Friday, February 3, 2017

Divide and Conquer: Still Duping the Masses

Over 2,000 years ago, Julius Caesar is said to have coined the phrase divida et impura – Divide and Conquer – to describe a strategy for overcoming and conquering foreign lands. Incredibly, this expanse of time and history has not taught the average person to see the tactic when it is employed, and resist it.

I am not apt to describe what is human nature, for you can hardly observe the behavior of humans in captivity and claim to understand their nature. But perhaps it is a malfunction caused by the human ego to separate this from that, black from white, up from down, right from wrong; to see the world in a matrix of dualities. Of course, this is useful at times, but it can cause us to lose touch with reality when we confuse the world as it is with the world as we think about it.

There are many tactics used to advance the divide and conquer agenda, but most fall within the circle of what might be termed identity politics. Man; woman. White; colored (et cetera). Christian; Jew; Muslim (et cetera).American; Russian; Mexican (et cetera). Left; right; conservative; liberal. All of this causes us to confuse reality by viewing it through some lens of cultural or ideological point of view. You don't see things as they are, you see them as you think you're supposed to see them according to whatever identity you're currently clinging to.

The modern day Establishment seems to have expanded on the divide and conquer strategy by presenting these divisions onto us like our identities are our favorite sports teams, so that, no matter how badly our “team” sucks, they're still our “team” and we'll “root” for them against other “teams” no matter how “good” or “bad” those “teams” are. The psychological affliction is commonly known as cognitive dissonance: the mental stress (discomfort) experienced by a person who simultaneously holds two or more contradictory beliefs, ideas, or values, when performing an action that contradicts those beliefs, ideas, and values; or when confronted with new information that contradicts existing beliefs, ideas, and values. People will often avoid that mental stress by repressing, deflecting or ignoring information that contradicts their core ideology.

For instance, as of this writing there is a great deal of strife amongst Americans over a travel ban implemented by the current regime. Those who identify as “left-wing” are angry about this, because they view it as racist. Those on the “right” view it as defending the “homeland” and national “security”, which in their view was neglected during the previous 8 years. However, the previous regime, which is identified with as “left-wing”, deported more immigrants than any regime in U.S. history, implemented a travel ban on Iraqi refugees, supported legislation to provide funding to build a border wall, and of course oversaw the bombing of 7 Muslim countries for literally every day of their 8 years in power – and of course so much more, beyond the scope of this essay to list.

The left views the above actions as racist, imperialist, and overall evil; the right views this as prudent foreign and domestic policy. But because they were implemented by a regime viewed as leftist, the “left” were almost universally silent to these crimes, because only the “right wing” is racist, while the “right” ignored them to the point of accusing the regime of being soft on terrorism, illegal immigration, and border security, because in their ideological slant only the “right” cares about these things. Now that the letter has changed next to the regime in power, the left is suddenly animated and opposed to oppressive government power, while the “right” is celebrating some sort of return to “greatness”. It is not a wild assumption to say that had the other “side” remained in power, these policies would have continued, more or less, and so would both “sides'” delusional perceptions of reality.

When you call yourself an Indian or a Muslim or a Christian or a European, or anything else, you are being violent. Do you see why it is violent? Because you are separating yourself from the rest of mankind. When you separate yourself by belief, by nationality, by tradition, it breeds violence. So a man who is seeking to understand violence does not belong to any country, to any religion, to any political party or partial system; he is concerned with the total understanding of mankind.

– Krishnamurti

This is just one scant example in a massive cauldron of stupidity, ignorance, and distraction. It is cognitive dissonance on display. If we want to begin to build a peaceful world, it seems to me that identity politics must be utterly abandoned; as an individual who views collectivism in all its forms as the root of all evil in the world, I reject it with every fiber of my being. As Mises taught, only the individual thinks. Only the individual reasons. Only the individual acts.

We have to be morally consistent. If you oppose travel bans on Muslim refugees, then you must oppose the bombing of their countries that turned them into refugees in the first place, no matter who is in office or what letter is next to their name. Similarly, you cannot support or turn a blind eye to the endless bombing of countries and then call the people who want to retaliate “terrorists”; you can't destroy their countries and then piss your pants that those you've driven out may visit upon you and do you harm, or refuse to assimilate into your culture after you've destroyed theirs.


All of this transcends politics, identity, which by nature inherently causes you to reject reality. The left/right paradigm and all forms of collectivism was created by the Establishment to pit you against you and your fellow man, ignoring the statistically insignificant percentage of elites that are the root cause of all the chaos and suffering in the world, so that it is then easier for them to control you. I ask you to consider this, to transcend and evolve above and beyond it. Do not be fooled again.