The New Dehumanization

How we are treated by our opponents

Forget about “cancel culture,” or the “woke” crowd dubbing their scapegoats as “racists” or “nazis.” These terms mean something, as one falls into a binary semantic of truth versus fault. At least the “racist” or “nazi” has an identity, and the opponent has an ideological meaning and definition, humanizing the subject as real.

However, what is happening in our declining liberal society, is that the opponent is no longer humanized as a subject, but instead, is rather dehumanized, being denied the status of a human, negating his existence, along with the cruelty and suffering that is inflicted upon him.

It is safe to say that the Internet platforms of “social media,” like Twitter, Telegram, or Discord, do not encourage humanity, but are deliberately designed for users to dehumanize its subjects, and to create a self-serving, autistic reality, where everything is edible, and anyone does not exist. It is an extreme form of solipsism, where libertarianism is enforced within culture, and the ethics are skewed around these new cultural concepts around social media; going against people’s selfish joys is considered “evil,” while enforcing autonomy in The Matrix pod system is a “good.”

The outage nature of “social justice warriors,” “Antifa,” or the “woke” crowd, relies on a created concept of the humanized enemy in their semantics. But throughout the years, this reverse psychology of the witch hunt has only given power to the witch, and as such, opponents like “the deplorables,” now have a virtuous identity against the opponent. This flaw in liberal shaming was finally noticed in the Trump years. As American society continues to decline, and as liberalism itself starts to decay, it is no longer about working within the libertarian semantics of the American ideology, and instead, is about getting rid of the opponent.

Yes. The girly act of “ghosting” is a part of this effect to make dehumanization normal. To further suppress the opponent, the opposition does not exist.

While it is often argued that the Nazis dehumanized Jewish citizens and threw them into concentration camps, I believe the same thing is happening right now, but through a more insidious, involuntary concept of cultural genocide. Rather, dehumanization in 2023 means censorship, ignorance of the opponent, and fabricated evidence for the self’s solipsism. There is no interactivity within dehumanization, and like criminals being thrown into jail, all opponents and dissidents are thrown into a spiritual jail of isolation, downplaying their existence not as human, but through harmful (and subjective), unwanted messages around someone’s “mental health.”

Michel Foucault, in his 1975 study “Discipline and Punish,” noticed that real dehumanization was happening in jail. The “prisoner” is not only psychically punished for his crime, but he is punished through neglect, isolation, and the ideology of non-existence. The criminal is taken out of society, and thrown in a box where he does not exist anymore. What is left is an urban legend and historical note of the crime, but of course, that is being challenged further, as revisionism tends to erase the history from the public eye.

In other words, dehumanization in 2023 comes with the notion of libertarian thought, but instead of respecting one another as intellectual and aware players in a game, the opposition is deliberately not recognized as an argument, or as a living person with a concern, because this would mean that liberalism itself, and the libertarian cultural values of isolation, will self-implode through interactivity. That’s why there are fake forms of “interactivity” which means a human can only be “interactive” with a machine, or a B.F. Skinner box, which creates a virtual reality around fabricated evidence. The “evidence” in question is purely based upon a subjective emotion of euphemisms and hearsay around a semantic of personal egalitarianism. Penpals and hug-boxes that say the correct thing, around a Freudian “pleasure principle” are rewarded, while opposition is never acknowledged as a choice. The new dehumanization takes the form of “A Police State Without Police,” where everyone becomes a police officer, looking out for themselves, and through new cultural cues, refusing to ever question a world outside of them.

The new dehumanizing efforts take heavily on the concept of “fabricated evidence,” where the individual can do nothing wrong, and the only existing evil is from those who are trying to break a “non-aggressive pact.” …Of course, the opposition is not trying to break anything! Rather, evidence of this so-called hostility is fabricated as “hate,” or as being a “bully,” when clear as day, the real bullies tend to be those who are dehumanizing without knowing. This is because the new dehumanization erased the human out of the equation of argumentation.

The liberals now love to say they are open-minded or have a unique, niche ideology they want to tell others. But when a real opposition has a polite rebuttal, it is encouraged by social media, and the ideology of “safe spaces,” to “block” the individual, as the individual is no longer human, but an unwanted pop-up ad, trying to break down the selfish nature of isolation, which ironically, is considered a good in 2023.

I blame technology for this new dehumanizing effort. Just like how humans kill chickens and cows in a factory to create McDonald’s fast food, we humans now have created superior forms of genocide that aren't explicit like it was 80 years ago. As Jean Baudrillard has stated in The Gulf War Did Not Take Place, or in Simulacra and Simulation, what was “real” many years ago, created outrage and trauma among the public, and to cover up the ongoing efforts of a future war became “reinvented,” and takes an entirely new form, unaware of public thought.

A great example would be the war between Russia and Ukraine. A true pacifist would be against it. However, the elite wants this war, and the elite needs some sympathy to carry it out. So the elite “fabricate evidence” to justify their actions, whether that is through propaganda, or shifting cultural values and technology as a norm. Liberals fly the Ukrainian flag outside their suburban and isolated houses, thinking this is a war around “the good guys,” and comparing the narrative to Star Wars or Harry Potter.

An even better example would be the McDonald’s cheeseburger in question. What looks like, tastes like, and serves as an organic cheeseburger, is anything but that. The lookalike “meat” in question is slurry, or blood and leftover parts of a dead animal, filled with junk and other chemicals, to pass along as real meat. The same could be said about Red Lobster restaurants serving langostino instead, and calling it “lobster.” We have a simulacrum of the real thing. Just like we have a simulation of a war, or technology emulating “what friends do” on “social media.” The simulation efforts can go so far as to mock and play that of attending a “prestigious” college, when in reality, it’s a corrupted no-named school in middle Pennsylvania, etc. This notion of Baudrillard’s social propaganda and technology plays a huge role in the new efforts of dehumanization and validating its behavior.

China recently has enforced its “social credit system” upon its people, where citizens are judged as digits, and not human beings with forgiving flaws. With that in mind comes blacklisting, or “whitelisting,” dehumanizing or humanizing the effects of someone’s resumes and actions. This new type of Chinese Confucianism is William Gibson’s worst nightmare, as the “cyberpunk” genre was supposed to celebrate Japanese tradition in the context of a futuristic society where their values still flourish with Western tech. The Japanese are no longer “the good Asians,” and G7 is collapsing on the face of global Eurasianism. The tables have turned, where this anime-realist technology is serving an incredible anti-Eurocentric urge, it is destroying the global liberal project as a whole. Dr. Frankenstein created a monster, only for it to lash out against his will, and the creature is a human.

Liberalism is trying very hard to strangle the world under its control, only then will its consequential variants emerge as anti-liberal, either through the works of Eurasianism or with the social credit system, as there are many paradoxical examples. Liberals may try and dehumanize the threat as something that should just be ignored, only then do they realize that the opposition becomes human again, as a subject in discourse. The point of egalitarianism is to be race-blind and never acknowledge the metaphorical elephant in the room. Hence, within the anti-liberal subculture, one now is a critic if he merely “notices,” or becomes a “noticer,” when objectively seeing the social propaganda falling apart. It’s like putting on the subversive sunglasses in the 1988 movie, They Live. We see the real social Malthusianism happening in front of us when we see it, or think, differently.

The point of the new dehumanization is to keep people ignorant. Ignorance allows the power of dehumanization, and thus if no opposition exists, the power to cause pain and suffering is justified, like killing an animal in a factory. The animals are not human, and therefore, they are dehumanized. Some people have oppositions against liberalism, and therefore, are also dehumanized, but this time, as “negative thoughts” not worth investigating. Unlike being called a “racist” or having a “fetish,” as these concepts gave power to the opposition, one is now acknowledged as a forbidden thought, like a sadist, perverted fantasy of causing evil. The remedy is to repent from reading the forbidden, endorse one’s supposed healthy ideology against their sins, (note, not a “devil,”) and assume the fabricated evidence as an ethical meaning to their solipsisms. Once the opposition has no objective reality, as an “enemy,” the opposition can be dehumanized.

I believe this new dehumanization is an effective strategy in this current world of Internet realities and decaying liberalism. One does not engage but simply is told to ignore the opposition. And if the opposition is successful in real interactivity or conversation, it’s a fault on the individual interest in the opposition, hence further gaslighting and endorsing the liberal cult.

We can make connections and say it has something to do with Christianity, or “social media” in general. All of this is true to some degree of the problem. I believe the masses of American liberals are indeed, losing their sanity, and thus showing their true colors, of wanting to have greater reasons to dehumanize their inward glitches and errors, and scapegoat them upon another. I believe René Girard is correct on this assumption of mimetic desire, and the liberal collapse of reason. We have reached a new stage of the primitive, but also existing in a greater technological social control, where the elites are losing the ideological message. And like in Harlan Ellison’s I Have No Mouth, And I Must Scream, we are being tortured by a machine that we have invented while enjoying the state’s sadism. We are trying to stop the machine, but it is further dehumanizing us as we point out the errors.

The new dehumanization is like Pierre Bourdieu’s concept of “symbolic violence.” The shunning, the censorship, and the deliberate ghosting is a form of non-physical “violence,” between a power confrontation of the ostracized versus the one on the platform. It is a euphemism, a “microaggression,” a power conflict that is not sincere and kept hidden from everyone else. When somebody says “Look at the camera,” or “Stop slurring in your speech,” it isn’t so much a fair and friendly paternalism, but a hostile, if not, concealed violence against the speaker that wishes to insult and commit “violence” against the image of the other.

We have to get over “cancel culture” and the subject of the witch. It is not a game of who’s “right” or “wrong.” A new semantics has emerged to justify dehumanization and to save liberalism as a whole.

To sum up this new dehumanization, think about Plato’s allegory of “The Cave,” and think about the prisons inside of it. Instead of celebrating the philosopher who broke free from the cave, liberalism is doubling down by celebrating the prisons as a right over the philosopher. It’s an inversion of Plato, and the chattering of the shadows is indeed more important of virtue than experiencing the real form! The liberal system has rid of the binary between “good” and “evil,” “right” or “wrong,” and has rather enforced “post-truth,” and that “there is no such thing as these binary concepts.” What is “evil” is something the individual must think about, and it is ironically advised, by the state, to not think about it, or investigate it. The new dehumanization is about celebrating the prisoners plotting to kill the freed philosopher!

We should be attacking the liberal zombie and its irrational attack on us. Because the zombie wants to eat us, and there is no way to convince them otherwise when they have dehumanized us first.

The liberal can only assume the enemy is another liberal on the same team who thinks another way and fabricates it as a mass pandemic.

"This kind of reasoning does not exist."

…The next article you should read is “Because They Are Mine.” Please click on this link to read it.

-pe

8-3-2023