Look, Ma. No Ideology!
~ how to have a good life, as a peasant, circa. 1500 A.D.
We have a big problem today with ideology. Kirk represents ideology. He did not want to fight, or break, the law. Because he wanted to use words. “Prove Me Wrong” means: “I want to talk about this; try talking.” That could be sincere, or not. I cannot know, at this point. So let’s leave it alone.
But “Divine Right of Kings,” does not. This entails no ideology. Unless one says the "Divine Right of Kings" is the ideology — but I am saying it is not. For me, there is a contrast between a period of history when class was powerful and a period of ideology. Class (or nobility) involves getting good control over the nation. If the socety is controlled along class lines, you won’t need ideology to control it. But it is a different situation later. The strict classes are now dissolved. (Most serfdom in Europe abolished by 1750) So what did you think? Everybody equal? Hell, no. A new control regime is now needed.
So during class there’s no ideology, but after that there is. There is ideogy for the democratic society. We may look down on classes. Why? That is how the persons in the "civilized" part of the map lived for ten to fifteen thousand years. This was endured (alternative: celebrated) until a fairly short space of time—about two hundred years ago. Remaining calm -if possible -and throwing fashion to one side what can we say about classes? Here’s an idea, then. Under the system of classes it was not necessary to indoctrinate the masses/ That is not a period of ideology or not in the sense of some pattern of ideas forced on people. There was no ideology in any way applicable to the society (there may have been ideological schools invarious locales). Those peasants may have had to do a lot of work for little in return. But they were free from ideology, free to think what they wanted . . . Free — like… Lassie?
But that is the clarity of it. With classes in play, comes actual freedom of speech, and those individuals may well have had more freedom of thought than do we in our enlightened democratic societies do. As long as you mind your own business of course. No need for drilling any intellectual garbage into the peasants. And so, the outcome of the society of “Divine Right of Kings” is that the peasants do not need to endure the constant barage of ideology and they had freedom to thought even if no freedom to open a donut shop. They had intellectual freedom; we do not. To give an example: they could lay on their backs and marvel at the beauty of the stars. Most of us, by contrast are either afraid to do that, or we think we should write a Substack about it if we did it, and turn it into another ideology. Okay. Their life was bad. know that; but it was not bad in every single way. And... Because they were unconditioned by any ideology, they were free to think. They knew who was powerful, but the powerful were not telling them how to think. Not that I would ever do that!
[ad]:
How To Think [and analyze] | jacob’s Newsletter | jacob silverman | see Substack ‘Section’
They were indoctrinated into exactly nothing (of course there was the standard religion of the day). But ideology is something else, not religion. What is "ideology"? It is something that happens in a stage that arises after open state freedom — peasants had an open intellectual environment (which was experienced despite much poverty) & that has gone bye-bye.
As we said, now that the old “class” system (also called an aristocracy system, or a serfdom system) is no longer available something changes. Could be the ruling classes start to worry at that point? Do they feel a little insecure with all these free persons running around? Obviously, there could be (free) radicals.
“My goodness. What will they do next?” So I think maybe the ruling classes do not want these persons existing in society with them, and right next to them, claiming equality. The aristocrats may have believed they had some kind of divine right at one point. I don’t know what they believed. But we point out above that “divine right of kings” is not like ideology. So, at this point, according to my ideas here, the masses would, according to the rich and powerful, need to get all locked up again. The rich persons obviously still can lord it over the poor. But they cannot do it via a class system. I think their need to be the dominant ones is plausible, really. That didn’t go away, so what must happen now is that the masses get hooked up into ideology. Religion will not do it. Catholicism will no longer do. So this is where the ideology component is introduced, which the French did — right after the “Revolution.” The revolution aside, we are now under capitalism. This is the system under which ideological control must be effectuated. Capitalism. It is the period of capitalism now. And ideas are how we control persons under capitalism. So they start propagandizing us that capitalism is “private,” etc.
When I was first thinking about this I was imagining the ruler. He is divine, arrogant. The ruler, then is something like in the Naked Emperor cartoon, strutting around the courtyard, with a train of toadies and umbrella-bearers. His confidence is class-based (or it comes from the "divine") and there is no ideology. What does obtain, however, is uncontrived openness, a cultural condition that is open. That is the social or cultural reality. If he raises his hand against the king he would get his head cut off, so you don’t need ideology. The way I see it this also means free expression. I see a person who may say whatever he likes. Or think whatever he likes. There is no pre-conceived channel for his ideas to flow through. (There certainly is no madness of the ‘Woke.’) As long as it is the strict class situation, that secures control over the masses, who are otherwise free.
What is life like for the peasants? The society has no given expectation of what is expected to come out of the mind of one of them. A person's mind is free. The mouth is free, and the mind is free. The masses are not being indoctrinated not some kind of democracy idea. They don’t have to endure Civics 101. Now, it is also clearl that the peasant can see who he is, inferior n status to his master. That is material reality, and one may not be disrespectful of the relationship. But at the same time, the mnd would have existed in a free state, outside of the class relation.
This changes with ideology. Persons are no longer free. In this next human condition, in which ideology has to be introduced, to achieve control. Now there is a “right” way to think. For the modern student this may be observed in every textbook. In every textbook we can see it. One may observe that this is going on as long as we have an awareness of it. This is the characteristic organization of socety — after “class.”
At this time, the use of ideology is to suppress the open condition. Ideology supplies the informaton on how a person must think and you will need to: to get a job, to graduate college, and everything else. (And that gets even crazier: now we are suposed to grovel before ‘Woke’ transsexual horseshit.)
Ideology suppresses free speech in the period just after the “Divine Right of Kings” in favor of a closed intellectual condition in which “professors” control speech. Now there is a condition which is closed — or now the case is now closed.
But this is also the era of economics — not to mention television. The ideologists also get a hold of the thinking on economics, in order to tell us fairy tales about economics.
Perhaps a human society survived in the reign of kings and classes because they were at least free in they mowynds (“Old English”). We think it was a bad time to be alive. That is also part of the ideology of democracy. I am the product of that, and so I do not want to be either of them: a peasant, or live in that era as the wealthy... But now we have stopped to consider: the entire population could think—! ~ because there was no ideology to stop it (for example, our idea now is "the whites are always the oppressors; do not ever agree with white people, because if they are white that means they must be wrong about everything.") The feudal peasant could think what they want. 100%. Period. The Haitians in Miami reminded me a little of this. They were something like this. I do not see religion as a problem.
Those who stop us from thought also stop us from actions, and those who stop us from doing things (like posting on Facebook or “hate speech,” or questioning that anyone uttering the holy word “science” is perfect) are repressive. It is repression of thought as well as action. That is the conservative side of life. These sorts are of course there. They are in the government, there fanatics among the police who fantasize controlling other people, uselessly irritating people, and there are the many other cultural vipers taking over every part of life, as this world becomes more and more intolerable. There are no exceptions anymore. They also took over the ngos. None of these elements in society are in favor of anyone’s freedom, except their own.
It is not class, but so what: it is ideological instead. Their purpose now is to stop us from thinking. They introduce a program of correct thought. They supress and identify the incorrect thought.
So, what is the solution? Political freedom has to be the solution. Politics is necessary if government is — I am afraid we have one (a government). Class society being thankfully in the past, we need to use a complicated form of government, three branches.
Polltical rebellion is now necessary because there is being practiced, inevitably, all over again, the regressive inhibition of human freedom, which, rather than being “saved” by the ideologies of 1776 or 1787 (Constitution) was [the freedom was] eroded. The system slowly turned itself around and destroyed the basic structure created by our originating leaders who made a revolution in this county: now it has turned against us and this structure favors ideology. It opposes the state of freedom in ever new ways. They oppose specifically our freedom of speech and expression and our mental freedom. This is happenn also in regimes like Trump's slowly emerging fascist America. That is not "Great," is it. This man’s evil, Hitler-like regime of lying will leave no space for a free culture. The country can only be great if it is great culturally: Donald Trump does not read books. Nor does he have any musical taste as far as I know. What we notice is that it has to be Trump's way or the highway, right—? ~ well, that is not freedom, because then all the answers are picked out for you. It is not any very advanced ideology either. This is a lot of name-calling: "Democrat politician." It is "Democrat-ic." What are they are trying for but to create a conditon of control, and since they don’t have class they only have a mean ideology of calling names.
Specific political protections, incl. protections for minorities, would represent a better way than calling all Mexicans criminals. All people need protection. And that includes minorities. So, civic protections is the alternative. It would have to be done right, and that is political. This would be the better option and not roughing up and abusing people after calling them names. They are unauthorized workers/vistors. They were given to believe that maybe they could sneak in. If that is no longer allowed we need to make the transition to a more strict polict. That takes time. Instead, look at what Tump did to other persons. Called them names and then abused them as “illegal” persons. Do not tell me that will protect freedom.
Anyways — to sum up. Maybe ideology represents what the dominant people always wanted, to ultimately stop us from thinking or being really human. They could do that merely using class. To do that now, they are using ideas. “Ideology” could mean “the use of ideas.” It is only ideas. But that’s all they have.
Intellectual attainment is thereby bent and turned against itself. Then when they say "science" or "expert," you are supposed obey that idea too, to bow in reverence. Perhaps that is the idea.
That they should be able to make us bow, just as they did back when they were called “aristocrats” and there was the divine right of kings.
They never had any right to do any of these things to us — but, that’s life. I guess. Oppression for breakfast, lunch, and supper. Now brought to you by the “left.” I do not see how there has been any progress towards real freedom.
Everything is upside down…
Good talking point.