked about by Evola in his book:
Revolt against the Modern World.

_________________
γνῶθι σεαυτόν
μηδέν άγαν
Back to top Go down
http://satyr-s-sanatorium.forumotion.com/
Guest
Guest



Domestication Empty
PostSubject: Re: Domestication Domestication EmptyWed Nov 30, 2011 3:29 am

Right, civilization is a high level of culture, a level of culture only possible after the advent of surplus food production, not every culture is a civilization, some cultures are primitive. He was asking for the definition of civilization, not culture. What you described was merely culture, you did not specify the difference between an advanced culture, a civilization, and a primitive culture.

Quote :
Revolt against the Modern World.
Another book I shall have to read.

I've read a little on Evola, but I haven't read any of his own works.
Back to top Go down
Guest
Guest



Domestication Empty
PostSubject: Re: Domestication Domestication EmptyWed Nov 30, 2011 5:14 am

I think 'civilization' is something of an anachronism.

What we witness is the gradual replacing of the real, the natural, with the unreal, the artificial, until the unreal - the simulacrum - is all that is left.

How an individual or group produces surplus food is almost entirely down to their intelligence. The differences are startling. In Africa, where there's no real winters to speak of, they still cannot produce a food surplus after hundreds of thousands of years of farming, whereas in Europe, where bitter winters prevent agriculture for half the year, we throw mountains of the stuff away so that it does not upset our economic planning. We even send some to Africa.

I don't think we're exploiting or destroying nature in the traditional sense of the word. We're overcoming it, transforming it... replacing it.

What was previously considered authentic, original, natural, is now almost invisible under the weight of the simulation. Technology will soon give us the power to make copies of objects, people, things, indistinguishable from the original. To bypass the fecundity of nature entirely.

Nature is formed of the organic, of molecules, of lattices, but our vision and physical reach takes us down to the sub-atomic, to quantum energy fields and Higgs-Bosons, the very fabric of time and space.
Of what value will the Mona Lisa be if we can produce exact copies of it, from the sub-atomic structure up? If carbon dating gives the exact same result for each copy, the paint surface indistinguishable and the underlying structure identical, so that no amount of analysis can disinter one from the other? So that Da Vinci himself - if he were alive - would not be able to tell one from the other?

Even Da Vinci could be precisely cloned.

Of course, merely producing copies of things is not going to create new genius. Therefore an elite will emerge, containing priviledged breeding lines. The simulation exists to control the mindless herd. The more they worship it the more mindless they are.

Already Africa and it's inhabitants are little more than a vast museum to natural history. Protected by all kinds of laws - imposed from without - and maintained by Western and Eastern aid, it's only economic role is as a mineral resource provider to industrialized economies, whilst its hominid and animal population become indistinguishable from each other in their primitive savagery. Exhibits to our dark past in a vast museum of natural history. Westerners go there to holiday and safari, to experience the power and danger of nature in its 'raw' element. But already this is illusion. Nature is being stripped of her power, real power lies to the east and west of Africa, in the glass and steel towers of the capitalist world. Over Africa hangs a vast, glowing, intricate network connecting capital interests all over the world that never sleeps; but none of this web touches down in Africa. The fate of Africa is decided by the global machinery of capital and commodities. Amongst this economic juggernaut even the mightiest lions roar is nothing more than a pathetic, inaudible squeal. A forlorn animal pleading to be spared, already extinct and resurrected in the bright living spaces of the Western world as the latest 3D Tamagochi pet.
Back to top Go down
Guest
Guest



Domestication Empty
PostSubject: Re: Domestication Domestication EmptyWed Nov 30, 2011 11:21 am

The untermensch is only an actor in the simulation, a pawn to be directed and contained. He is moved to where his resources (labor) are needed. His biology precludes him from becoming an architect. He was born into slavery, the inevitble destiny of his phenotype.

He only exists as a human for as long as the architects have a use for him. When they don't he vanishes into the periphery, or is annihilated in the furnaces of industrialisation.
Tourist attraction, holiday destination, charity case, affirmative action.
Even as a destitute there is still the possibility for IMF loans, still the potential to extract more capital to feed the simulation.

The simulation maintains him, gives him some status above animal. Turn off the lights and he is once again food for the lions.
Back to top Go down
Satyr
Daemon
Satyr

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 36826
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 58
Location : Hyperborea

Domestication Empty
PostSubject: Re: Domestication Domestication EmptyWed Nov 30, 2011 12:57 pm

Vanitas wrote:
I think 'civilization' is something of an anachronism.

What we witness is the gradual replacing of the real, the natural, with the unreal, the artificial, until the unreal - the simulacrum - is all that is left.
A civilization has the capacity to become self-referential, cocooning internally, while it remains competitive and antagonistic externally. It takes on the behavior of all organic life.
The shared ideas and ideals are what is called meme....just as the shared codes for replicating self in the biological body is called a gene.

Quote :
How an individual or group produces surplus food is almost entirely down to their intelligence. The differences are startling. In Africa, where there's no real winters to speak of, they still cannot produce a food surplus after hundreds of thousands of years of farming, whereas in Europe, where bitter winters prevent agriculture for half the year, we throw mountains of the stuff away so that it does not upset our economic planning. We even send some to Africa.
Read Jared Diamond
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Vanitas wrote:

I don't think we're exploiting or destroying nature in the traditional sense of the word. We're overcoming it, transforming it... replacing it.
Domesticating it; taming it.

Vanitas wrote:
What was previously considered authentic, original, natural, is now almost invisible under the weight of the simulation. Technology will soon give us the power to make copies of objects, people, things, indistinguishable from the original. To bypass the fecundity of nature entirely.
Ergo we shall lose our contact with our past; our identity and sense of self.

Vanitas wrote:
Of course, merely producing copies of things is not going to create new genius. Therefore an elite will emerge, containing priviledged breeding lines. The simulation exists to control the mindless herd. The more they worship it the more mindless they are.
This is already in effect...only you and I are excluded.

Shall we start our own circle of friends/lovers/mates to prolong our own shared memes?
Have we even agreed that we have shared memes?

_________________
γνῶθι σεαυτόν
μηδέν άγαν
Back to top Go down
http://satyr-s-sanatorium.forumotion.com/
Guest
Guest



Domestication Empty
PostSubject: Re: Domestication Domestication EmptyWed Nov 30, 2011 7:34 pm

The ancient Romans had two words for city, urbs and civitas. Urbs was used in relation to the urban form, the infrastructure. Civitas related to the human aspect, to living as a group.

Civitas is derived from civilis, as are the words civil, citizen, and civilization.

The word civilization does not refer to technology, economy, or mercantilism. It refers to how people in a society relate to one another, and how the society as a whole cooperates towards maintaining, and when possible improving the standard of life of its members (citizens).

A civilization is a society that achieves a high level of civility,

What eyesinthedark describes is a highly developed society in the urban sense, not a civilization.




Back to top Go down
Guest
Guest



Domestication Empty
PostSubject: Re: Domestication Domestication EmptyWed Nov 30, 2011 10:15 pm

That's apeshit, when have you heard niggers in a pond referred to as a civilization?

Words are more than their etymological origins.


Last edited by eyesinthedark on Wed Nov 30, 2011 11:01 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top Go down
Guest
Guest



Domestication Empty
PostSubject: Re: Domestication Domestication EmptyWed Nov 30, 2011 10:34 pm

Whenever and wherever I've heard the word used, it has always been to refer to technologically advanced and socially stratified cultures, not just any culture, I've yet to hear a historian or scientist refer to monkeys in a pond, sharing feces and half-baked ideas as a civilization, or the art of fishing for ants with a stick.

Here's the definition Satyr attempted to counter me with-

1. an advanced state of human society, in which a high level of culture, science, industry, and government has been reached.

How does one measure advanced, hmmm?, if not by whether they have some semblances of urbanity or not? How can one be civil if he/she dwells in pig vomit or eats raw meat?

I have watched documentaries and read books where the author was attempting to determine whether this culture was a civilization, or that culture was a civilization. No, he/she would say, I don't think they qualify, because they didn't have agriculture, or they didn't have writing, or they didn't have centralization of power, a government.

I think you're unwitting attempting to equate monkey culture with civilization. You don't want there to be a word to distinguish the two. You despise social analysis, you only acknowledge social synthesis and that is your major malfunction, spider.

I bet to you, all religions are one, and there are no races, they're man made arbitrations.
Back to top Go down
Guest
Guest



Domestication Empty
PostSubject: Re: Domestication Domestication EmptyWed Nov 30, 2011 11:09 pm

My apologies phoneutria.


Last edited by eyesinthedark on Thu Dec 01, 2011 11:05 am; edited 2 times in total
Back to top Go down
Guest
Guest



Domestication Empty
PostSubject: Re: Domestication Domestication EmptyWed Nov 30, 2011 11:39 pm

I think Vanitas is too much of a techno junkie to find much common ground with Satyr to lie down in. Satyr has his feet planted firmly in the soil, Vanitas in concrete, plastic and rubber.

There's always racism though, and a snobbish, disdain for weakness.
Back to top Go down
Guest
Guest



Domestication Empty
PostSubject: Re: Domestication Domestication EmptyWed Nov 30, 2011 11:46 pm

Satyr's capitalism is old school, of the countryside, Vanitas' capitalism is more liberal, more urban.
Back to top Go down
Guest
Guest



Domestication Empty
PostSubject: Re: Domestication Domestication EmptyThu Dec 01, 2011 2:53 am

Well, darling, sounds like you need a new word.
Back to top Go down
Guest
Guest



Domestication Empty
PostSubject: Re: Domestication Domestication EmptyThu Dec 01, 2011 12:11 pm

Satyr wrote:
Read Jared Diamond
I'm familiar with his work. Jared's a typical white liberal, trying to make everybody feel better about themselves by creating a theory that excludes race/humanity entirely from the results of evolution, simultaneously assuaging white liberal guilt and black feelings of inferiority.

But Diamond is driven by his feelings - a typical woman - his argument lacks sophistication and his vision lacks depth, a perfect product of the simulacrum.

Little does he realize what is at stake here, or how he has contributed to the opposite of what he intended.

Quote :
Ergo we shall lose our contact with our past; our identity and sense of self.
But does this also not offer other unique opportunities? Many European and New World nations are burdened with 'racial guilt', the simulacrum provides a method to dispense with it and carry evolution forward.

Quote :
This is already in effect...only you and I are excluded.

Shall we start our own circle of friends/lovers/mates to prolong our own shared memes?
Have we even agreed that we have shared memes?
We're too small and powerless a group for that to be of any consequence. The architects are already socially and geographically isolated enough for the process to have begun centuries ago. We can form networks of aware individuals within the simulation, which we are doing, preserving our own memes. But to overcome it would require astronomical amounts of capital and would prove utterly futile. Wouldn't we be fighting against that which is on our side? We simply have to keep our heads above water.

When Baudrillard describes reality fraying at the edges of the map, there are all kinds of consequences in that statement which cultural critics and philosophers are completely unaware of... would be too frightened to even contemplate. One of them is the annihilation of the primitive other, as what is more physical gives way to a universe of the synthetic, the mental. Aesthetics plays a crucial role in the creation of the simulacrum. What post-modern critics could not interpret in the film The Matrix - as they congratulated the film makers and each other on fielding such a large black cast - is that it's subtext is one of racial apocalypse. The eventual eclipsing of the physical world.

The simulacrum is capable of preserving all that is beautiful and valuable in our culture, including our own nature.
Back to top Go down
Satyr
Daemon
Satyr

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 36826
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 58
Location : Hyperborea

Domestication Empty
PostSubject: Re: Domestication Domestication EmptyThu Dec 01, 2011 6:32 pm

eyesinthedark wrote:
Satyr's capitalism is old school, of the countryside, Vanitas' capitalism is more liberal, more urban.
That you think I'm a capitalist or that you use the term "conservative" in the same old typically liberal way, is indeed funny.

_________________
γνῶθι σεαυτόν
μηδέν άγαν
Back to top Go down
http://satyr-s-sanatorium.forumotion.com/
Satyr
Daemon
Satyr

Gender : Male Pisces Posts : 36826
Join date : 2009-08-24
Age : 58
Location : Hyperborea

Domestication Empty
PostSubject: Re: Domestication Domestication EmptyThu Dec 01, 2011 6:53 pm

Vanitas wrote:
Satyr wrote:
Read Jared Diamond
I'm familiar with his work. Jared's a typical white liberal, trying to make everybody feel better about themselves by creating a theory that excludes race/humanity entirely from the results of evolution, simultaneously assuaging white liberal guilt and black feelings of inferiority.

But Diamond is driven by his feelings - a typical woman - his argument lacks sophistication and his vision lacks depth, a perfect product of the simulacrum.

Little does he realize what is at stake here, or how he has contributed to the opposite of what he intended.
What he intended was to offer a plausible excuse which made the divergence observed and which cannot be denied, less insulting to some segments of the population.
After all, who can be blamed for blind chance?

Vanitas wrote:
Quote :
Ergo we shall lose our contact with our past; our identity and sense of self.
But does this also not offer other unique opportunities? Many European and New World nations are burdened with 'racial guilt', the simulacrum provides a method to dispense with it and carry evolution forward.
Yes, that's why I never speak of an uprising or of armed resistance or of "changing" things. What I speak of is increasing discrimination, fragmentation, in response to increasing uniformity.
This means that the uniformity is allowed to flourish, and one simply drops-out, or goes into hiding....a wolf dressed in lamb skins. A culture within the declining culture; a tribe amongst the sheeple.

Vanitas wrote:
We're too small and powerless a group for that to be of any consequence.
What a defeatist attitude.
Are you powerless to preserve your concepts of truth, your ideals, your ideas, within the pressures of modernity and the bullshit which confronts you?
Are you powerless to become more discriminating in a world telling you that it is "wrong" to do so?
Are you powerless to distinguish your own not by genetics or nationalities, alone, but by memes, demeanor, a sense of aristocracy?

You must alter your perspective here.
If you were to find yourself in the jungle, would you want to change it, correct it, liberate it?
Would you wish to save the creatures that habitat it from their suffering, their ignorance, their baseness?

No, you would study it, know it, understand it and all the elements comprising it; all the animals that populate it.

Now transpose this to this world; apply it to these manmade environments.
The only big difference being that in this New Age, the animals all appear to be the same, because they are of the same species...they almost the same genes.
The differentiating markers are no longer easily discernible. Now the divisions are about spirit: meme.
What does this mean? Ideals, principles, thinking, spirituality.

Vanitas wrote:
The architects are already socially and geographically isolated enough for the process to have begun centuries ago. We can form networks of aware individuals within the simulation, which we are doing, preserving our own memes. But to overcome it would require astronomical amounts of capital and would prove utterly futile. Wouldn't we be fighting against that which is on our side? We simply have to keep our heads above water.
When a hunter and his mates hunt in the forest they have two choices...to hunt free game or to capture these creatures and domesticate them.
In both accounts they appreciate these animals - they do not hate them - they understand and often feel for them...but they never consider themselves like them.

Vanitas wrote:
When Baudrillard describes reality fraying at the edges of the map, there are all kinds of consequences in that statement which cultural critics and philosophers are completely unaware of... would be too frightened to even contemplate. One of them is the annihilation of the primitive other, as what is more physical gives way to a universe of the synthetic, the mental. Aesthetics plays a crucial role in the creation of the simulacrum. What post-modern critics could not interpret in the film The Matrix - as they congratulated the film makers and each other on fielding such a large black cast - is that it's subtext is one of racial apocalypse. The eventual eclipsing of the physical world.
The Matrix is a perfect example. In it the "real" humans coexist with the asleep one; they enter and exit their world at will.
It is dangerous, no doubt, but it is also rewarding.
Now, the difference here is that in opposition to the Hollywood message where the real humans wish to free all of humanity in this case I say that this should not be the goal.
Those who are free shall be the ones who can free themselves. The others should remain as they are because even if one would dream of freeing them, as in the movie, this would be impossible. the shock would kill them or they would prefer to return, like that character did in the movie.

Where did these humans live, in relation to the machines?
Underground.

Vanitas wrote:
The simulacrum is capable of preserving all that is beautiful and valuable in our culture, including our own nature.
Then seek out and cooperate and share and create with your own kind.

_________________
γνῶθι σεαυτόν
μηδέν άγαν
Back to top Go down
http://satyr-s-sanatorium.forumotion.com/
Sponsored content




Domestication Empty
PostSubject: Re: Domestication Domestication Empty

Back to top Go down
 
Domestication
View previous topic View next topic Back to top 
Page 1 of 3Go to page : 1, 2, 3  Next

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
Know Thyself :: AGORA-
Jump to: