As we spiral toward a dystopia where the opportunity has arisen for governments to be able to surveil and control us in every possible way through the introduction of digital identification, will enough people eventually just get jack of it all and revert to living without the internet?
Surely technocracy can only continue to increase until transhumanism becomes a reality, surely the majority of people by then will reach a point where they believe this is too much?
Probably not.
If we learned anything through the last two years, it’s that the majority of people will play along regardless of the stress excessive regulations impose on their lives, they’ll even make the excuse that the stress of the excessive regulations is justification to not have the energy to do anything about it. Most would rather save face in their social groups than be caught dead in a protest group which they have been well trained to denigrate as “low iq, selfish, youtube researchers and anti-anything” by the institutions.
The least hesitancy in accepting excessive regulation exists in the middle of the bell curve of IQ, perhaps this is because this is where the importance of having a social network exists, where they all think alike and have the outcasts of either side of the IQ bell curve to dismiss as the ‘other’. The middle of the bell curvers, often described as the ‘midwit’, require an ‘other’ to laugh at and mock in order to succeed in having social relations, as many midwit social relations exist due to the collective human instinct to reject the ‘other’. They use the ‘other’ as a balancing mechanism to ensure they know where the limits lie to what would be socially acceptable in order to succeed in the ‘machine’ or ‘system’ careers this group tends towards. They fear any change from the system they know functions in an orderly way and accept onerous regulations in order to stay in the safety of that system.
They reject any suggestion that perhaps the school system might not be the most efficient for creativity and innovation, they reject any suggestion that the news media is a manufactured set of manipulated events curated to ensure they keep hating the right people, keep fearing the right things, and don’t hear about any corrupt doings by their governments, nor hear about any whistleblower speaking outrageously about things that may challenge the midwit’s bubble wrapped safety ideal of the system. Nor do they understand that the system, as it ages, exponentially and disproportionately, is driving wealth inequality and despair. “I’m too busy to look into it” they’ll say, “I’m tired, I have to go to my job in the morning, can we all not talk about it and just have a calm and peaceful evening”. Exist in the system and above all ‘just be happy’. Sounds great! Not.
While the internet has been great at having information at our fingertips, what has been lost is social checks and balances. Many of us are now atomised, studies show that loneliness is increasing exponentially and that far too many of us now cannot nominate anyone that we can call upon or trust to assist us if we were in a bad situation. Spending hours a day reading social media posts can make our brains think that maybe that is the real world. We can read 50 horrible social media comments from trolls who say completely reprehensible things they would never say in real life, and we throw the phone away after reading the worst one and have to sit there thinking ‘is this really what kind of people are out there?’ This is not helpful at all for a socially cohesive world or attempting to restore the kind of community spirit that has ensured humanity has lasted as long as it has. And no I am not saying that all of human history was a cohesive, peaceful bliss, it certainly wasn’t, but what is vitally missing now is real life community groups, even of 20 people, that get together and chat and work towards something cohesive.
We have online groups where we don’t personally know anyone in the group, but share mountains of information in that one could never get through, but it solves nothing except to know that somewhere, someone out there is thinking similarly. This is great for globalists, whilst everyone is atomised creating storms in teacups that achieve barely anything other than to know what’s going on behind the scenes, they can exist in a whole other dimension directing around the midwits with ease, distracting them by pointing over there to the ‘other’, blaming them for wrecking everything.
If you look from a completely animal point of view, this world we have allowed to be created for ourselves is quite the living hell. Government attracts a very poor subset of moral-less psychopathic sociopaths particularly since social media kicked off, as what person of good morals would want to be defamed every minute of the day online for the entirety of your term, and in an increasing number, long after your term ends. Corporations have become so large that they are in effect a government, large chains adopt government overreach as Gospel truths, leading to a complete dehumanisation of the system. Large chain shops have turned into technocratic nightmares, with the employees having all their soul removed to be carbon copies of the ‘paper’s please’ notions world wars were purportedly fought over. Yet if you tell these people working there that that’s the comparable historical sentiment, they’ll shame and shout you down and give you every justification on how it’s not the same. The internet has given would-be authoritarian moral high horse ‘Karens’ (male and female) a platform to openly, legally and endlessly verbally assault anyone who doesn’t play along, dismissing dissident thought as selfish, when they are in fact the ones intruding on other’s space attempting to inflict their pro-authoritarian points of view on others they have no real world relation with.
The internet gives a welcoming platform to the midwit who wants, possibly without even knowing, to inflict global authoritarianship on everyone. These people actively and deliberately infiltrate the online space of those who have dissident points of view to, often with very poor argument or ‘the science’ evidence, attempt to prove to the dissident that they are stupid and wrong. They then, once they run out of their limited evidence for argument, usually resort to insult and shame, telling the person they originally engaged that they are the ones ‘throwing a tantrum’, when they were likely originally just politely sharing information with people who were interested. After 20 years of the internet, sharing information outside of the narrative has become a social crime.
Perhaps the internet is evolving to mirror the midwit’s ideal of the regulated orderly utopia they firmly believe they exist in. ‘Censorship’ is just about making the internet a place where the middle of the IQ bell curve can parrot their ideal society. ‘Parallel societies’ are popping up on new tech platforms as the major platforms become what I just described. What we need is to replicate these parallel societies in real life, before the midwits steer us blindly into an irreversible global Social Credit System and call it utopia because there is a defined way to behave and a defined ‘other’ for them to mock.