Newspeak Continues

Caution: Adult topic, not for the squeamish.

Orwell’s Newspeak was just the beginning.

It’s not enough to control the language itself, but TPTB want to invade your very mind, and change your wiring. Granted, the freedom to speak the truth includes the freedom to lie. The Internet cannot be made safe from all threats, or it will no longer be the Internet. The only rightful place to control spam coming at you is at your inbox, or perhaps on the receiving mail server, not out on the Net itself. You can’t make rules about what is passed without destroying the whole thing. Even better is to change the operating system by which you face the Net, so it’s more secure. There’d be precious little spam then, because almost all of it comes from compromised machines. That we have so many computers so easily compromised is because TPTB have permitted the sort of corporate arm-twisting which results in making it very hard to find a computer without that near-monopoly OS. So the state, serving TPTB, is not willing to honor anything resembling free speech, because TPTB aren’t going to allow much freedom of thought, either.

In essence, the rationale is simply a matter of money. That is, you and I are reduced to economic units. The entire calculus of the state is just that — a calculus of control over resources. People must be reduced to resources. This assumes a range and degree of manipulation which is apparently justified, because it seems to be working.

I realize how difficult it is to discuss this without whittling down the actors into simple cut-outs so familiar, but that’s the whole point. The real world in which we live is not what TPTB want us to believe it is. Channeling human thinking into narrow structures prevents people thinking for themselves, and makes them more predictable.

Prime example: What comes into your mind when I offer the term “hot babe”? The vast majority would think of someone exceedingly slender, narrow hips, perhaps a tad athletic, but with a substantial bosom. In other words, something freakish and unnatural. Almost no one is born with genes to produce that, but for the few who do manage to produce such an aspect, they are universally admired and desired. So much so, a woman cannot enter any field of public presentation — music, journalism, etc. — without being physically attractive. Numbering at least in the thousands are the women who abuse their health trying to look like that when it does not come naturally. Meanwhile, the chemical additives in our foods militate against it, so it requires extraordinary measures up against the chemically induced addictions caused by those same additives.

Run back in time some 50 years — roughly my own lifespan — and a “hot babe” would not bear pipe-cleaner thin arms, nor striated abdominal muscles, but had some genuine curves. We would call Ms. Universe of 1952 (the first year) “chubby”. If you go back much farther, we get terms like “Rubenesque” — substantial women, indeed. But notice something: Only in the most recent decades has there been any different definition of feminine beauty. Soft and curvy, or voluptuous, was the standard for all of human history up to the time I was a child. That’s because men knew instinctively a gal needed some meat on her bones in order to survive multiple childbirths and render healthy progeny. The modern boy-with-boobs is definitely not built for that.

It’s not hard to figure out where this came from. The whole idea was to turn women into men, investing them with a false male libido, so that men begin to desire boyish women. Is anyone surprised that the whole pornography market is almost totally controlled by gays, who also dominate the fashion, cosmetics, and beauty pageant industry? By no means should we be surprised that child pornography is now the fastest growing market on the Net, despite all the risks of arrest. The only difference between little boys and little girls in that market is the single anatomical fact of one extra orifice to exploit. The mainstream porn market is the greatest source of prospective consumers of child porn, because the visual ideal is so similar. Making the juvenile version technically illegal is an Orwellian marketing trick, same was with illegal drugs and so forth.

At the same time, this whole mess aims at producing the most unrealistic emotional norm for humanity. To the degree women buy into the notion equality means freedom to be a man, she becomes a slut without the pimp or standard fees. She honestly believes she knows what she wants, but her wiring betrays her every time. Men are conditioned to serve an obsession in singular devotion to this or that woman, which is also utterly unnatural. The few men who simply obey their wiring to spread it around are far more likely to get what they want. And again, women spend so very much effort and money on looking their best, not because it attracts men, per se, but in competition against other women. That they compete in attracting men has nothing do with what actually attracts them to the men. Women are most drawn to guys who dismiss them, and barely tolerate those who fall at their feet.

In the end, we have every man worshiping a tiny thin slice of available females because of these insane ideals of beauty, which are totally against their own interests and their native wiring. Should they actually get their hands on one, she’ll be intolerable. Meanwhile, the women are encouraged to meet this ideal and demand a certain type of man they actually can’t stand.

And it’s all three or four times removed from God’s ideal. My whole point in discussing human sexual behavior on the fallen plane is to offer help in escaping it. For a man, the only woman worth having is the one who understands what it means to be fallen, understands the basic wiring of human sexual response, and possesses at least a desire to escape that. Not to escape sexual union, but to make it what it ought to be. Same for the men; the only man worth having is the one who somehow manages resist the mindless demands of his sex drive and keeps his focus on what really matters in this world. That’s not the same thing as a man with no sex drive. What matters is how you fulfill those appetites, in part by not letting them be shaped by human stupidity.

That something so fundamental to human nature has been so completely perverted should surprise no one. Everywhere you turn, you run into this pervasive effort to control not just the terms of conversation, but the very thought process from which the conversation arises. Thus, Wikileaks only appears to be spilling the beans on secret government chatter. The chatter itself is simply opinionated stuff from good servants of the state, but Wikileaks is entirely selective in what chatter is served up, carefully preventing a full exposure of the whole. The idea is to steer all the debate into restricted channels of thought. If you aren’t aware Professor So-n-so promoted armed Marxist revolt, you might not understand how he became a refugee from his homeland. If someone tells you a piece of the truth — said professor wrote articles criticizing his government — it seems totally unjust. If you didn’t know almost every socialist/communist policy wonk and writer in America was funded by exceedingly wealthy big corporations, you’d think such policy was contrary to capitalism. If you didn’t know what fascism actually was, you’d easily believe it was a right-wing policy, when it’s actually another brand of lefty-socialism.

In any given generation, it will always be a tiny few who actually understand much. In times past, it was simply that education was too easily restricted to the few who had great resources. The most prosperous nations of the ancient past where the ones who made at least a token effort to offer a high minimum of education to as many as possible, typically through the religious institutions. The advent of the Internet is the first time we’ve seen the possibility of breaking the monopoly. That so few actually seek any measure of truth is a testimony to the success of TPTB. That’s because the Net is availability, not delivery. We can expect some change, but not as we would hope. Instead, the Net becomes one more tool for deception, as the availability itself slips away.

The window will not remain open much longer, I fear.