Looks like your thesis is that COVID restrictions were deliberately constructed in part either to flush out or activate the dissidents. "Flush out" in order to suppress, "activate" in order to use for the purposes of artificial negativity. Mentioning Piccone probably means that you tend toward the latter (while most of the dissidents think it's the former.)
Aug 2, 2022·edited Aug 2, 2022Liked by The Evolved Psyche
Both massive public schooling and incessant marching as part of military training are associated with Prussian state-building. But so were liberal reforms. I always had subconscious trouble associating the names of Frederick the Great and especially Bismarck with liberalism. What you are saying actually sheds some light on it: the reforms broke down the dependence of individuals on their communities, which brought them in the direct dependence on and contact with the state. That made it much easier to make them into obedient cogs in the Prussian state machine with the help of public schooling and marching.
Aug 1, 2022·edited Aug 1, 2022Liked by The Evolved Psyche
I remember some junior officer peers of mine some years ago having this fetish for discipline over motivation. The desire for this power over others has always chagrined me. This is an ongoing conflict of visions in the military with those interested in developing war fighters to reach their full potential as human beings going along with concepts like motivation, trust, and mission command vs those who would rather lead mindless automatons who follow orders rapidly and efficiently without question. There is something to be said for discipline and having the ability to "shut up and color", but going too far threatens to handicap the ultimate lethality of the human weapon system. Does that sound nerdy? I don't care, I didn't make it up, we literally have a program called Optimizing the Human Weapon System (OHWS). I think some kind of deliberate consideration for how discipline can serve both the individual and the organization might be a way to reconcile these visions. In any case, I always appreciate the application focused cliff notes of postmodernist stuff I'll never get around to reading on my own. Thanks Michael, and looking forward to pt. 2!
A few years back websites began to push their cookies policies at visitors, supposedly aimed at improving privacy. Now it’s next to impossible to follow any link without the need to click some button/s “agreeing” to some or other yawnsome tripe that no one ever reads. Apart from the momentary irritation this produces I’ve never thought much about this, but is there some deeper reason for having to “agree” before proceeding?
The introduction in Europe, Russia, and other Beta-test nations of vaxxpass QR codes took things a little further.
It’s gradual but steady conditioning, exactly the sort of drill Foucault was commenting upon.
Unthinkingly or reluctantly acceding to minor inconveniences makes the major ones more likely, I think. And this has certainly been accelerated since CronyVirus was ushered onto the scene. Traffic lights outside supermarkets, spots on the floor, CCTV and Number Plate Recognition tech.
The development of AI is interesting and potentially useful, I suppose, but the results so far seem eerily consistent. To interact with the bot, the telephone tree, the self-service checkout, you have to learn the rules the bot needs you to follow. Frequently I want to lift up my shopping bag and rearrange the contents, so that I can fit in a couple more items, but the self-service checkout is programmed to find this suspicious and to whine for assistance. So I curb my own innocent behaviour.
This is precisely the self-policing, in a carceral society, that Foucault warned about and which you've highlighted in this excellent article. I look forward to part 2, and have been reading more about some of the other topics explored on this Stack.
It’s only a mask. Just two more weeks. I get a test for you.
Looks like your thesis is that COVID restrictions were deliberately constructed in part either to flush out or activate the dissidents. "Flush out" in order to suppress, "activate" in order to use for the purposes of artificial negativity. Mentioning Piccone probably means that you tend toward the latter (while most of the dissidents think it's the former.)
Both massive public schooling and incessant marching as part of military training are associated with Prussian state-building. But so were liberal reforms. I always had subconscious trouble associating the names of Frederick the Great and especially Bismarck with liberalism. What you are saying actually sheds some light on it: the reforms broke down the dependence of individuals on their communities, which brought them in the direct dependence on and contact with the state. That made it much easier to make them into obedient cogs in the Prussian state machine with the help of public schooling and marching.
I remember some junior officer peers of mine some years ago having this fetish for discipline over motivation. The desire for this power over others has always chagrined me. This is an ongoing conflict of visions in the military with those interested in developing war fighters to reach their full potential as human beings going along with concepts like motivation, trust, and mission command vs those who would rather lead mindless automatons who follow orders rapidly and efficiently without question. There is something to be said for discipline and having the ability to "shut up and color", but going too far threatens to handicap the ultimate lethality of the human weapon system. Does that sound nerdy? I don't care, I didn't make it up, we literally have a program called Optimizing the Human Weapon System (OHWS). I think some kind of deliberate consideration for how discipline can serve both the individual and the organization might be a way to reconcile these visions. In any case, I always appreciate the application focused cliff notes of postmodernist stuff I'll never get around to reading on my own. Thanks Michael, and looking forward to pt. 2!
A few years back websites began to push their cookies policies at visitors, supposedly aimed at improving privacy. Now it’s next to impossible to follow any link without the need to click some button/s “agreeing” to some or other yawnsome tripe that no one ever reads. Apart from the momentary irritation this produces I’ve never thought much about this, but is there some deeper reason for having to “agree” before proceeding?
The introduction in Europe, Russia, and other Beta-test nations of vaxxpass QR codes took things a little further.
It’s gradual but steady conditioning, exactly the sort of drill Foucault was commenting upon.
Unthinkingly or reluctantly acceding to minor inconveniences makes the major ones more likely, I think. And this has certainly been accelerated since CronyVirus was ushered onto the scene. Traffic lights outside supermarkets, spots on the floor, CCTV and Number Plate Recognition tech.
The development of AI is interesting and potentially useful, I suppose, but the results so far seem eerily consistent. To interact with the bot, the telephone tree, the self-service checkout, you have to learn the rules the bot needs you to follow. Frequently I want to lift up my shopping bag and rearrange the contents, so that I can fit in a couple more items, but the self-service checkout is programmed to find this suspicious and to whine for assistance. So I curb my own innocent behaviour.
This is precisely the self-policing, in a carceral society, that Foucault warned about and which you've highlighted in this excellent article. I look forward to part 2, and have been reading more about some of the other topics explored on this Stack.
It’s only a mask. Just two more weeks. I get a test for you.
Ding: your docile drone is ready.
Here’s my take on Foucault and the scamDemic: https://thaddeuskozinski.substack.com/p/foucault-told-the-truth?r=24l7o&s=w&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&utm_source=direct