All Episodes
Previous Next
July 14, 2019 - Freedomain Radio - Stefan Molyneux
45:07
The Fascists That Surround You - Part 6: Ethics for Psychopaths
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Hi everybody, Stephen Molyneux from Freedom Aid Radio.
So this is part six of The Fascists Among You.
This one is most properly entitled The Sociopaths Above You.
And I'm going to make a case that it's going to be seriously upsetting, discombobulating, creepy, alarming.
And this is a Matrix Unplugged podcast.
So if you're feeling shaky in your relationship to society, this may not be the best podcast for you at the current time.
You can bookmark it for later, but this is ugly stuff.
So I hope that you will take care of yourself when listening to these kinds of arguments.
Thank you.
So, there are two fundamentals in human society that are really important and not entirely unrelated.
The first is that society always coalesces back to a hierarchy.
And the hierarchy is composed of fraud and force.
The hierarchy is composed of violence and manipulation.
The violence, of course, is the secular rulers, the king, the queen, the president, the prime minister, the local warlord, whoever, who is willing to use violence against you in order to get his way.
And that's the force side of it.
And the fraud side of it is...
The propaganda, which pretends that the violence is voluntarism, which pretends that the brute coercion of you and the massive hawking off of your children, children's futures, is somehow you're doing...
And this, of course, is what abusers do, right?
They use force against you.
They say, you made me do it, it's your fault, and it's a good thing.
And abusers, of course, always isolate you from other people.
And the state does that at all times by causing you to be completely unable to talk about the essence of your society, the essence of anything that is true, and lies divide.
The truth unites. Lies divide.
And because propaganda is lies and you can't tell the truth about anything to anyone, about anything real, you end up isolated and addicted to sports and materialism and all this other kind of nonsense that is so destructive.
So, in the modern world, of course, we have public schools and the media, and to some degree religion, but more so in America, and to some lesser degree in Canada, and to a much smaller degree.
In Europe, you need more of a socialist state because religion has largely diminished and as religion has begun to lose its hold over the minds of the people, you need to increase the propaganda on children, which is why governments are trying to get children earlier and earlier through encouraging women to go into the workforce and abandon their children to state drones to inject them with the mental formaldehyde slash brain parasite called statism.
I mean, you understand that this is constant.
The level of propaganda is constant.
It just shifts from secular to theological.
So, why did you need public schools in the 19th century?
Why was it a universal phenomenon?
Well, because religion was losing its hold, and democracy was taking root.
Now, see, when democracy takes root, you lose the divine right of kings, right?
And once you lose the divine right of kings, you need some other way in which to propagandize people to obey the leaders, right?
The divine right of kings, of course, was that the ruler is placed there by God, and to question the ruler or oppose the ruler is to question and oppose God.
Now, once you got democracy, then this story no longer held.
And so you needed another way of propagandizing people.
And you have to propagandize people hard and early and long in order for it to work.
This used to be achieved by religion.
And then when the religious impulse and when the aristocracy was overthrown, you needed another reason to lie to people or another way to lie to people to get them to obey the rulers.
And thus, governments took over schooling.
Because the level of propaganda needs to be the same.
And if the church is doing less of it, then, of course, governments need to be doing a whole lot more of it, right?
You understand?
Nothing has changed fundamentally.
It's just that the propaganda has gone from religion to socialism.
Of course, the rise of communism occurred as well, in particular in the Jewish community, as the secular movements began to hold sway.
They needed another way to control people, and communism displaced some of that.
It came into the vacuum.
So there is a power vacuum, right?
And the power vacuum is filled by propaganda, and if one set of propaganda doesn't work anymore, then you simply switch to another.
So the propaganda, of course, is the ethical issue.
So to speak, or the ethical lies, the ethical myths that are invented to control people.
And this, of course, is two sides of sociopathy, right?
It's the incredible verbal ability, the incredibly verbal and manipulative ability of the sociopath.
And then more on the psychopath side, you have the willingness to use violence to achieve your ends, all while cloaked, right?
So, in the moral justification.
So, moral justification, the velvet glove on the fist of the state, all of this is...
The other thing that's really essential to understand is that...
Ethics is a monstrously failed system by its own standards, right?
I mean, ethics is, of course, designed to reduce violence and promote peace and cooperation among human beings.
And after a 2,500-year history, we still have endless wars.
We have debts.
We have 90% of children still being hit by their parents.
After a 24...
Actually, no, I guess you could say, what, a 3,000 or 4,000-year program called Thou Shalt Not Kill, we end up with...
Now, one thing that's of course easy to understand is that...
If a program does not achieve its stated goal but still continues, then it's achieving its unstated goal.
You understand? Let me say that again.
If a program or a plan does not achieve its stated goal but still continues, then it is meeting its unstated goal.
I mean, we can see this in the realm of dysfunctional human behavior, of course, right?
So, in that realm, somebody says, well, I just want a woman to stay with me, and I'm paranoid about the woman leaving me, and therefore I'm going to stalk her and read her texts and keep her up all night, whining and complaining about her sleeping with other men, and then she leaves me, right?
And if this keeps repeating itself, if this keeps repeating itself, if Then the stated goal is to have a woman who stays, right?
But the unconscious goal is to drive the woman away, is to confirm the low self-esteem constant called I am not lovable, I cannot be loved, and so on.
And so any repetitive goal, program, plan, whatever you call it, habit of action, any repetitive habit of action that does not achieve its stated goal is simply achieving its unstated goal.
Which is almost certainly to be the opposite of its stated goal, right?
So you can look at the war on drugs.
Of course, the war on drugs is, of course, largely driven by the need to keep drug prices high so that governments can profit from drug running and governments can frighten people with drug addicts and get them to surrender their liberties and they can constantly terrorize people and so on.
So it's not there to end drugs.
Obviously, it hasn't ended drugs.
You can't even keep drugs out of prison, which means if you turn society into a prison, you've still got lots of drugs.
But the unstated goal is continually being achieved, and therefore we can understand that it's the opposite, right?
I mean, how is the war on poverty going?
Has poverty been solved?
Well, no, of course not. Poverty has been entrenched.
But the goal of the war on poverty is not to end poverty, but to create a dependent class of people who can be reliably counted on to vote to increase the size and power of the state.
The goal of education was to create a high-quality education for everyone and literacy rates are a small fraction of what they were before government schools came in.
But the program continues because the purpose, of course, is to create a propagandizing class called public school teachers who are dependent upon the state and therefore cannot speak out against the state in any fundamental or at least emotionally believable way.
You can't rail against government power while taking your summers off and being protected by a government union.
It's ridiculous, right?
And so it's achieving its goal perfectly.
I mean, children are wonderfully propagandized to accept a violent hierarchy and pretend that it's a voluntary and virtuous thing.
Told that, you know, you're a citizen, civic duty, and blah, blah, blah, right?
Voting, all that sort of nonsense.
So it's working beautifully for them.
So, with that brief overview, I think we can understand and appreciate the dark, satanic, majestic art of it all That the fist is there, the fist is portrayed as a handshake.
An unchosen obligation is converted into a voluntary debt, right?
You stay here, you consume government services, therefore you must pay for them, and anyone who doesn't is watching on a legitimate debt, and blah-de-blah-de-blah, right?
So, I think it's really, really important to understand that since society consistently recoalesces back to these situations, the propagandist, the conman, cannot survive without...
The fist, right?
The lie called taxes are voluntary, rape is lovemaking, cannot survive without the fist to enforce it, without the IRS and tax laws and jail and the cops to enforce it all, right?
You understand that.
I mean, this is the basic argument that you always get into with people.
They say, taxes are voluntary. Okay, great.
Then let's not have laws to enforce them because they're voluntary, right?
Well, we can't have that, right?
Okay, so they're not voluntary.
No, they are because as a social contract, you consume government services, right?
So this is the 1984 double thing that occurs.
Because if the lies of the propagandists are accepted as truth, then you must eliminate the fist of the state.
If it is a social contract, if it's voluntary, blah, blah, blah, then you can't have it enforced.
If you can choose whoever you want to make love with, then you can't have institutionalized rape.
So, really what I want to focus on this aspect of things, the propagandist has nothing to cover up and will not be believed without the fist of the state.
But the fist of the state, the violence of the state, cannot sustain itself, cannot survive without the propagandist portraying it eternally as voluntary.
People don't like to be forced, and forced is wrong, and therefore you constantly have to cloak what the state does in propaganda.
You constantly have to portray What the state does as peaceful as, well, it's law and order, and without that it would be chaos, and the government is there to protect you from financial predation and from theft and assault and so on, and it does that by printing money, devaluing your currency, creating national debts, stealing up to half your money by force and selling off your kids.
And it's all insane, and it's all nonsensical, of course, and it doesn't take more than a moment or two's undefended thought to see the truth of it.
But this is really important to understand.
It's the left hook and the right hook, so to speak, the one-two punch of statism.
The force, which cannot be called force, and the propaganda, which cannot be accepted without force.
Once you're already forced, you're desperate for propaganda.
Once you're in a situation of force, you're desperate for propaganda to pretend that it's somehow voluntary and virtuous, and that way you don't have to change anything, you don't have to act, you don't have to put yourself in danger by opposing a system and so on, right?
So I think this is really important to understand.
Now, ethics... It falls under the category of state propaganda.
It always has, until recently, and, I mean, without strong efforts of the country, it always will.
Ethics is state propaganda.
Why? Well, because you're always told to obey the state.
I mean, this is Socrates' commandment.
You know, the state is your mother and father.
Oh, very subtle there. And you need to obey the state, no matter whether it's unjust.
This is Luther's reconciliation of the contradiction of an eye for an eye versus turn the other cheek.
Turn the other cheek is if the state is unjust to you.
An eye for an eye is if you are unjust towards your fellow citizen or towards the state.
So, obey the state. The social contract, the law, all of this stuff is all about obeying the state.
Don't cause violence among each other is very important.
I mean, look, if you're selling leather coats, you don't want your cows goring each other or attacking each other.
If you're selling chickens, you don't want a pecking party getting your chickens killed.
And so we're told not to aggress against each other because we're less valuable if we aggress against each other.
We're less productive. We're less functional livestock if we attack each other.
So of course we're told not to attack each other.
Of course we're never told to attack the state or resist the state.
And... Oh, sorry.
The only time that resistance to the state is considered virtuous is when a new group of sociopaths is making an end run for a state power.
Then... State, you know, rebellion against the state is considered virtuous, but the moment that changes, then anyone who continues to rebel against the state is treated like George Washington treated the farmers in Pennsylvania who resisted the whiskey tax, ride them down and slice them up.
So rebellion is only a virtue when people are grabbing power.
The moment they have power, then rebellion is evil.
So why am I saying all this?
Well, I'm saying all this because it's really essential if you really want to understand the world.
If you really want to understand the world, it's absolutely essential to truly grasp that what you call ethics is a form of sociopathic control over you.
It's verbally adroit, it's kind of convincing, and it's unbelievably contradictory, right?
One of the marks of a sociopath and of a psychopath is to contradict themselves in the same sentence with no reference to it, to that contradiction.
And of course, with rage and attack, if that contradiction is pointed out, or at least persistently pointed out.
And the social contract is a voluntary concept.
The state is a violent enforcement.
So the state is both voluntary and violent in the same breath at the same time.
If anybody points out the violence, they're told that it's voluntary.
If anyone then says, okay, well then we shouldn't have the violence if it's really voluntary, then they're told the violence is necessary.
So violence is necessary for voluntarism, and voluntarism is the definition of violence.
You understand, right?
This is mad.
This is completely mad.
But this is, of course, the hallmark of sociopathy.
Telling you lies in order to steal your resources is the essence of sociopathy, of manipulation, and it is the essence of state propaganda.
Playing on your fears or your greed is the essence of sociopathy, right?
Surrender your control, your valuable resources, your children, for heaven's sakes.
Because the sociopath is able to play like an expert pipe organist on the keys of your greed and your fear.
Well... What happens without the state?
All this chaos, ruin, destruction.
Well, that's all just playing on your fears.
The state can provide you real great goodies if you support it.
If you donate to me as a politician, I will get you favorable legislation.
I will get you government contracts.
That plays upon your greed. And it's always at the expense of others.
Incredible callousness towards others.
Well, of course, this is the state.
A complete lack of empathy, particularly towards the helpless.
Well, that's national debts, right?
A consistent pattern of immorality that is never admitted to be immorality.
Well, this is the state.
A constant targeting of people who expose and disagree potential sociopathy.
That is the state and its critics.
A constant lying to aggrandize power and steal resources.
Constant lying. But this is the state.
Everything the state says is a lie.
And everything it has, it has stolen.
So saith Sir Nietzsche.
And rightly so. So, when I say that you live inside the defenses of a sociopath, what I mean is that all the ethics that you are taught...
These are sociopathic manipulations, cons, and control mechanisms to hide the violence of the psychopath from you.
This is the media, this is the religion, this is public school teachers, this is everyone in your social circle who continues to praise a state despite the clear and obvious coercive nature of the state.
The other thing that you're taught by sociopaths It's not like everyone who teaches you is a sociopath.
I want to be sort of clear about that.
But the content of the teaching is sociopathic.
If you were to analyze the content of state propaganda, it is sociopathic.
This doesn't mean that everyone who teaches you is a sociopath.
I said statism is sociopathic.
Not all statists are sociopathic.
The belief structure itself, the content and the presentation is sociopathic.
Because it advocates the use of force while strenuously denying that there's any kind of use of force.
It promotes voluntarism all the while promoting the use of force.
I mean, this is praise upon people, particularly upon the innocent, without remorse, without conscience.
It never apologizes for anything.
I mean, this is statism as a philosophy, and this is statism as an indoctrination system.
So what you're being taught is sociopathic, and it is there to profit sociopaths.
This doesn't mean everyone who teaches you is sociopathic.
But you will be taught by this sociopathic, or within this sociopathic belief system, you will be taught that the essence of morality is empathy.
That the essence of morality is empathy.
You could even argue sympathy, right?
So don't you care about the poor?
Don't you care about the old? Don't you care about the people who are sick and have no money for medicine?
I mean, we have to help them.
We have to help them, right? Now, one of the most popular states of mind to listen in others from a sociopath is pity.
If the sociopath can get you to pity him, then your defenses are down, that your concern is up, your care is up.
Pity is an incredibly dangerous emotion to have.
And around a sociopath, it just means you're about to get royally screwed and possibly even killed, you know, in terms of war and so on, right?
So you really have to be careful when your pity is evoked.
Look at these poor homeless people.
Look at these poor hungry people.
You know, this is foreign aid, right? Foreign aid is completely sociopathic.
And yet it is your, quote, concern for and pity for the poor and the needy that is used to manipulate and control you and to...
Let's destroy any rational objection you have.
I mean, all libertarians. We've been through this a million times, right?
So if you're against the welfare state, you must be against helping the poor.
That's a purely sociopathic structure.
It's like if you have some obsessive guy stalking you and so on and you're against that, well, you must just be against love.
If you're against the government controlling currency, it must be because you're against stable currency.
And you want to go back to the crazy, madcap, 19th century, frontiersville of whatever, right?
If you're against government regulation of industry, it's because you want industry to run everything.
As if industry doesn't run everything through the government, through the foundation.
Or the phenomenon called regulatory capture.
So all of this is really, really important to understand, right?
If you're against...
It's because you want people to be harmed by drugs, as if people aren't harmed and killed, in fact, by the millions through the FDA. Again, it's the exact opposite of the truth and it's portrayed as an eternally true and virtuous system or solution.
If you're against the drug war, it's because you want little kids to be held down in alleys and shot up with heroin or you want families to collapse or whatever, right?
As if families aren't collapsed by all the people thrown into jail.
If families aren't detonated by all the people thrown into jail through the drug war.
So this, we've all heard this a million times.
It's a sociopathic structure.
Whenever you're in a no-win situation, you're in the orbit of a sociopath.
Whenever you feel trapped or no-win or can't lose or whatever it is, right?
Occasionally people post on the message board this outrageous stuff or whatever, right?
And, you know, they're trying to set a trap, right?
I mean, everybody who's been in admin knows this, and I don't admin anymore, but, you know, that's...
And then, of course, you either let this outrageous, horrifying stuff continue, in which case you are destroying the quality of the message board and driving good people away, or you, you know, tell the person to stop and maybe ban them, in which case you...
A dictatorial censorship and can't handle questions and criticisms.
You know, it's all crazy stuff, right?
But this is, I mean, it's just obvious to anybody with any eyes to see it.
It's all completely obvious.
But, again, it's hidden to most people because they're trained not to see this, right?
So, the ethics that you're taught are the first line of defense for the sociopaths.
It's like a cow being taught that to go anywhere near the electric fence is evil.
Well, that means if enough cows believe it, if the cows believe it as a whole, then that's wonderful because the farmer doesn't have to waste money running electricity through the electric fence.
In fact, they may not even need to have a fence after a while, right?
Again, all of this stuff is really essential to understand.
That what you call ethics are control mechanisms designed to paralyze you in the face of sociopathy, to hide sociopathy from you, to get you to submit to sociopathy without arousing your natural defenses.
It is a form of self-esteem paralytic.
It is a form of disarming to the point of truly taking your arms off to be able to defend yourself.
That's essential to understand.
Morality is slavery.
Because everything that is called good is that which serves the sociopath, and everything that is called evil, it's that which does not serve and opposes the will of the sociopath.
And because people constantly mistake sociopathic predation and exploitation for moral excellence, we continually have society recoalesce back into this, right? Society follows the form of the ethics it accepts.
Always, always, always.
The ethics are like the medieval T-Rex footprint in the mud, and society is like the water running into it.
It just fills it up in the shape that is there.
Whatever people accept ethically, they will create socially.
Sociopaths understand this.
Of course. Of course they do.
Sociopaths understand the power of ethics, which is why they're ethically responsible.
Sociopaths accept and understand the power of ethics much more so than the average person.
So the sociopath will tell you that your empathy is what makes you virtuous.
And of course they're going to say that because they don't have any empathy.
So they're already excluded from that which is virtuous.
Right? Do you understand this?
If you say to someone, virtue is empathy, then you're automatically above, you're the ubermatch, right?
The superman. You're already above and beyond virtue because you don't have empathy.
And also, once you say that virtue is empathy, then you can use the supposed virtue of empathy to generate pity and manipulate people into surrendering their independence, because you can elicit pity in them for others.
I mean, for the most part, what sociopaths call sympathy or empathy is...
Just unbelievably tragic, negative, horrible, messy.
It is the anxiety we feel towards hostages.
And the hostages are those who the...
Right? So sociopaths will say, well, let's take care of the poor.
And then they provoke...
They work on people's empathy for the poor.
Because empathy, of course, is such a virtue.
But they provoke people's empathy for the poor.
They pity for the poor.
And then they use that to create more and more poor.
Thus ensuring that people will continue...
To surrender their liberty so that they can continue to, quote, take care of the poor.
And it sets up, once they gain a monopoly on actions which are related to empathy, or sympathy in particular, once they gain a monopoly on those actions, helping the poor, the old, the sick, the weak, whatever, right?
The poor children and their need for education.
Once the sociopaths gain a monopoly on the actions which are defined as virtuous through empathy, then anyone who opposes, like within a certain amount of time, anyone who opposes the sociopathic control over the, quote, solution, obviously anyone who opposes the sociopathic control over the, quote, solution, obviously opposes any kind of solution, So once a sociopath can gain a monopoly over charity, a violent monopoly over charity, then anyone who opposes that violent monopoly must oppose charity.
Because people are taught that empathy is virtue.
Empathy is philosophy.
Empathy is morality. No, no, no, no.
Empathy is the trap.
Empathy is the soft, sticky quicksand that sends your soul down deep into the dungeons of the verbally adept and soulless monsters who rule the species.
I'm not saying empathy is a bad thing.
Empathy is a fine thing. It just doesn't really have anything to do with philosophy.
It has to do with human relationships.
It has to do with understanding how other people tick.
It may have to do with intimacy and so on, although the virtue called honesty is much more fundamental to intimacy than the supposed virtue called empathy.
But in no other discipline, in no other discipline, did we put empathy forward as a central value.
Nobody says, well, to be a good physicist, you need to have empathy.
Nobody says that to be a good engineer, you need to have empathy.
I mean, empathy doesn't hurt and may in fact even help.
I mean, it helps in general, I think.
But nobody says, in order to be a good heart surgeon, you need to have empathy.
I mean, it's nice to have a good bedside manner, for sure.
That's great. But that's true of...
It's a general rule that empathy is preferable to non-empathy.
But, of course, an excess of empathy can be disastrous.
An excess of empathy can be disastrous.
So, an excess of empathy, and particularly an excess of sympathy, can be disastrous because...
If you're about to be robbed and you really sympathize with the person's need to have your wallet, then you're just going to give them your wallet.
Now, you probably should just give them your wallet rather than get stabbed or whatever, but an excess of empathy paralyzes you in the face of true human predators.
If you empathize with the shark's desire to eat your leg, you're going to stay in the water.
An excess of empathy is incredibly dangerous.
We need to have empathy for those who have empathy and we need to have no fucking empathy for the people who don't have empathy.
Of course. You treat people the best you can the first time you meet them and after that you treat them as they treat you.
And if they're assholes to you and they have no empathy and they pray, then just get out.
Leave. I mean, the con man is unhappy if he doesn't have you as his victim.
But that doesn't mean that you have to surrender yourself to the con man's preferences, right?
The specific denial of empathy, the avoidance of empathy, like the plague, is essential in particular situations.
Empathy will mess you up bad, right?
The guy who's trying to sign you up for the Marines really, really, really wants you to sign up for the Marines, right?
You got it? If you empathize only with his desires and not what's actually going to keep you sane, healthy, and alive, then you're going to go sign up for the Marines.
The guy who wants to sell you the timeshare really, really, really wants you to sell you the timeshare, right?
But you don't empathize with him alone, right?
I mean, nobody says, to be a good mathematician, you see, you really, really need to have empathy.
No. Don't need any of that stuff.
I mean, it's not bad to have, but it's certainly nothing to do with the essence of the discipline.
In order to be good at philosophy, you need to have the capacity to universalize from first principles, to identify and point out self-detonating arguments, and to resist and withstand the attacks of the evildoers who lose power as a result of your identification of universals.
I mean, a philosopher who has empathy for everyone can't get anything done It's like an oncologist who has empathy for cancer.
Can't cure you, right? Because the cancer doesn't want you to cure.
And the cancer hates the best oncologist, of course, right?
The cancer could think. The worst disease hates the best doctor.
And so, well, you have to recognize and...
But to do that, you need to recognize that not everyone is deserving of empathy, which means you need to abandon the concept of the soul, human perfectibility, the good intentions of everyone, people doing the best they can with whatever they've got, and you need to recognize the scientific, physical, brain-proven fact that there are some very evil people out there who are doing enormously damaging things to human society, murdering people by the millions, hundreds of millions, abusing children...
Raping, killing, pillaging.
And they are an enemy.
I mean, they're the enemy of the species.
They're the enemy. They're the worst enemy.
I mean, we don't have any other particular predators.
There's only the very big and the very little.
The only predators we have left are the little diseases and the big guns of the sociopaths in power.
That's it. It's the curse of the smalls and the stars, and it's Phafford and the Grey Mouser, once mentioned many moons ago.
We need to recognize it's a basic fact.
It's a basic fact.
And people who have no conscience and who gain massive amounts of power and control over others by preaching the value of empathy of which they possess none, of course are not going to be very happy about anyone who interferes with their power and control.
Parents are not happy when you preach independence and virtue to children and that parental relationships are not an automatic value but a virtue which must be earned like every other virtue, the way that the marriage has to be earned.
right the quality of marriage It used to be, of course, that your husband was just your husband, and he ruled over you like God did, and you had to stay with him no matter what.
And we don't believe that anymore, and the same thing will happen, of course, with parental relationships.
It's the only way to fundamentally improve society.
It's to improve the quality of parenting.
And the only way to fundamentally improve the quality of parenting is to make the relationships voluntary.
We understand this, right? You don't get quality out of involuntary relationships.
You don't get quality out of unchosen and enforced relationships where virtue is not the defining factor, which is why you get worse service from the IRS than you do from whatever private, the most private institution you can think of, the most free market institution you can think of.
Right? Equality only improves when people can get fired.
We understand this when it comes to public schools.
We have difficulty understanding this with regards to parents, but that's all right.
That will simply take time. And of course, there's a lot of parents who've behaved badly because they assume they can never get fired.
Well, sorry, but the family needs to be privatized as much as everything else.
So I really wanted to point that out as a sort of fundamental thing.
And this is really where the power of UPB comes in.
Universally preferable behavior.
I'm sorry, I'm not going to run through the basics of it here, other than to say that it is around true universalization.
So, just for the moment, we'll bypass all the arguments and say the non-initiation of force is a virtue.
To extend that to true universalization means that you can't have a state.
Can't have a state. Because the state is the initiation of the use of force.
To truly universalize UPB. But see, UPB is ethics for sociopaths.
What a great sales pitch that is.
UPB is ethics for sociopaths.
I don't mean that the sociopaths will now accept it as ethics, but it is ethics designed to combat sociopathy.
The reason for that is that if you have empathy, then you're not going to be able to torture someone because you'll feel it yourself.
I think Joe Halderman wrote a short story many years ago which I read.
Quite a huge impact on me called Study Warner More.
It was an anthology called Study Warner More and it was about an alien who gave someone true empathy.
They felt whatever other people feel.
And you can't torture people.
You can't rape somebody.
When you truly understand and accept and feel what other people feel, then you can't do evil to them.
Now, through abstractions that are heavily propagandized to cover up the evil and the immorality, you can support things like the public schools and the welfare state and taxes and bloody bloody roads and all the crap like that.
By the by, somebody posted a great comment on one of my recent interviews with John Bush where he said, you know, we need the government to do the roads.
Best rebuttal to that is the government neither pays for nor builds the roads.
They subcontracted all that.
That's a very good point. So I think that's an important thing to understand.
But if you have empathy, you are not really going to do evil in a direct way.
It's very unlikely that you're going to do evil in a direct way.
So, really, at a personal level, ethics is not necessary for people who have empathy, if that makes sense, right?
Ethics is not necessary. It's not really required for people to have empathy.
I mean, ethics for people who have empathy is kind of like having a diet which says, don't eat any junk food to a guy stuck on a desert island.
Well, you don't have access to it anyway.
Can't get it, so why bother banning it, right?
Most people will never directly want to accept or initiate force against their fellow person.
You don't need ethics for people who have a lot of empathy.
You do need ethics, of course, for sociopaths.
To identify sociopaths, particularly sociopathic systems, like the state, like certain forms of religiosity, you need ethics for systems or situations without empathy, where empathy is absent.
Like I said in a podcast recently that you can get sociopaths responsible for ethics because they can easily understand universals.
This is what I mean.
So UPB is that which is the most necessary where there is the least empathy because it is a way of destroying the manipulations of the sociopath by truly universalizing that which the sociopath says or claims is universal.
Because the claims of universality made by the sociopath are entirely, entirely around disarming you and getting you to subject yourself to control in a sociopathic system.
That's the only reason that sociopaths care about universality at all.
It's simply a claim that disarms you.
It hooks into the universality centers of your brain, which are responsible for language and perception and being able to learn tennis and stuff like that.
It hooks into those and renders you to be subject to the sociopath's control.
So, that's the only reason that sociopaths use universals.
And they don't care about the effects because they don't have any empathy, right?
So, given that we understand that, or given that reality, given those facts, then I hope that you can understand that philosophy is the opposite of sociopathy, because sociopathy is designed to con you and to manipulate you through contradictions, through propaganda. And philosophy, and in particular UPB, is fundamentally predicated on no inconsistencies, ironing out the propaganda.
Propaganda are like wrinkles in time.
Like, up-down equations, black-white color schemes.
They're entirely self-contradictory.
And that's when we get lost in the folds of that and swallowed up in that.
And since sociopathy is about creating these opposites, these contradictions which can never be identified and constantly rotate back and forth.
You know, like, in religion it's so many of them, right?
10,000 gods are false, but our god is true.
God speaks to me, but not to you.
God used to do miracles, doesn't do them anymore.
It's all right. The third-hand, hundred-years-later reports of our God are perfectly true.
The third-hand, hundred-year-later reports of everybody else's God are false.
God is all good, but if you do what God does, you're evil.
God kills, you can't kill.
I mean, you go on.
All these contradictions. Philosophy comes along.
And irons out these contradictions.
Points out the contradictions and demands.
Insists. Is relentless in pursuit of consistency, universality, rationality.
But you see, that goes in direct opposition to the entire purpose of language and intellectual manipulation through sociopaths.
Philosophy is the antidote to hierarchy.
Philosophy is the antidote to predation.
Philosophy is the antidote to manipulation.
Philosophy is the antidote to sociopathy and psychopathy.
Philosophy is the cure for evil.
And evil resists it, of course.
Like a vampire resists having a state driven through his heart.
And this is why UPB messes people up so much because we get that it's the way out of the cave.
We get that it's the way out of history.
We get that it's the way to finally shrug off these brain parasites that have ruled human beings since the dawn of human beings.
We get that it's the only catapult that gets us over this medieval wall towards a truly free society on the other hand.
But it's dangerous as hell.
This is why people get so anxious about it.
It's so easy, but people get so anxious about it because it goes directly against what ethics has been set up for, what the life of the mind has been set up for, which is as bizarre, rose-colored, leaf-petaled, spray-painted, fireworked over electric cages and fences for the livestock.
We are, of course, supposed to lick the hand that beats us.
We are supposed to bow down to the Master who places the yoke on our back and praise Him for such a weight which is not a weight, but something which lifts us up.
The only way to fight the predation of contradictory, quote, universals, is through true universals, through true ethics, through the true universalization of property rights and the non-aggression principle.
But that is a silent atomic thunderclap of detonation at the very heart of the hierarchy for which all of our mental life is designed to maintain and to sustain.
We have an unconscious, we have the subconscious, the part which we cannot directly access, It is a cyst, it is an abscess, which has developed as a way of keeping the contradictions of sociopathy away from our consciousness.
I mean, we still have an unconscious in a free society, but it will be vastly different from what it is now.
All of the contradictions which, if identified in history, would get us killed, the contradictions have to go into the unconscious, which is why the unconscious seems irrational to us.
It's not. The unconscious is simply where we have to stuff the insane evil of the sociopaths who rule us so that they don't target us.
Well, I've had enough of that.
I've had enough of this shit.
I've had enough of this goddamn shit.
I've had enough... Of fluid-tongued assholes wrapping our brain up in Gordian nuts in order to pick our pockets and steal our children.
Fuck that and fuck them.
I have had enough.
It is time to fight our way free, to bite and claw our way through the fogs of propaganda to the truth, to virtue, to true universality, away from these savage, predatory brain tumor genes of sociopathic manipulations.
Because you understand, our technology is moving far faster than our morality, which means that the technology is being forever pumped and served into the hands of the most evil among us, which is why so much of what government does is only possible because of technology.
If our goddamn ethics does not speed up to keep up with our technological growth, we will end up in a night of hyper-controlled technological fascism for which there will be no dawn, no end, no awakening.
The gorgeous potential and wonderful voluntary tapestry of the human mind, of the human condition, of the human society will be burned and buried and dead and turned to ashes pecked only by the crows of the fascists among us.
Do not let that happen.
We must accelerate our ethics to keep up with our technology or we will end up as electric slaves until the end of time.
▲
Export Selection