Now, I’m far from crazy: I don’t believe that 9/11 was an inside job, I’m pretty sure that there are no aliens in Area 51 and there’s no way FEMA could be conspiring against the citizens it was commissioned to protect.
I’m not a ‘conspiracy theorist’ in any sense of the term, so when I tell you that in spite of this it isfact that the world is constructed in a manner which constricts our actions and thoughts it should have a little more clout than if I was a tinfoil-hatted homeless man. In spite of this, the vast majority of people reading this will still probably reject it as paranoid gobbledegook- which means that the control systems are doing their job!
Here in Britain, the setting of George Orwell’s utterly fantastic 1984 we are already careening wildly down a path which restricts civil liberties to such a degree that an Orwell himself would have been ashamed about the caste-run dystopia into which we have evolved. The United Kingdom is notorious in the international community for its utility of a social construct known as the Panopticon, with over 1.85 million CCTV cameras observing every action taken by every citizen. On average you are observed by a government representative every 35 seconds.
No other nation would put up with this.
Now the panopticon isn’t just a governmental construct; people have to be predisposed towards the acceptance of observation before they are willing to submit to an authoritarian force which can see their every action. Achieving this has been a true Machiavellian masterpiece, which utilises every facet of the public sector to create this attitude, ranging from entertainment, to the forth estate, to religion.
Many of you out there will know of the television show Big Brother, a reality TV show which began as a simple social experiment to observe the effects the act of observation had on a group of students in England, set up by Channel 4. Much like the Quantum Double Slit experiment, observation in the end caused people to act in a manner they would otherwise not have, and the study was deemed a success. Unfortunately for the people of Britain, the show also ended up being a fairly incredible social success.
By series 3 the television show was getting applicants by the millions, enticed by dreams of celebrity (which we’ll get onto in a bit) and naturally only the very ‘kookiest’ individuals ended up being selected. The show was watched by tens of millions of people religiously, all the while soaking up the message that it was not only OK to be watched over by a controlling authority (who, quite aptly made contestants perform arduous tasks for food) but that this forfeit for human rights was actually something to be desired and embraced.
The winner of the show may have gotten the prize of hundreds of thousands of pounds, but the real winners were the people who lived on in the public’s hearts- either loved or loathed- as the ‘professional celebrities’ that the tabloid magazine industry perpetuates. These people now existed outside the construct of theBig Brother house, and their lives became a public spectacle for all to see, and since this remained the source of their income these individuals constantly humiliated themselves in public.
The very notion of celebrity is, in itself, indicative of a populus who have grown accustomed to a lack of privacy, and the fact that we now wish to have our privacy invaded as a mark of social advancement is, to my mind, tragic. Since the launch of Big Brother CCTV systems in the UK have risen by just under half, more than doubling the increase seen in previous years.
Of course since then punditry has claimed that the paparazzi are a vile bunch, but considering the media conglomerates who control their talk shows and symposiums are the same people who fork over millions for pictures of Paris Hilton’s vagina I don’t think they’re in a position to talk.
The idea that it’s “OK” to be observed by an all-powerful entity is hardly a new theory; reality TV simply brought the theory into the new age and turned control from one set of people to another. The first people to use the idea of a benevolent superpower to control people were, quite obviously, the Church! This is not a phenomenon restricted to the confines of Christianity either- the vast majority of religions, Abrahamic or not, utilise the idea that there is some omnipresent entity who observes your actions and judges you as either “Good” or “Bad”. Christianity and Islam merely took it one step further by saying that sin led to damnation, which is something your average 12th century French peasant would do anything to avoid.
To quote my good friend ‘OmniZero’: “From the moment we’re born to the moment we die we are subjected to some form of control system.” I wish it weren’t so, but this chap could not be closer to the truth if he were in a Louisiana strip-club and the truth was a moderately hot girl from a broken home. We’re left over with a medieval control system of primal fear and religious piousness, a modern theory of the panopticon built on the same theories as those ancient methods, and yet we still consider ourselves free?
Well, it’s not just the act of observation which governments, religions and corporations attempt to trivialise and then utilise; even our very free will is utterly warped by the systems of economic control which society has now grown dependent on. Say you go to a supermarket, and you buy a carton of Soya milk- that’s a noble act, right? Soya beans are relatively easy to farm, and look! It even says “Fair Trade” on it, so you know it’s reputable!
I’m really sorry to break it to you, but that’s just not the case.
The modern world, such as it is, operates like an elaborate pyramid scheme: That soya milk comes from beans grown on a farm, which are then shipped in a truck to a factory, where it is processed and then packaged, then it is flown to the supermarket where you buy it with currency issued to you by a central authority. That’s a pretty simple process on the surface of it, but when you consider that the farm exports exclusively to a corporate factory, who have a corporate contract to use vehicles manufactured by another corporation, probably owned by the same shell company as the supermarket and the airline you eventually boil down to everyone working for one person:
Whomever owns the shell company.
Then of course there’s the issue of the currency used to purchase that soya milk. Only 10% of money actually exists as physical currency, with the rest being transferred around cyberspace in bank accounts as simple mathematical assertions of pure fiscal value. If this is the case, then why does the number on one person’s screen determine how much currency they are entitled to? Sure, they may have worked for it, but in the end who attributes the end value to an essentially valueless resource?
In the old days we used gold to determine the wealth of a nation, but now everything is just noughts and ones flitting around, given importance by banks, companies, governments and the people who have but no choice but to live with them. This is no problem for the people who are in control, but for your average bluecollar worker the lofty decisions of the elite can be utterly devastating, particularly when the same people who decide what currency is worth are the same people who define who pays taxes.
We’ve ended up with a system whose very goal is to keep the rich rich and the poor poor, masquerading as a benevolent meritocracy and side-lining spirituality and “off the grid” living as the notions of madmen and fools. If one expresses a wish to live outside the system they are expected not only to fend for themselves but to not reap the rewards of being inside the system- even if they contribute.
Humanity is, at its heart a collaborative species- we do what we must to survive, and it is important to note that living as a collective isn’t necessarily corrupt. The idea of political anarchy, having no leaders and simply living in love and peace with one another works in theory, but in the end simple greed causes us to corrupt ourselves, and pretty soon you’ve got a ruling class and every other sucker working for them. The trouble we have today is even more dire than this grim reality though:
Even if someone has a revolutionary idea we are unable to implement it due to logistics.
Take the visionary work of the reverend W. Cecil- he not only theorised that Hydrogen, not fossil fuels, could be used to create locomotion within machinery. A hydrogen engine is a pretty simple piece of kit- it runs on water, uses a catalystic chamber to break H2O into its component molecules, burns the hydrogen and then reconstitutes the excess back into water.
That’s right: The fuel for this engine is the same thing it burns. Not only that, but the excess Hydrogen and Oxygen which cannot be reclaimed are released into the atmosphere, where they form clouds which form as more water! It’s infinite fucking fuel.
So when was this idea patented? Well, there were a lot of hydrogen-powered engines being designed and manufactured in the 1970s, so surely this is the suppression of information to retain the global oil market, right?Wrong.
Rev. W. Cecil designed this Hydrogen engine in 1820. EIGHTEEN. TWENTY. It had some practical applications, but at that time coal mining was a huge industry, and naturally putting millions of miners out of work was impractical as it would destroy the very basis of the economy. Because of this the engine and all its counterparts were dismissed, and coal power remained the focus of the industrial revolution. The exact same thing happened in the 1970s, but instead of coal we had oil, and instead of workhouses we had multinational corporations.
The sad fact is that unless we all change, showing people stuff like the Hydrogen engine, or solar heating, or the rejection of the panopticon is utterly useless. As a species we have so much faith tied up in the systems used to restrict us that our survival has begun to hinge on the survival of the systems just as deeply as it does on actually living!
I don’t mean to sound dire, but as long as we believe in shallow concepts like shame and governmental omniscience we are destined to be the slaves of the same ten or twenty corporate superpowers which own all of industry, and as such bankroll all of government. I’m not saying that we all need to rush to live off the grid, and in the end even the control system of nuclear deterrence in the cold war was based on the human need to survive. We simply need to have a little faith in the species and hopefully you and I can be as free as the birds we have always longed to be.