• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content

Loading…

Flash Player 9 (or above) is needed to view presentations.
We have detected that you do not have it on your computer. To install it, go here.

Like this document? Why not share!

Deconstructing Planet 7

on

  • 1,547 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
1,547
Views on SlideShare
1,547
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
12
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft Word

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    Deconstructing Planet 7 Deconstructing Planet 7 Document Transcript

    • Planet 7 lodges as the postmodern panopticon In case you wondered why all the fuss over the past few years about freemasonry, the answer is simple: Over emphasis on a closed system which has been invested with overabundant mythical perceptions due to the secrecy that is demanded of its members as a necessary precondition for membership merely affords to instigate curiosity. Curiosity as a frame of mind eo ipso drives someone towards discovery. In a state of generalized psychological warfare (not just psychological, the material effects are more than tactile, as it will be illustrated in due course) curiosity is by default coupled with suspicion about the veracity of the object towards which it is comported. In every act of comporting oneself in a curious manner towards something a relationship of expectation is established. One is curious about something only insofar as one expects that the provided answer with will resolve that curiosity. According to one's level of syllogistic potential , s/he is capable of discerning the veracity of the object that is offered as the resolution of curiosity. The locus wherein curiosity must by necessity be resolved in the context of the grand social reengineering project that has been taking place over the past few years, namely PLANET 7, is the lodge or the gathering of like minded curious individuals who seek after the resolution of this tantalizing state of mind. In essence, nothing is ever resolved , however one feels safe through participating in a wider community of like minded and like curious individuals. One’s passion is resolved in a state of compassion. One’s curiosity is not exchanged with its resolution in the face of its object that initially triggered the process of resolution, but for another’s curiosity in quest of the same object (object functioning as a conceptual schema, in essence it might be anything). Thus, a mutual relationship of reflet/refletant , of one’s reflection over another like minded individual is instituted in a legitimate locus, which is the lodge. In pragmatic terms, the lodge is the primary locus of control and directionality in meeting one’s goals. However, in order to be allowed to meet your pragmatic goals, first you have to subscribe to a hidden order , or exchange your pragmatic token for the ontological token of unconditional partaking. Do not be mistaken about thinking that the right to partake is not coupled with an incommensurable responsibility. The system of exchange and control instituted in the context of the lodges is centrally coordinated by intelligence services in each country. Insofar as the very theological underpinning that grounds the communitarian rationale of a lodge entails the transposition of loci of control, the supreme agency of legitimacy of these informal institutions is the central governing body of the intelligence agency. Do not be misled in thinking that an intelligence agency is primarily concerned with safeguarding the interests of a nation-state. Each and every intelligence agency is primarily and ultimately concerned with safeguarding that the establishment of NWO is effected with as less frictions as possible. Now it should be clear to you why most planet 7 lodge initiators are low-lives , criminals or in general people who would feel less comfortable with a formal state-of-affairs than otherwise. Their only “salvation” , so to speak, or atonement or right to continue living is to play the immanent theatrical game demanded of their controller somewhere in the dark corridors of an intelligence service, seeking to recruit members who in turn recruit others, thus progressively forming hierarchical pyramids, not in the sense of a formal authority, but of an informal system of control. The means whereby this new state of affairs is instituted hinges on psychological warfare tactics, amply practiced and institutionalized by intelligence agencies. In case of non compliance with the demands placed upon recruits the material effects vary from lodge exclusion, job and monetary deprivation, up until utter elimination (in case of “betraying” the system’s inner workings).This system functions against the background of a simulacrum of openness and natural response patterns in every communicative encounter. I shall qualify in due course what I mean by
    • immanent theatrics, simulacrum of openness, natural response patterns and communicative encounters. Starting from the notion of simulacrum of openness, insofar as this state of affairs is promoted in the context of apparently democratic regimes it must give out the impression that it respects different voices or the voice of difference or, put simply, value frameworks. Hence, planet 7 has crystallized in a matrix (see Deleuze & Guattari) of discreet value frameworks , each one of them instituted (informally) in the form of a lodge (with ramifications). Now, what is the relationship with traditional freemasonry? Freemasonry (in its formal respect) relies on the principle of deception . In every degree you are expected to feel naive having believed what you were told in previous degrees in the path of light (or illumination or Lucifer or whatever, don’t worry it is just plain nominalism , the names count as much as everything). Likewise, in planet 7, leaping from lodge to lodge entails shifting the facade of your rebus or aspect of seeing (occularcentric metaphors are abundant in the community of planet 7, the same as in freemasonry). Every time you shift your value framework you are forced to stabilize in a new communicative setting , endorse different value judgments and reconsider your past actions under the prism of a new configuration of the rebus. The extent to which this system is prepared to tolerate variations (around a mean which constitutes the gravity center of each configuration of the rebus) is determined by controllers of each lodge. As with the case of a regression analysis, outliers (or extraordinary cases) which conflict with the institution of a positive relationship among explored variables are excluded from the equation in order to produce acceptable results in the form of a positive relationship (in this example, multicollinearity is not a defect of the system, it does not matter if variables affect each other positively, hence indiscriminately with regard to the dependent variable insofar as their interaction maintains a positive, stability effect in the entire explanatory pattern or in terms of the rebus configuration, insofar as the provisional attractor in the form of a value framework represented by a lodge, is maintained in its intactness, within the boundaries of the accepted variance around a presumed mean). This matrix structure of provisional configurations of value frameworks merely functions as a precursor or as a preliminary infiltration of someone with the mindset required for joining traditional freemasonry (and the organizations beyond freemasonry as amply illustrated over the course of the past years). Complementary to its function as a process of primary indoctrination it works for cutting off unwanted individuals, who have been excluded due to all sorts of reasons from participating in the “big boys game”. The ontogenesis of a new mode of ec-sisting (or being there/ ontologically speaking) paralinguistically : towards a neotribal protolanguage of primary affect (the orgy as the protosemiotic locus of planet 7 inscription) Words have the power to motivate towards a goal-oriented action (the metaphysical paradigm); meaningless constellations of phonemes and lexemes constitute a discursive redoubling or maintain in absentia the force of the primary affect ; the affectionate exclamation of phonemes pro-claims the evanescent in a simulacrum of evanescence, it enshrines evanescence in the exclamation of the primary affect as remembrance of quiddity as affective (not ideational) limit. Control of the id (interiorized quiddity) starts with the control of the affective response to the primary coup dedans (or dehors, this is only a topographical difference). Partaking of the commonality of the affective re-sponse, redoubling , inscribing the mode of redoubling in one’s comportment towards the evanescent is the primary locus of control. The rest is social cybernetics. Philosophia perennis has always concerned itself with the quest for first principles. The more minutely the self referential underpinnings of the principles are laid bare, thus open to questioning
    • and challenge (thus, inevitably prone to revolutionary paradigmatic shifts), the more foundational the quest for principles has to become. Institutionalization and universalization of a discourse at a subatomic pre linguistic, merely phonemic level bypasses rational discourse and shifts communication to a primitive level of affective communication. Neo tribalism is another name for neoprimitivism, or another phantasmatic closure of a metaphysical circle in quest for first principles? The answer does not reside in the realm of metaphysics or epistemology but of pragmatics. If the model works, there is no reason why it should be challenged. Moreover, the model may not be challenged, because it functions at a level beyond dialectical challenge, that of the sub linguistic rendition of affect. In case you wondered why group orgies should be institutionalized , the answer may be yielded once the above syllogistic thread is operationalized. In the orgy what is exchanged is not discursive tokens, but libidinal ones or affective tokens. The only way to appropriate (or re-appropriate) the original encounter between the inside and the outside is through its enclosure in the trajectory of libidinal exchanges, where you become self-same through participation in a matrix of mutually affective exchanges. The token given is not a vow, rather a vowel (primary affective exclamation in exchange of the promise to appropriate the Other in the form of another proprius who is in turn expropriated by passing the sublinguistic token to another and so forth; the Chain of Being inverted in a chain of bodies; the UR-ratio inverted in the UN- ratio, the cathexis in the context of culturally sanctioned symbols inverted in a methexis in a grand spectacle of limit instances- limit spectacle of nudity and exchange of affect as the Other scaffold or the scaffold FOR the Real, whereupon the imaginary and the symbolic are in turn scaffolded). The orgy as rite of passage to the Real (the libidin-al, the methectic, the affective) functions mnemotechnically as the limit representation of the loss of the primary signifier – hence the vanity of its quest- hence the free-of- metaphysical-underpinnings enactment of symbolically sanctioned roles- hence the end of sublimation in an idealistic sense and its inversion- giving way to standalone pragmatics (without further questioning) The need to apply systems thinking, game theory, sociolinguistics, cultural anthropology, semiotics, psychoanalysis and social cybernetics in the explanation of planet 7 networked lodges as an omnipresent control system According to G.Bateson, one of the forefathers of modern cybernetics, “Systems are comprised of a unified pattern of events, and their existence, as well as their character are derived more from the nature of their organization, than from the nature of their components”. In essence, the notion of system is a relational one. It does not concern a particular object or a particular state of affairs, but the way whereby the interrelate and cohere with each other. Subjects, objects and/or states of affairs interact , thereby forming a particular aspect of reality. Insofar as the reality principle (in Freudian terms), is what holds together separate egos , while yielding a common ground for meaningful action, acting and thinking may not be conceived as such outside of a systemic configuration. The main question that arises at this juncture concerns the ways whereby this configuration is controlled in its configuring. Insofar as a system is so much a relational concept, as it is a dynamic one (configurations change, they hardly ever remain the same), while there must be a central agency responsible for channeling these configurations towards such directions, as to undercut any potentially destabilizing oscillations at the very point of inception, what grants the relative stability of a systemic configuration in the process of reconfiguring? The role of intelligence agencies consists primarily in this task. However, when we
    • transpose this process of constant configuring of objects and states if affairs , which in interaction form an aspect of a system or a temporary configuration, from the plane of explanatory or interpretive schematics to the plane of particular objects and states of affairs that are singled out each time a new configuration is about to emerge, we are confronted with another fundamental question. Which objects are singled out and which states of affairs? Put slightly differently, according to which criteria, for whom, where, for how long and other questions aiming at qualifying the selection process that leads up to a configuration, must be answered. Even though these questions are intriguing in themselves, they may not be answered in a holistic fashion or for the entire spectrum of configurations, as that would amount to being able to predict every single action and patterning that takes place . However, what may be attained through patterning and relative predictability is the configuration of particular behavioral blocks in the systemic matrix . Thus, instead of trying to control chaos a posterior, the creators of planet 7 opted for creating a priori behavioral typologies as polar attractors where various rational agents (or otherwise) must be attracted. Each lodge typology essentially constitutes another facet of Being or another systemic configuration of the gigantic rebus that is called planet 7. Insofar as you are color coded according to the principles of each lodge, you do not risk being harassed for not participating in the new world order. In a similar fashion (and this will take us from the processual part to the linguistic aspect of planet 7 cybernetic system), in the context of the rhetoric that was amply employed during the initial stages of the viral expansion of planet 7 was a compulsory urge to “be in the system” The rhetoric was enforced in every occasion and indeed social automata even took pleasure in believing of themselves and their peers as being in the system, than otherwise. The social needs catered for through the lodge system have already been exemplified in previous passages. What is of more importance in this section is to render as clear as possible that this new outlook on system formation, substance and expansion derives from systems theories and cybernetics and constitutes its practical rendition. OR ITS FLESHING-OUT IN THE FORM OF AN UNQUESTIONABLE REALITY PRINCIPLE. The gimmicks employed for avoiding questioning (through a return to a primitive form of communication and the establishment of neotribalism, among others, which both evade rational scrutiny) have already been illustrated. What may be questioned, and rightly so, is who is controlling these constant reformations or dynamic reconfigurations? Planet 7 lodge controllers, plain and simple. How do they avoid potentially harmful oscillations? Do they confer judgment from a bird's eye view perspective, so to speak? No need to to do so, insofar as , (as already explained), the transformation of rational agents (or lodge members) does not take place in a chaotic, unstructured fashion, but in a highly structured one, insofar as it is always already channeled according to preordained behavioral paradigms (within the acceptable range of variation or degrees of freedom). . In this arena or chess-like field, members or social cells, are actively urged to compete against one another against the background of relatively fluid behavioral norms in order to gain admission in new lodges or simply maintain their positions. Is it just a game? Yes, but it has significant material repercussions, insofar as failure or unwillingness to abide by these (fluid and highly subjective) rules would amount to exclusion from the game. Who is attracted more to this game? Children 2-10, teens and later age bracket losers or scum, who have nothing better to do in their (anyway, vain and derelict) lives- THE LATTER CONSTITUTE THE BEST CLIENTS OF THE INTELLIGENCE SERVICES INSOFAR AS THEY ARE COMPLETELY “OPERATIVE”. Also, kids are ideal clients, insofar they are infiltrated at such an early age with planet 7 game rules that it becomes impossible to shake off this second skin later on in their lives. This is equivalent to the indoctrination tactics traditionally employed by the freemasons and the illuminati ,who have always relied on the selection of youngsters (especially from families composed of scoundrel and
    • criminals, whose only opportunity for sparing their lives was to abide by the directives given to them by intelligence agencies, working for the new world order) for populating their slave base. The above constitutes a generic conceptual platform for coining practical principles that govern social interaction. However, in the context of the planet 7 panopticon, their application is manifested as a platform of psychosomatic warfare among social cells. Whereas in centralized totalitarian regimes cleansing was enforced through sanctioned state institutions , in the context of self governed, self regulated post modern matrix-like social organizations, cleansing is effected through psycho somatic warfare techniques (refer to the feedback mechanisms erected around micro systems , that encompass food poisoning, overcoding , undercoding and other rhetorical / propaganda techniques aimed at streamlining a cell’s actions and self outlook according to an agreed pattern that has been carved by lodge controllers). Based on which of the aforementioned needs are met through participation in a lodge (or multiple lodges, since members are actively encouraged to shape their worldviews through the interaction with other lodge members and according to the role-model lodge controllers), viz social, needs, ontological, and based on what is expected of oneself from participating in a lodge, intersubjective reality is steered towards a particular orientation. Insofar as intersubjective reality is shaped primarily through discursive formations and semiotic systems , the primary bond among lodge members is safeguarded through partaking of the same communicative requirements and engaging in mutually reinforcing language games. In simple terms, insofar as communicative (and other...) chemistry has been established among members , the group formation game has begun to roll. As with traditional freemasonry, acceptance to other lodges and/or ascension to higher levels of planet 7 hyperreal formations is effected through material and / other sorts of exchanges (occasionally it features tribulations on a bodily level as part of the wider disciplinary system). THIS SYSTEM OF EXCHANGE AND GENERAL EQUIVALENCES IS DOMINANT THROUHGOUT BOTH TRADITIONAL FREEMASONRY AND PLANET 7. Remember that this system is based on the reification (ie making concrete) of ontological principles, pertaining to variable classes of Being (in traditional theological discourse) or aspects of being (in a secular , postmodern era). It is not a matter of epistemically correct or wrong propositions about a given state of affairs, but of pseudo-moral axiomatics, legitimated through ephemeral referenda (see Baudrillard's reference to the prevalence of referenda in deciding about the truth of a phenomenon, wherever relativism has swept over any previously held notion of universally binding epistemological legitimacy). Restructuring common discourse with the employment of cybernetic perspectives Marketing the boundaries between sacred (ie within group dynamics) and profane (that is outdie of the boundaries) through the employment of overcoded metaphors Feedback loops formed by monitoring outsiders through echelon, forming patterns (cf POM pattern oriented modeling) and diffusing this information to lodge members. Language games are enacted against the backdrop of discrete pieces of behavioral patterns. Who’s into this game? Mostly low life, low class members, whose sole function in the new era systemic order is to perpetuate a void game, structured exclusively on immaterial signs,without reference (the best way to disorient the masses and get them started on looking for meaning in all sorts of misguided directions). FS systematics is structured on this
    • principle insofar as in every degree knowledge is granted into how the system works – the mythical mambo is merely a perfect cloaking of the inner systemic machinations The dispensing of information is always asymmetrical, someones knows more than the other. The only flaw is that due to the fact that he is forced to interact with those not having privileged access to information and in his attempt to mask that information he betrays its content, if not in full, yet to such an extent as to enable a learned addressee to make low risk conjectures about its content. See the open mind project – attempt to predict the syntactic and grammatical ordering of a language by employing probabilistic models. This project may be successful only on the condition that the building blocks of language itself are limited to a finite set. Hence, the adoption of a metaphorological nexus as the gateway to the “system” is the only way whereby the model can be successful. Positive feedback loops and constant censoring, as well as the enforcement of communicative fear is the only way whereby Adherence may be safeguarded. The systemic function of the secret as a social bond The notion of the secret lays open inasmuch as it hides. It lays open insofar as it suggests there is something hidden from sight, while at the same time refuses to disclose it. This notion is fundamental to the constitution of a social collective insofar as it attains to demarcate the boundaries between what lies outdie and what lies inside the collective. Irrespective of the not necessarily classified nature of what is hidden in terms of political importance, yet it is of significance to the members of the collective. Hence, maintenance of the secret at all costs is a condition sine qua non of admittance to the collective. The promise is a state of mind (so to speak) of maintaining the secret, which grounds all other psychic states. Hence, the promise not to lay bare, while at the same time of maintaining in oblivion constitutes a double bind that in turn lays the groundwork for all ensuing political action. Thus, the notion of the key as potentially unlocking the secret is a powerful operative metaphor The notion of secret and the boundary it demarcates functions at the same time as the ., a rhetorical topography is instituted on the grounds of what is sacred and what is profane and these two realms are carefully kept apart through the maintenance of the secret. Now, members of conflicting lodges with discreet axiological frameworks are maintained by their own secrets. For each lodge every other lodge is profane. The only common denominator is their being oart of something wider than their strictly defined boundaries. Hence, they are partia totalis. ALSO SEE: Beck- Universal numerical language Medieval mysticism Cryptography Ars Magna (Raymond Sully) Leibniz universal calculus Jung: sacrifice of the horse (sacrifice of animal nature) Nihilistic “in-between” colonized by ephemeral symbols. The ecstacy of communication, Merlau Ponty- reflet-refletant – cobelonging as primordially being in the experiential in-between, sacralized by cult processes. “In primitive societies violence is legitimated under the auspices of the sacred”. “If the sacrificial catharsis succeeds in preventing the unlimited propagation of violence, a sort of infection is being checked” “There is something infectious about the spectacle of violence. Violence is at the heart of the sacred”.
    • “The connection between sexuality and religion is a heritage common to all religions and supported by an impressive array of convergent facts” (35) “The fundamental purpose of the festival is to set the stage for a sacrificial act that marks at once the climax and the termination of the festivities”. “When the transcendental element descends to the human sphere it is reduced to immanence, transformed back into mimetic fascination” (143) “The double bind might be said to form the basis of all human relationships” (p.147) “Man cannot respond to that universal human injunction “imitate me” without almost immediately encountering an inexplicable counterorder “don’t imitate me” (which means do not appropriate my object). “Violent opposition, then, is the signifier of ultimate desire of divine self-sufficiency, of tha beautiful totality whose beauty depends on its being inaccessible and impenetrable” (142) “Thymos derives from the verb thuein, which means to make smoke, to offer sacrifices”(p154). From modeling to meta-modeling -You retort by displacing the referential plane of the locution, thus laying bare the production method of the signifiers -As a consequence, you obliquely point to the eschatological horizon1 wherein the constant infolding/involution of signs takes place -Through condensed metaphors that reverse the logic of the signs and force them to reflect back on themselves, thus effecting a semiotic collision R.Frith- Symbols, Public and Private (1973) “A very important property of symbols is their capacity to represent many different things, in different contexts (polysemy, multivocality, condensation)” “Research L.Strauss concept of sensory coding Myth & the polis, by Pozzi & WWickersham “Ajax is more than a pharmakos scapegoat upon whom Athenians might lay communal guilt for a violent self assertiveness that was as outmoded as it was excessive” (100) Victor Turner, Dramas, Fields and Metaphors “These symbols, visual & auditory, operate culturally as mnemonics, or as communications engineers would no doubt have it, as “storage bins” of information not about pragmatic techniques, but about cosmologies, values and cultural axioms, whereby a society’s deep knowledge is transmitted” (P239) “And because communitas is such a basic ever primordial mode of human inter linkage it is often religiously equated with love” (166) “I believe it would be as interesting to study the key words and expressions of major conceptual archetypes or foundational metaphors both in the periods during which they first appeared in their full cultural settings and in their subsequent expansion in changing fields of social relations” (p28) Maurice Yolles, Knowledge cybernetics, a new metaphor for social collectives “In a coherent autonomous human activity system knowledge occurs in structured patterns. This provides the structure that enables the system to recognized its existence, maintain itself and change, while its manifestations constitute systemic content”. 1 CF Wiener’s notion of systemic teleology
    • Essentially knowledge cybernetics institutes not only an epistemological framework, but moreover, an ontological self-referential framework, which enables us to gauge how inputs and outputs are formed, but how their emergence is controlled. Social geometry (countereference algebraic semiotics and other perspectives attempting to blend mathematics and behaviorism with view to engineering communication) Beer’s Viable System Model Ontology in Beer’s terms is concerned with two referential planes, the metasystemic and the systemic. The metasystemic plane refers to worldview and knowledge and the systemic plane to phenomenal energetic behavior.
    • The existential domain has thematic relevance and determines the constituents of an experience This is the locus where cultural stock is engraved (or enshrined) ; consider the usefulness of employing the modalities of contagion, sacralizing processes, experiential marketing , the rhetorical functions of phoros and thema, as agencies whereby communication to the noumenal domain is effected The noumenal domain has interpretive and virtual relevance and creates direction through selection of relevant aspects of a stock of knowledge to formulate a system of thought This is the locus of latent meaning behind manifest communication, consider the usefulness of employing the modalities of paralinguistic behavior, Strauss’ sensory coding, subliminal effects and the rhetorical function of metaphor and metonymy, synecdoche, as bridges between the existential and the phenomenal The phenomenal domain is associated with motivational relevance that causes a local conclusion through action
    • Luhmann defines the autopoietic network in a human system as a process of communication: “social systems use communication as their particular mode of autopoietic reproduction” (Luhmann, 1990, p. 104). Complex Adaptive Systems A complex adaptive system is a self-organizing, self-reflective community of intelligent agents capable of learning and adaptation (Morel & Ramanujam, 1999; Pascale, 1999). It is made up of interacting agents, or system components, whose behavior is driven by adaptive rules. These rules lead them to examine each other’s behavior in order to choose their own behavior in relation to others within the system they comprise. Because complex adaptive systems are self-organizing learning systems that function in
    • environments containing other complex adaptive learning systems, “it follows that together they form a co-evolving supra system that creates and learns its way into the future” (Stacey, 1996). A summary of key characteristics common to complex adaptive systems, which reflect complexity theories outlined in the preceding pages, is listed below. • Component parts of complex adaptive systems do not interact in a linear, straight line, direct cause-and-effect sequence but rather display nonlinear, oscillating, random-like dynamics. • Because movements are nonlinear, exact prediction and control are not possible. • Nonlinear interconnectedness within self-organizing systems results in self reinforcing feedback loops that lead to increased complexity. • Patterns of behavior in nonlinear dynamical systems tend to be self-similar in nature. • System behaviors are highly sensitive to initial conditions and can be expected to exhibit unpredictable variability and diversity of movement over time. 11 • Simple rules may produce an unsuspected richness and variety of complex behavior while complex and seemingly chaotic behavior can give rise to ordered structures and sophisticated patterns. • Boundaries are permeable, allowing energy and information from the environment to continually flow through the system while allowing the autonomy necessary for mutual interdependence and self-organization. • Self-organization operates far from equilibrium; emergence of new structures and forms of behaviors occurs only when they system is far from equilibrium. • Systems are able to create novel structures and models of behavior in the processes of development, learning, and evolution needed to sustain themselves. According to psychological constructivists, a person’s development of a sense of self goes through a process similar to Maturana and Varela’s structural coupling. A person adapts new knowledge from his or her environment to match his or her personal meanings. Any pushes for personal changes in self from the environment are subsumed under the person’ core constructs or present experiential order. Life experiences, and subsequent pushes from the environment, however, result in the “discontinuous emergence of more inclusive knowledge of self and of the world” (Guidano, 1991, p. 9). This also means that as a person adapts to the environment, he or she also changes the environment, which in turn is influencing the person. Thus, a recursive feedback loop is established and maintained (Warren, et al, 1998). The Social Construction of Organizational Transformation in a Complex Adaptive System The view of social constructionism suggests that complex adaptive human systems are created through social interaction, i.e., discourse. Meaningful discourse is the result of social interdependence and requires the coordinated actions among members of the organizational system (Gergen, 1994; Pearce & Littlejohn, 1997). At the most basic level, discourse is “what is said and listened to” between and among people (Berger & Luckmann, 1966). Described more fully, discourse is a complex information-rich mix of stimuli that includes not only what is spoken, but also the full, conversational elements of behaviors, symbols and artifacts, etc. that are used in conjunction with, or as substitutes for, what is spoken. Conversations maintain realities through an accumulated mass of continuity, consistency, and relatedness to other conversations (Berger & Luckmann, 1996; Watzlawick, et al, 1974). DISCOURSE AND RHETORIC
    • For both, Schutz and Luckmann, all communication depends on the language used in everyday life. Religious as well as any symbolic communication thus has to face the problem of indirect communication. This idea will provide the basis for the reconsideration of the problem of religious communication with respect to metaphors. According to Luckmann, religion is an elementary feature of the "conditio humana". It fulfills a central anthropological function: "The basic function of religion is to transform members of the natural species homo sapiens into actors in a historical social order" (Luckmann 1991, 171). Both semiotics and hermeneutics suggest a similar problem of maintaining a boundary between observe and observed. Every sign creates an interpretant, which in turn is the representatum of a second sign (Noth 1990). Self reference challenges the ontology of an external observer and reveals a hidden tautology and paradox fundamental to social sciences (Luhmann 1988). Metaphors, Transcendence and Indirect Communication Alfred Schutz’ phenomenology of the life-world and the metaphors of religion1 It [metaphor] brings out the thisness of a that, or the thatness of a this (Kenneth Burke) Metaphors and Symbols Transcendence is a general feature of human experience. Because empirically every human being is born into a socio-historical world, also the experience of transcendence is shaped by cultural knowledge. In the words of Schutz, most of the experiences of socialized individuals are "preinterpreted" or "socially derived" from the social stock of knowledge (Schutz 1962, 401). Valuable info from F.A.C.T.net on mind control and brainwashing Mind control is coercive persuasion or coercive psychological systems. Prospects for recruitment profile The subjects easiest to influence are usually young, trusting, gullible, and non-critical people from protective backgrounds or people who may be particularly vulnerable because of some recent unsettled transition. Prospects for rejection profile In this highly calculated process, the rejects are likely to be individuals who have easy access to accurate, critical, or counterbalancing information. Insolent, self- centered, street-wise, highly critical or recalcitrant individuals are generally culled out because they are too labor intensive, difficult, and cost ineffective. The group has rocked and tranced them into believing that they are totally and completely responsible for everything that happens to them and the group is never responsible. The organization is always right, the individual always wrong and responsible, bad things happen to those who break the code of silence, etc. Most victims do not get the information and counseling they need to combat the thought reform and phobia induction they received in the cult. They need information
    • to know that there is reason to speak out and perhaps counseling to become strong enough mentally to speak out. Those who have been in for years probably have impaired or at least unpracticed critical thinking faculties, and so may continue to believe as good victims are supposed to believe, that the cult is always good and right and they are always bad and wrong. Coercive psychological systems are behavioral change programs which use psychological force in a coercive way to cause the learning and adoption of an ideology or designated set of beliefs, ideas, attitudes, or behaviors. The essential strategy used by the operators of these programs is to systematically select, sequence and coordinate many different types of coercive influence, anxiety and stress-producing tactics over continuous periods of time. In such a program the subject is forced to adapt in a series of tiny "invisible" steps. Each tiny step is designed to be sufficiently small so the subjects will not notice the changes in themselves or identify the coercive nature of the processes being used. The tactics used to create undue psychological and social influence, often by means involving anxiety and stress, fall into seven main categories. TACTIC 1 Increase suggestibility and "soften up" the individual through specific hypnotic or other suggestibility-increasing techniques such as: Extended audio, visual, verbal, or tactile fixation drills, Excessive exact repetition of routine activities, Sleep restriction and/or Nutritional restriction. TACTIC 2 Establish control over the person's social environment, time and sources of social support by a system of often-excessive rewards and punishments. Social isolation is promoted. Contact with family and friends is abridged, as is contact with persons who do not share group-approved attitudes. Economic and other dependence on the group is fostered. TACTIC 3 Prohibit disconfirming information and non supporting opinions in group communication. Rules exist about permissible topics to discuss with outsiders. Communication is highly controlled. An "in-group" language is usually constructed. TACTIC 4 Make the person re-evaluate the most central aspects of his or her experience of self and prior conduct in negative ways. Efforts are designed to destabilize and undermine the subject's basic consciousness, reality awareness, world view, emotional control and
    • defense mechanisms. The subject is guided to reinterpret his or her life's history and adopt a new version of causality. TACTIC 5 Create a sense of powerlessness by subjecting the person to intense and frequent actions and situations which undermine the person's confidence in himself and his judgment. TACTIC 6 Create strong aversive emotional arousals in the subject by use of nonphysical punishments such as intense humiliation, loss of privilege, social isolation, social status changes, intense guilt, anxiety, manipulation and other techniques. TACTIC 7 Intimidate the person with the force of group-sanctioned secular psychological threats. For example, it may be suggested or implied that failure to adopt the approved attitude, belief or consequent behavior will lead to severe punishment or dire consequences such as physical or mental illness, the reappearance of a prior physical illness, drug dependence, economic collapse, social failure, divorce, disintegration, failure to find a mate, etc. These tactics of psychological force are applied to such a severe degree that the individual's capacity to make informed or free choices becomes inhibited. The victims become unable to make the normal, wise or balanced decisions which they most likely or normally would have made, had they not been unknowingly manipulated by these coordinated technical processes. The cumulative effect of these processes can be an even more effective form of undue influence than pain, torture, drugs or the use of physical force and physical and legal threats. How does conversational space expand ? •Creating metaphors that draw heretofore unrelated empirical domains into conversations (George Lakoff) •Coping with a polyphony of voices (Mikhail Bakhtin), second-order understanding (the understanding of others’ understanding) (KK), living in multi-versa (Maturana) Bourdieu- language and symbolic power P46: integration into a single linguistic community, which is a product of the political domination that is endlessly reproduced by institutions capable of imposing universal recognition of the dominant language is the condition for the establishment of relations of linguistic domination. To speak is to appropriate one or other of the expressive styles already constituted in and through usage and objectively marked byu the poisityion in a hierarchy of styles which expresses the hierarchy of corresponding social groups A SPONTANEOUS STYLISTICS ARMED WITH A PRACTICAL SENSE OF THE EQUIVALENCES BETWEEN THE TWO ORDERS OF DIFFERENCES, APPREHENDS SOCIAL CLASSES OF STYLISTIC INDICES
    • What would become of the literary world if one begun to argue not about the value of this or that author’s style, but about the value of argument about style? THE GAME IS OVER WHEN PEOPLE START WONDERING IF THE CAKE IS WORTH THE CANDLE. P105: BY STRUCTURING THE PERCEPTION WHICH SOCIAL AGENTS HAVE OF TH SODICLA WORLD, THE ACT 0OF NAMING helps to establish the structure of this world, and does so all the more significantly the more widely it is recognized, ie authorized. There is no social agent who does not aspire, as far as his circumstances permit , to have the power to name and to create the world through naming : gossip, slander, lies, insults, commendations, criticisms, arguments and praises are all daily and petty manifestations of the solemn and collective acts of naming, be they celebrations or condemnations, which are performed by generally recognized authorities., P105: insults, like naming, belong to a class of more or less socially based acts of institution and destitution through which an individual , acting in his own name or in the name of a group that is more or less important in terms of its size and social significance, indicates to someone that he possesses such and such property. P106: agents possess power in proportion to the symbolic capital , ie in proportion to the recognition they receive from a group. The authority that underlies the performative efficacy of discourse is a percipi, a being-known, which allows the consensus concerning the meaning of the social world which grounds common sense to be imposed officially, ie in front of everyone and in the name of everyone. CHAPTER 3: THE SOCIAL CONDITIONS FOR THE EFFECTIVENESS OF RITUAL DISCOURSE It is only in exceptional cases that symbolic exchanges are reduced to relations of pure communication , and that the informative content of the message exhausts the content of the communication. P109: by trying to understand the power of linguistic manifestations linguistically, by looking in language for the for the principle underlying the logic and effectiveness of the language of institution, one forgets that authority comes to language from outside, a fact concretely exemplified in Homer by the skeptron which is passed over to the orator who is about to speak. It is not enough to say , as people sometimes do, in order to avoid the difficulties inherent in a purely internalist approach toi language, that the use made of language in a determinate situation by a determinate speaker with his tyle , rhetoric and socially marked identity , provides words with ‘connotations’ that are tied to a particular context introducing into discourse that SURPLUS of meaning which gives it its illocutionary force. In fact, the use of language, the manner as mushc as the substance of discourse, depends on ther social position of the speaker, which governs the access he can have to the language of the institution, that is, to the legitimate uses of expression, and therefore the participation in the authority of the institution, which makes all the difference, irreducible to the disroux. Chapter 4 : rites of institution, consecration, legitimation P139: legitimate works thus exercise a violence, which protects them from the violence that would be needed if we ewere to perciev tyhe expressive interest which they express oinly in forms which deny it. P140: the special language distinguishes itself from scientific language in that it conceals heteronomy behind the appearance of autonomy, being unable to function without the aid of ordinary language it must produce the illusion of independene through strategically creating a false break P141: the imposition of form produces the illusion of systematicity; by virtue of this and the break between specialized and ordinary language which it brings about, it produces the illusion of the autonomy of the system. P153: the ability to accuse the science of ideology of being ideological is a specific characteristic of the dominant ideology: uttering the hidden truth of a discourse is scandalous because it sqays something which was tyhe last thing to be said ./. Baudrillard- forget Foucault P34: repression is only a tarp and an alibi to hide assigning an entire culture to the isexual imperative. Foucault merely substitutes the transcendental concept of power which is founded in interdiction and law with a positive, active, immanent conception . P35: in deleuze and lyotard one findsa instead of interdiction the deployment and the positive dissemination of flows and intensities. Desire is always already there, purged of all negativity, a network, a rhizome, a contiguity refracted ad infinitum P37: as we pass from a violent model of socialization (work) to a libidinal economy. THERE IS A METAMORPHOSIS AND A VEERING AWAY FROM LABOR POWER TO DRIVE , FROM A SYSTEM OF REPRESENTATIONS (THE FAMOUS IDEOLOGY) TO A MODEL OPERATING ON A
    • SYSTEM OF AFFECT (SEX BEING ONLY A KIND OF ANAMORPHOSIS OF THE CATEGORICAL SOCIAL IMPERATIVE) P47: repression or theii ARTCILE: LANGUAGE NETWORKS: THEIR STRUCTURE, FUNCTION AND EVOLUTION Common patterns of evolution of natural languages in terms of how nodes (concepts) are connected in order to form world views CONSIDER THE FUNCTION OF LANGUAGE IN PRIMITIVE SOCIEGTIES (SUCH AS PL7) WHERE PHONEMES AND LEXEMES HAVE PRIMACY OVER ANY REPRESENTATIONAL FUNCTION OF LANGUAGE IN FORGING COMMUNAL BONDS SOS THE CAMBRIDGE COMPANION TO FOUCAULT P95 POWER/KNOWLEDGE EMPHASIZE THE PURELY HISTORICALLY CONTINGENT EMERGENCE OF THE PS SCIENCE AND THE FOLLOWING THAT CONTRIBUTED TO ITS DISCURSIVE FORMATION: He argued that particular investigations were structured by which concepts and statements were intelligible together, how those statements were organized thematically, which of those statements counted as “serious,”1 who was authorized to speak seriously, and what questions and procedures were relevant to assess the credibility of those statements that were taken seriously.2 These historically situated fields of knowledge (which Foucault in The Archaeology of Knowledge [AK] called “discursive formations”) also included the objects under discussion. The types of objects in their domains were not already demarcated, but came into existence only contemporaneous with the discursive formations that made it possible to talk about them. MY NOTE: EVERY EPISTEMOLOGICAL EDIFICE CONSTSITUTES A SELF REFERENTIAL WHOLE. IN ORDER TO MAKE IT INTELLIGIBLE YOU HAVE TO MASTER ITS DISCURSIVE TERMS. THE TERMS CONDITION THE PHENOMENA ON WHICH THEY PRESUMABLY CONFER DISINTRESTED EIDETIC KNOWLEDGE. THUS, IT IS A CLEAR CASE OF A VICIOUS CIRCLE OR PETITIO PRINCIPII. IT IS NOT THE CASE THAT PHENOMENA NEED THE EDIFICE FOR THEIR EXISTENCE (GRANT THIS PROVISIONALLY ) BUT VICE VERSA. THE EPISTEMOLOGOCAL EDIFICE NEEDS PHENOMENA FOR ITS LEGITIMACY AS DOMINANT DISOURSE. EVEN THE VERY TERM PHENOMENON PRESUPPOSES THE EXISTENCE OF AN EPISTEMOLOGICAL FRAMWORK FOR ITS INTELLIGIBILITY. IN A PRIMITIVE SOCIETY WHERE GROUP COHESION IS FOUNDED PRIMARILLY ON RITUAL AND SYMBOLS, WHAT GUARANTESS MEMBERSHIP IS PARTAKING OF THE AXIOMATIC SUPERSTSRUTUCRE, WHERE EMINENT GROUP MEMBERS, SUCH AS SEERS ARE EX POSITIO SANCTIONED (ACCESS TO THE AVATON OR THE INEFFABLE UNDERPINNINGS OF THE GROUP’S COHESION). IN A NEO TRIBAL SETTING THE SAME PATTERN IS ENCOUNTERED IN THE REDUCTION OF COMMUNICATIVE CODES TO PLAIN PHONEMES AND LEXEMES, WITHOUT ANY TRACE OF LOGICAL GROUNDING. FROM A PURELY PRAGMATIC PERSPECTIVE , THE TRIBAL MODEL IS MORE CAPABLE (vs A COMMUNITY OF RATIONAL AGENTS) OF FORGING COMMUNITY RELATIOSNHIPS IN THAT IT IS AXIOMATIC, THAT IS IT DOES NOT LEAVE ANY ROOM FOR DIALECTICAL MANOEVRES (CF CODE, COUPLING, SIMULATION, REDUCTIONISM, HOLISM) How is the communitarian rationale of planet 7 diffused? See following extract from Foucault's Discipline and Punish “the mechanisms [of the disciplinary establishments] have a certain tendency to become “de-institutionalized,” to emerge from the closed fortresses in which they once functioned and to circulate in a “free” state; the massive, compact disciplines are broken down into flexible methods of control, which
    • may be transferred and adapted. . . . One can [therefore] speak of the formation of a disciplinary society in this movement that stretches from the enclosed disciplines, a sort of social “quarantine,” to an indefinitely generalizable mechanism of “panopticism.” (DP, 211, 216) Foucault objects to the very idea of a knowledge or a truth outside of networks of power relations. However, if we endorse Rorty’s premise that nothing is left save for utility once we relinquish conceptions of description as accurate representations of objective things and events, then we condemn any critical outlook and adopt a passive fatalistic outlook , taking things as they come. FREE PORN FOR ALL- THE NEW NAME OF THE PANOPTICON (PANOPTIPORN?) The unspoken, yet concrete and moreover behavior orienting omnipresence of surveillance mechanisms , coupled with the essential mechanisms for their enforcement on a daily level (eg Echelon, Haarp) have brought about a novel form of social realism, which marks the end of representational logic, while enabling the once only dreamt of 1-2-1 correspondence between mind and matter insofar as thoughts are not only controlled through educative mechanisms, but read at their inception. Deviancy no longer constitutes the threat to an orderly order of things, but , having been reduced to its seemingly biologically determined source (that is copulation or sex) , it has been allocated a determinate space and time for its deployment (in the context of orgies ). In the context of the orgy social exchanges no longer take place against a linguistic communicative code, but at a primary level or pure affect , thus simulating the absolute openness to exteriority (or multiplicity of the affective element of existence). The legitimacy and indeed enforcement of this nihilistic comportment towards being (no longer teleologically conceived) but as unconditionally being-with (of course on the condition of exchanging libidinal energy with others) is informally granted by pseudo lodge controllers. The orgy as the necessary precondition for partaking of the new order simply attests to the utter violation of the last bastion of human freedom (at least as conceived through classical constitutional logic) and the farthest colonization of unconscious processes,. If the unconscious for Lacan is always already structured as a text (that is a as a plenum of collective representations) , in the context of the new order it is structured as a materially affective plenum. The rationale resembles that of concentration camps or the kibbutz, yet it differs in that those who enter this realm have done so on their accord (or seemingly on their own accord, as the majority have been brainwashed/indoctrinated into believing that this is the only way of surviving in the new era- I’ve personally experienced such indoctrination tactics, which are an utter joke, and yet they do assume material effects , such as social isolation, economic deprivation etc). This new era of crypto communism, which rests on a system of libidinal flow exchanges as the necessary precondition for being in the world has come to pass as the latest fad, under the cloak of an escahtological pattern. On another, similarly resounding tone, the level of the primary affect (which could be paralleled to the interface between the id and the unmediated exteriority ) insofar as it is the main provider of raw material for the shaping of the imaginary or for the inscription in the imaginary of collectively shared representations (which do not abide by the tenets of the symbolic order, but pre-exist and in fact condition it) is much more powerful than ideological constructs in the formation of social bonds. Insofar as the imaginary lies in between the reel and the symbolic and given that the gateway to the symbolic may not take place unless agreement on universally sanctioned imaginary signs has been instituted, it is only insofar as one has primarily partaken of the imaginary in a sanctioned way that he is allowed to proceed to the symbolic. Hence, symbolically sanctioned values, such as wealth, health, power, career etc are reserved for those who have participated in the ineffable Other secne, the in sidious and ineffable underpinnings behind the visible order. The NWO is essentially an invisible order. One of the various indoctrination tactics employed on a daily level involve (verbal) metaphors, such “can’t you see?”. “can’t you hear properly?” etc. As happens with most cases of forcing native populations to willful enslavement, cultural invasion is the primary weapon whereby a new order is instituted. In order to respect the frail balance between an existing language and a new language during the transition period of colonization , words and sentences must be used in a bifurcated manner. All ordinary and commonsensical locutions carry a double meaning, simultaneously having a referent in the reality principle and a referent to the other scene, the ineffable stage or communicative / semiotic scaffold,. Co-belonging is granted by successfully introjecting these metaphors in one’s communicative repertoire, which at the same time constitutes the glue with others
    • (peers) and fends off (alienates) non community members. The same semiotic strategy has always been prevalent among Freemasons , and continues to be so among the now fully rolled-out planet 7. One of the ways whereby this hyperreal superstructure may be lifted off its hinges is through the demystification of its signifying methods (involving the vast array of indirect communicative techniques- which have always constituted a common currency among intelligence services). Only insofar as signs remain fresh and exciting can they yield an ec-sistential ground for co-belonging linguistically. This condition may be paralleled with a micro politics of fascination. Fascination has always been a state of mind accompanying experiences of awe and amazement (in tandem with the emotions connected with the sublime , conceived ever since Immanuel Kasnt’ Critique of Judgment and transpose d in the context of postmodern imagery to the level of surprise with the ordinary). Ec-sisting linguistically entails primarily having inscribed the same imaginary traits that lead to consumer truth qua universal language. Secondly (shifting lenses from the solipsistic to the inter-subjective realm), it entails successfully sharing these linguistic experiences with peers (which implies mastering the twists and turns, the discursive tropes, the symbols and the rest theatrical paraphernalia that make up the discursive armory of the nouveau cult- just consider it as the utter colonization and perfect streamlining of small talk, pseudo morals and vague discourse). Preponderance of limit metaphors and limit conditions, simulacra of the end of an eschatological horizon that has always been appropriating its becoming (ultimately fleshing out in the current state of affairs) . Whence the primacy of appearing naked in the press (nudity as the precondition for participating in the hyperreal Thule and thule as the utopian descriptor of a n order that is by virtue of its being hyperreal or of not being capable of being by virtue of its always already having become concrete in its simulacral rendering) “In the redundancy of the nudity-sign, which works towards a reconstruction of the body as a phantasm of totalisation, we again find the infinite speculation of the conscious subject through its mirror-image, capturing and bringing a formal resolution to the insurmountable division of the subject in this reduplication (Baudrillard, symbolic exchange and death) MORE NOTES Baudrillard – symbolic exchange and death Here comes the great Culture of tactile communication, under the sign of techno- lumino-kinetic space and total spatio-dynamic theatre! A whole imaginary based on contact, a sensory mimicry and a tactile mysticism, basically ecology in its entirety, comes to be grafted on to this universe of operational simulation, multi-stimulation and multi-response. We live in a referendum mode precisely because there is no longer any referential. Every sign and every message (objects of `functional' utility just as much as fashion features or any televised information, polls or discussions) is presented to us as a question/answer. The entire communications system has passed from a complex syntactic structure of language to a binary system of question/answer signals -- perpetual testing. Tests and referenda are, as we know, perfect forms of simulation: the question induces the answer, it is design-ated in advance. A utopia of nudity, of the body present in its truth: this is at most the ideology of the body that can be represented In the redundancy of the nudity-sign, which works towards a reconstruction of the body as a phantasm of totalisation, we again find the infinite speculation of the conscious subject through its mirror-image, capturing and bringing a formal resolution to the insurmountable division of the subject in this reduplication. The signs inscribed on the body, where the death drive is also tangentially inscribed,
    • merely repeat the metaphysical operations of the conscious subject on corporeal material. In the current system, the body as the site of the primary processes is contrasted to the body as secondary process: erotic use-- and exchange-value, a rationalisation under the sign of value. The pulsional body menaced by desire is contrasted to the semiurgic, structural body, theatricised in nudity, functionalised by operational sexuality. Towards an axiomatics of style Style has no origin. No genealogical approach is capable of deconstructing it. It does not even go into circles, as there is no circular method that is capable of constituting its truth value as petition principii. The same goes for ritual. In ritual, there is no questioning of the validity of its practice. The only rationale it obeys is condensed in a @take it or leave@ IT PRINCIPLE. Therefore, style and ritual are two modes of being alongside each other that do not need any extraneous legitimation, save only themselves. Politics have always been concerned primarily with style and ritual. Style of enunciation, rhetorical schemes, rituals of passage, spectacular epiphenomena that are self -legitimated . The existence of a constitution is the a posterior footprint of what has already been legitimated through style and ritual. Whence the necessity to replicate the axiom by inscribing it in as many automata as possible . Automata do not question, not because they are not capable of questioning, but because the very mode of questioning has given place to para linguistic modes of being, legitimated through bodily inscription and stylistic tropes. Let us call this the axiomatic of the empty signifier. It would be relatively easy to dispel the notion of empty as against a notion of seeming fullness that would be yielded by a classic semantic theory. Is the legitimacy of style and ritual as the primary modes of being with as being alongside truth in a post eschatological era? Not easy to say, what is self evident classical theories of truth , time hallowed though is that epistemic and ontological claims have recede under the massive force of self -legitimated stylistic and ritualistic forms. However, if one employs pragmatics as an interpretive paradigm, then it becomes clear that they are legit insofar as they work (as simple as that). What is of primary importance in the context of planet 7 is not which perspective may yield more insights to systemic loopholes , but which perspective will yield a platform for maximum social cohesion and the uncritical acceptance of one’s role within a matrix of power relationships. Style and ritual have always been the key modes of coming into power (let us use the latter a key ontological category for interpreting the way whereby members of planet 7 lodges / micro communities are glued to each other). Whereas in classical philosophy, primacy was given to analytical categories , principia, premises, maxims and so on , in the post eschatological era, primacy has been given to modes of Being., whence the primacy of modality over the truth value of sentences and the method of its legitimation, that is not as the aporetic end of a syllogistic process , but as the self-grounded approximation of discursive style that is sanctioned by lodge members' agreement. The more extensively these members have managed to sell this idea to the state agents, the more legit (formally) it becomes. Going forward, planet 7 lodges will constitute formal loci of control over the coming years. See biosemiotics (in sociocybernetics journal) neurolinguistic programming (anchoring)
    • Don Handelman, Models and mirrors, towards an anthropology of public events ( berghan 1998) Pp9: events are important phenomena because they constitute dense concentrations of symbols and their associations, that are of relevance to a particular people. Cultural information makes sense best when imparyted through occasions that are set up to do this kind of coded , communicative work. P10: Levu Strauss notes that the ritual uses a procedure that he calls “parceling out” . Some basic features of public events P11: the purpose of the ritual is to achieve goals. The result of ritual action is dinally the small of large scale transformation of both the actor and the audience. P12: Publ;ic rituals , by establishing visible external forms, bring out the possible might have beens a firm social reality. That is whenever a particular occasion is enacted, it is put together from more or less similar elemnst. It is performed by more or less the same cast of characters and it passes through more or less the same sequences of action. P12: AS A THEORETICLA POSITION, FUNCTINALISM DEPENDS FIRST and foresmot on the premise that the elements and act5ivfities of social order are organized as an integrated homeostatic social system. # BOURDIEU- LANGUAGE AND SYMBOLIC POWER P51: There is every reason to think that the factors which are most influential in the formation of the habitus are transmitted without passing through language and consciousness, but through suggestions inscribed in the most apparently insigifnicant aspects of the things, situations and practices of everyday life. Thus, the modalities of practices, the ways of looking, sitting, standing, keeping silent or even of speaking are full of injunctions that are powerful and hard to resist precisely because they are silent and insidious, insistent and insinuating. SEE Zoosemiotics & cybernetics DELEUZE & GUATTARI ANTIOEDIPUS the abstract machine that connects a language to the semantic and pragmatic contents of statements, to collective assemblages of enunciation, to a whole micropolitics of the social (D&G) Schizoanalysis, on the other hand, treats the unconscious as an acentered system, in other words, as a machinic network of finite automata (a rhizome), (D&G) The issue is to produce the unconscious, and with it new statements, different desires: the rhizome is precisely this production of the unconscious. Thus it is the study of the signifying regime that first testifies to the inadequacy of linguistic presuppositions, and in the very name of regimes of signs. (dg) D&g’S 8 PRINCIPLES OF SIGN SYTEM FORMATION (or lodge-attractor’s systemic function) The signifying regime of the sign is defined by eight aspects or principles: (1) the sign refers to another sign, ad infinitum (the limitlessness of signifiance, which deterritorializes the sign); (2) the sign is brought back by other signs and never ceases to return (the circularity of the deterrito-rialized sign); (3) the sign jumps from circle to circle and constantly displaces the center at the same time as it ties into it (the metaphor or hysteria of signs); (4) the expansion of the circles is assured by interpretations that impart signified and reimpart signifier (the interpretosis of the priest); (5) the infinite set of signs refers to a supreme signifier presenting itself as both lack and excess (the despotic signifier, the limit of the system's deterrito-rialization); (6) the form of the signifier has a substance, or the signifier has a body, namely, the Face (the principle of
    • faciality traits, which constitute a reterritorialization); (7) the system's line of flight is assigned a negative value, condemned as that which exceeds the signifying regime's power of deterritorialization (the principle of the scapegoat); (8) the regime is one of universal deception, in its jumps, in the regulated circles, in the seer's regulation of interpretations, in the publicness of the facialized center, and in the treatment of the line of flight. -Being-with in an affective community or the end of the ends of reason and the return to medieval ism (instituted as neo tribalism) -The power of neo formalism (you can be what you want to be insofar as you do it with unparalleled style; cf Thousand plateaus- style is a holding together of disparate elements ; in a cyberneticized society the ups and downs in the hierarchical ladder concern the size and the quality of the clientele that have subscribed to a particular style (discursive or otherwise) ; power is ephemeral insofar as it hinges on the capacity of a style to act as an attractor for clients; as clients pass through the learning curve of the attractor’s inner machinations, hence they demystify its style, they abandon it and involuntarily look for another haven, another attractor around whose elements they will stabilize; this explains the incessant quest for partaking of different lodges styles- ultimate demystification would amount to the zero point of textuality, where no text can attract any further attention, thus death and radical unweaving- which by definition is an impossible task – yet, constitutive of the nomadic transition from lodge to lodge, like a secular reinscription of an archaic ontotheologicall ladder) see Systems theory see Popper's open society and its enemies The matrix- the rebus Value frameworks and their variations Cf paper on cybernetics and controlled variation (in case you wondered why it is called V planet – don’t be stupid V is just the symbol for variation or the level of oscillation a sanctioned systemic configuration or lodge is capable of bearing. Being accepted as a V member simply means that your behavioral variations (or goals) are aligned with expectations already embedded in the configuration of the matrix of which you have been chosen to partake) Jump around : leaping from lodge to lodge keeps you excited (in case you has nothing else to do) (Bateson) “The self-organizing and homeostatic (self-stabilizing) processes exhibited by open systems constitute evidence of persistent phenomena which are contrary to the mechanically and statistically demonstrable dissolution of the universe, postulated by the second law of thermodynamics. Also, open systems provide evidence that demonstrates the existence of anti-entropic (negentropic) tendencies within our perceived universe—negentropic tendencies in which order, complexity, and improbability are sustained and increased. Hence, we may safely assume that the existence of open systems resolves the apparent contradiction between data from physics which supports dissipation, disorganization and randomness, on the one hand, and ample documentation of increased order and complexity in biological evolution, on the other.”
    • Deleuze & Guattari – On several regimes of signs (in the Antioedipus) The Hopi indians jump from one circle to another, or from one sign to another on a different spiral. One leaves the village or the city, only to return. The jumps may be regulated not only by presignifying rituals but also by a whole imperial bureaucracy passing judgment on their legitimacy. The jumps are not made at random, they are not without rules. Not only are they regulated, but some are prohibited: Do not overstep the outermost circle, do not approach the innermost circle .. . There is a distinction between circles because, although all signs refer to each other only to the extent that they are deterritorialized, oriented toward the same center of signifiance, distributed throughout an amorphous continuum, they have different speeds of deterritorialization attesting to a place of origin (temple, palace, house, street, village, bush, etc.), and they have differential relations maintaining the distinction between circles or constituting thresholds in the atmosphere of the continuum . Moreover, the distribution of these thresholds and circles changes according to the case. Deception is fundamental to the system. Jumping from circle to circle, always moving the scene, playing it out somewhere else: such is the hysteric operation of the deceiver as subject, answering to the paranoid operation of the despot installed in his center of signifiance.” Idle speech or the nihilistic in-between Cf Ernesto Laclau The path to illumination The hooking function of luring Masonic myths has been exposed in various papers (see the death of freemasonry in the US for an expose of the power of theatrics and dissimulation in the institution of freemasonry and the progressive disenchantment of members once the mythopoetic aura wears off) . Yet, disenchantment with a particular mythical edifice does not preclude that the power of seduction endemic in every novel configuration of signs wears off at the same time. The power of seduction is far greater than the power of rational persuasion (at least in postmodern cultures, where social collectives are largely sustained around imaginary constellations, that is frameworks of signs , edified under the auspices of enforced semantic properties; in plain terms, the rise of interpretivism has been coupled with the augmentation of the role of channeling interpretation to particular routes, with view to combating the inherent polysemy of constellations . This nouveau empiricisim which looks for truth in the ways whereby signs cohere may only be sustained through the existence of omnipresent systems of control o of the mediation between image, its couple and its meaning. Cf morgan’s exposure of freemasonry At the end of the day it is pure power play The lodge as the locus of control Cf article The Technology of Total Domination (in Surveillance & Society journal) “In Bentham’s conception, Panopticon aims at a total, centralized surveillance of individuals who are constantly aware of being visible. Visibility replaces force as a tool of control. It is more economical, it reduces the need for physical contact between the supervisors and supervised,”
    • Panoptical power, produced through relations of discipline, showed its greatest intensity in the bodies of the subjects, individualized through these new relations and the new branches of knowledge centred on the human body (1979a: 208). The executive power is concentrated in the hands of the political secret police whose quasi-invisible presence is felt everywhere In the long run, this strategy of ruling strives to erase the very need for distinguishing between truth and lie and discredit any former epistemological, moral and linguistic standards attached to them. The underlying assumption seems to be that through intensive mass training – involving indoctrination sessions, marching, chanting slogans, will-breaking ceremonies, self-denunciation rituals, arbitrary sanctions and terror – a combination of fear, opportunism, stupidity and exhaustion will produce the desired indifference to truth and falsehood. The role of mass movements is not to bring people together as individuals but rather as insignificant particles, assembled together to assume appearance of masses following the leader (OR LODGE CONTROLLERS). Through a simple device known as “guilt by association,” family, friends and acquaintances of the accused are automatically considered suspect or contaminated. To save their skin, they are prone to be transformed into the doomed person’s enemies by volunteering information, denouncing and berating the accused (see, e.g., Arendt, 1958: 322). Black holes and chaos theory – the outliers in the regression functioning as the limit of the hyperreal textual edifice or the autopoeitic system Pseudo-difference instituted through discursive formations -The institution of a new vocabulary -The ontogenesis of a new mode of ec-sisting linguistically and paraliinguistically -Words have the power to motivate towards a goal-oriented action (the metaphysical paradigm), meaningless constellations of phonemes and lexemes constitute a discursive redoubling or maintain in its absence the force of the primary affect ; the affectionate exclamation of phonemes pro-claims the evanescent in a simulacrum of evanescence, it enshrines evanescence in the exclamation of the primary affect as remembrance of quiddity as affective (not ideational) limit. Control of the id (interiorized quiddity) starts with the control of the affective response to the primary coup dedans (or dehors, this is only a topographical difference). Partaking of the commonality of the affective re-sponse, redoubling , inscribing the mode of redoubling in one’s comportment towards the evanescent is the primary locus of control. The rest is cybernetics. Philosophia perennis has always concerned itself with the quest of first principles. The more minutely the self referential underpinnings of the principles are laid bear, thus open to questioning and challenge (thus, inevitably prone to revolutionary paradigmatic shifts), the more foundational the quest for principles has to become. Institutionalization and universalization of a discourse at a subatomic pre linguistic, merely phonemic level bypasses rational discourse and
    • shifts communication to a primitive level of affective communication. Neo tribalism is another name for neoprimitivism, or another phantasmatic closure of a metaphysical circle in quest of first principles? The answer does not reside in the realm of metaphysics or epistemology but of pragmatics. If the model works, there is no reason why we should challenge it. Moreover, the model may not be challenged, because it functions at a level beyond dialectical challenge, that of the sub linguistic rendition of affect. In case you wondered why group orgies should be institutionalized , the answer may be yielded once the above syllogistiv thread is operationalized. In the orgy what is exchanged is not discursive tokens, but libidinal ones or affective tokens. The only way to appropriate (again reappropriate) the original encounter between the inside and the outside is through its enclosure in the trajectory of libidinal exchanges, where you become self- same through partaking in a matrix of mutual affective exchanges,. The token given is not a vow, rather a vowel (primary affective exclamation in exchange of the promise to appropriate the Other in the form of another proprius who is in turn expropriated by passing the sublinguistic token to another and so forth; the Chain of Being inverted in a chain of bodies; the UR-ratio inverted in the UN-ratio, the cathexis in the context of culturally sanctioned symbols inverted in a methexis in a grand spectacle of limit instances- limit spectacle of nudity and exchange of affect as the Other scaffold or the scaffold FOR the Real, whereupon the imaginary and the symbolic are in turn scaffolded). The orgy as rite of passage to the Real (the libidin-al, the methectic, the affective) functions mnemotechnically as the limit representation of the loss of the primary signifier – hence the vanity of its quest- hence the free-of-metaphysical-underpinnings enactment of symbolically sanctioned roles- hence the end of sublimation in an idealistic sense and its inversion- giving way to ...... After the locus of release of primary affect, what? Traditional freemasonry has been the abode of conservative s morals, strictly intertwined with state mechanisms 9which is why the poubliv domain has been the always been populated by freemasons). Nothing wrong with that. However, the majority of Planet 7 is the materialization of Deleuze and Guattari’s vision as laid out in the 1000 Plateaus, a supple space where nomad thought reigns supreme. Traditional freemasonry has been reduced to another instance of the open system’s configuration. The systemic function of the Other Overcoding by the signifier, irradiation in all directions, unlocalized omnipresence. Finally, the face or body of the despot or god has something like a counterbody: the body of the tortured, or better, of the excluded. There is no question that these two bodies communicate, for the body of the despot is sometimes subjected to trials of humiliation or even torture, or of exile and exclusion. "At the opposite pole one might imagine placing the body of 1 16 □ 587 B.C.-A.D. 70: ON SEVERAL REGIMES OF SIGNS the condemned man; he, too, has his legal status; he gives rise to his own ceremonial... not in order to ground the surplus power possessed by the
    • person of the sovereign, but in order to code the lack of power with which those subjected to punishment are marked. In the darkest region of the political field the condemned man outlines the symmetrical, inverted figure of the king."5 The one who is tortured is fundamentally one who loses his or her face, entering into a becoming-animal, a becoming-molecular the ashes of which are thrown to the wind. But it appears that the one who is tortured is not at all the final term, but rather the first step before exclusion. Oedipus, at least, understood that. He tortured himself, gouged out his own eyes, then went away. The rite, the becoming-animal of the scapegoat clearly illustrates this: a first expiatory animal is sacrificed, but a second is driven away, sent out into the desert wilderness. In the signifying regime, the scapegoat represents a new form of increasing entropy in the system of signs: it is charged with everything that was "bad" in a given period, that is, everything that resisted signifying signs, everything that eluded the referral from sign to sign through the different circles; it also assumes everything that was unable to recharge the signifier at its center and carries off everything that spills beyond the outermost circle. Finally, and especially, it incarnates that line of flight the signifying regime cannot tolerate, in other words, an absolute deterritorialization; the regime must block a line of this kind or define it in an entirely negative fashion precisely because it exceeds the degree of deterritorialization of the signifying sign, however high it may be. The line of flight is like a tangent to the circles of signifiance and the center of the signifier. It is under a curse. The goat's anus stands opposite the face of the despot or god. Anything that threatens to put the system to flight will be killed or put to flight itself. Anything that exceeds the excess of the signifier or passes beneath it will be marked with a negative value. Your only choice will be between a goat's ass and the face of the god, between sorcerers and priests. The complete system, then, consists of the paranoid face or body of the despot-god in the signifying center of the temple; the interpreting priests who continually recharge the signified in the temple, transforming it into signifier; the hysterical crowd of people outside, clumped in tight circles, who jump from one circle to another; the faceless, depressive scapegoat emanating from the center, chosen, treated, and adorned by the priests, cutting across the circles in its headlong flight into the desert. This excessively hasty overview is applicable not only to the imperial despotic regime but to all subjected, arborescent, hierarchical, centered groups: political parties, literary movements, psychoanalytic associations, families, conjugal units, etc. The photo, faciality, redundancy, signifiance, and interpretation are at work everywhere. The dreary world of the signifier; its archaism with an always contemporary function; 0 587 B.c.-A.D. 70: ON SEVERAL REGIMES OF SIGNS □ 117 its essential deception, connoting all of its aspects; its profound antics. The signifier reigns over every domestic squabble, and in every State apparatus. The signifying regime of the sign is defined by eight aspects or principles: (1) the sign refers to another sign, ad infinitum (the limitlessness of signifiance, which deterritorializes the sign); (2) the sign is brought back by other signs and never ceases to return (the circularity of the deterrito-rialized sign); (3) the sign jumps from circle to circle and constantly displaces the center at the same time as it ties into it (the metaphor or hysteria of signs); (4) the expansion of the circles is assured by interpretations that impart signified and reimpart signifier (the interpretosis of the priest); (5) the infinite set of signs refers to a supreme signifier presenting itself as both lack and excess (the despotic signifier, the limit of the system's deterrito-rialization); (6) the form of the signifier has a
    • substance, or the signifier has a body, namely, the Face (the principle of faciality traits, which constitute a reterritorialization); (7) the system's line of flight is assigned a negative value, condemned as that which exceeds the signifying regime's power of deterritorialization (the principle of the scapegoat); (8) the regime is one of universal deception, in its jumps, in the regulated circles, in the seer's regulation of interpretations, in the publicness of the facialized center, and in the treatment of the line of flight. Not only is this semiotic system not the first, but we see no reason to accord it any particular privilege from the standpoint of an abstract evolutionism. We would like to indicate very briefly certain characteristics of the other two semiotic systems. First, the so-called primitive, presignifying semiotic, which is much closer to "natural" codings operating without signs. There is no reduction to faciality as the sole substance of expression: there is no elimination of forms of content through abstraction of the signified. To the extent that there is still abstraction of content from a strictly semiotic point of view, it fosters a pluralism or polyvocality of forms of expression that prevents any power takeover by the signifier and preserves expressive forms particular to content; thus forms of corporeality, gesturality, rhythm, dance, and rite coexist heterogeneously with the vocal form.6 A variety of forms and substances of expression intersect and form relays. It is a segmentary but plurilinear, multidimensional semiotic that wards off any kind of signifying circularity. Segmentarity is the law of the lineages. Here, the sign owes its degree of relative deterritorialization not to a perpetual referral to other signs but rather to a confrontation between the territorialities and compared segments from which each sign is extracted (the camp, the bush, the moving of the camp). Not only is the polyvocality of statements preserved, but it is possible to finish with a statement: A name that has been used up is abolished, a situation quite 0 118 □ 587 B.C.-A.D. 70: ON SEVERAL REGIMES OF SIGNS unlike the placing in reserve or transformation occurring in the signifying semiotic. The meaning of cannibalism in a presignifying regime is precisely this: eating the name, a semiography that is fully a part of a semiotic in spite of its relation to content (the relation is an expressive one).7 It should not be thought that a semiotic of this kind functions by ignorance, repression, or foreclosure of the signifier. On the contrary, it is animated by a keen presentiment of what is to come. It does not need to understand it to fight against it. It is wholly destined by its very segmentarity and poly-vocality to avert the already-present threat: universalizing abstraction, erection of the signifier, circularity of statements, and their correlates, the State apparatus, the instatement of the despot, the priestly caste, the scapegoat, etc. Every time they eat a dead man, they can say: one more the State won't get. There is another semiotic, the countersignifying semiotic (whose most notable representatives are the fearsome, warlike, and animal-raising nomads, as opposed to hunter nomads, who belong to the previous semiotic). This time, the semiotic proceeds less by segmentarity than by arithmetic and numeration. Of course, the number already played a role of great importance in the division and union of segmentary lineages; it also had a function of decisive importance in the signifying imperial bureaucracy. But that was a kind of number that represented or signified, a number "incited, produced, caused by something other than itself." On the contrary, a numerical sign that is not produced by something outside the system of marking it institutes, which marks a mobile and plural distribution, which itself determines functions and relations, which arrives at
    • arrangements rather than totals, distributions rather than collections, which operates more by breaks, transitions, migration, and accumulation than by combining units—a sign of this kind would appear to belong to the semiotic of a nomad war machine directed against the State apparatus. The numbering number.8 Its numerical organization into tens, fifties, hundreds, thousands, etc., and the associated spatial organization were obviously adopted by State armies, but basically bear witness to a military system specific to the great nomads of the steppes, from the Hyksos to the Mongols. They were superposed upon the principle of lineage. Secrecy and spying are important elements of the war machine's semiotic of Numbers. The role of Numbers in the Bible is not unrelated to the nomads, since Moses got the idea from his father-in-law, Jethro the Kenite: he used it as an organizational principle for the march and migration, and applied it himself to the military domain. In this countersignifying regime, the imperial despotic line of flight is replaced by a line of abolition that turns back against the great empires, cuts across them and destroys them, or else conquers them and integrates with them to form a mixed semiotic. 0 587 B.c.-AD. 70: ON SEVERAL REGIMES OF SIGNS D 119 We would like to go into greater detail on a fourth regime of signs, the postsignifying regime, which has different characteristics opposing it to signifiance and is defined by a unique procedure, that of "subjecti-fication." There are many regimes of signs. Our own list is arbitrarily limited. There is no reason to identify a regime or a semiotic system with a people or historical moment. There is such mixture within the same period or the same people that we can say no more than that a given people, language, or period assures the relative dominance of a certain regime. Perhaps all semiotics are mixed and not only combine with various forms of content but also combine different regimes of signs. Presignifying elements are always active in the signifying regime; countersignifying elements are always present and at work within it; and postsignifying elements are already there. Even that is to mark too much temporality. The semiotics and their mixtures may appear in a history of confrontation and intermingling of peoples, but also in languages in which there are several competing functions, or in a psychiatric hospital in which different forms of insanity coexist among the patients or even combine in a single patient; or in an ordinary conversation in which people are speaking the same tongue but different languages (all of a sudden a fragment of an unexpected semiotic surfaces). We are not suggesting an evolutionism, we are not even doing history. Semiotic systems depend on assemblages, and it is the assemblages that determine that a given people, period, or language, and even a given style, fashion, pathology, or minuscule event in a limited situation, can assure the predominance of one semiotic or another. We are trying to make maps of regimes of signs: we can turn them around or retain selected coordinates or dimensions, and depending on the case we will be dealing with a social formation, a pathological delusion (d'elire), a historical event, etc. We will see this on another occasion when we deal with a dated social system, "courtly love," and then switch to a private enterprise called "masochism." We can also combine maps or separate them. To make the distinction between two types of semiotics (for example, the postsignifying regime and the signifying regime), we must consider very diverse domains simultaneously. In the first years of the twentieth century, psychiatry, at the height of its clinical skills, confronted the problem of nonhallucinatory delusions in which mental integrity is retained without "intellectual diminishment."
    • There was a first major grouping, paranoid or interpretive delusions, which already subsumed various aspects. But the question of the possible independence of another group was prefigured in Esquirol's monomania and Kraepelin's querulous delusion, and later defined by Serieux and Capgras as grievance delusion, and by Clerambault as passional delusion 0 120 □ 587 B.C.-A.D. 70: ON SEVERAL REGIMES OF SIGNS ("querulousness or seeking redress, jealousy, erotomania"). Basing ourselves on very fine studies of Serieux and Capgras on the one hand, and Clerambault on the other (the latter took the distinction furthest), we will contrast a paranoid-interpretive ideal regime of signifiance with a passional, postsignifying subjective regime. The first regime is defined by an insidious onset and a hidden center bearing witness to endogenous forces organized around an idea; by the development of a network stretching across an amorphous continuum, a gliding atmosphere into which the slightest incident may be carried; by an organization of radiating circles expanding by circular irradiation in all directions, and in which the individual jumps from one point to another, one circle to another, approaches the center then moves away, operates prospectively and retrospectively; and by a transformation of the atmosphere, as a function of variable traits or secondary centers clustered around a principal nucleus. The second regime, on the contrary, is defined by a decisive external occurrence, by a relation with the outside that is expressed more as an emotion than an idea, and more as effort or action than imagination ("active delusion rather than ideational delusion"); by a limited constellation operating in a single sector; by a "postulate" or "concise formula" serving as the point of departure for a linear series or proceeding that runs its course, at which point a new proceeding begins. In short, it operates by the linear and temporal succession of finite proceedings, rather than by the simultaneity of circles in unlimited expansion.9 (D&G ANTIOEDIPUS) Technologies for (re)creating the self and a culture of self-sameness First and foremost, in the context of cuberneticized social constellations there is no such thing as difference or difference, wherever noticed and demarcated as such, is progressively normalized by reshaping unacceptable aspects (be it behavioral, personality traits, or generally aspects of oneself that are deemed as unacceptable by the social constellation of which one has benn chosen to partake- yes, participation in planet 7 lodges or discreet value framework constellations is far from voluntary – through prolonged control, by system agents and through their feedback on upper echelons of the panopticon, you are allocated to a herd of their choice. Denial is met with ever increasing (direct , but mostly indirect , ) attempts to conform to a preordained fate. 1.The manufacture of new linguistic and paralinguistic codes 2.The build-up of popular mythologies Myths are axiomatic (they do not fololow a rational discursive poattern , but are self referentaial and self subsistent;m insofar as the legitimacy or the epistemic status of so called traditional science, empiricism and positivism came under severe questioning by postmodern perspectives, their epistemological status became indistinguishable from that of a myth , there is nothing stopping someone from climing that the
    • mythical or narratological aspects of a story virally diffused among lodge members is untrue; indeed, what safeguards the identity and self sameness of lodge ,members is their common adherence to mythological beliefs about a wide range of issues; in terms of the very political underpinnings of the community, myths of excluded others based on non-conforming to the lodge behavioural and epistemic preconditions are of foundational significance. In traditional mythical structures, a new community was normally instituted on the relics of a conquered community. In the context of psychological warfare, a new community is structured on the grounds of virally diffusing beliefs about others and other communities (see articles by Bishop Brown, Lewin, Community in excess, social glue and social cybernetics papers). “Such myths have certain basic features that both enable them to be effective and also bring with them some ambiguous consequences. One is the division of the social field into “our group” and “the others.” Another is the division of the world into distinct spheres of quality: the sacred and the profane. These two sets of divisions are not identical, but they work together to bring about social cohesion. “Our” group is always associated with sacred values. The “others” tend to be thought of as living outside the sacred in the chaos of the profane. Myths are intrinsically political because they always have to do with the birth or maintenance of order against the threat of chaos, either from without or from within, and it is unlikely any political community could survive for long without drawing on the symbolism of the sacred to reinforce its claims and encourage its members to struggle against the forces that threaten it.” Political Symbolism and the Ambiguity of Political Community: An Inherent Dilemma of Politics”. “In Girard’s interpretation, the victim is an object of abhorrence insofar as he is perceived by members of the angry mob as the source of all the violence among them. This is why he must be killed. But when he is dead, his death is also seen as the source of the new spirit of peace and brotherhood among them, and the newly born community deifies him and reenacts his death in sacrificial rites in order to try to perpetuate the beneficent effects of his slaying.”. To speak simultaneously of myth’s power both to disturb and to protect the balance of the soul might seem paradoxical, but the paradox is an inescapable result of the inherent ambiguity of the sacred, of the mythic foundation of community, and of the human spirit itself. The notion of paradox is instrumental to understanding the state of mind of planet 7 lodge members (the same holds for traditional freemasonry where the principle of coincidentia oppositorum is indirectly evidenced in all speculative degrees). Paradoxicality is essentialized in all comportments as coexistence of opposite states of mind; in essence, the state of mind demanded of lodge members is equivalent to that of a schizoid personality, insofar as they operate in every instance on two levels; on the one level, they have to abide by given societal rules and state laws, while at the same time undermining them in order to satisfy own and lodge-sanctioned goals. see Eugene Webb University of Washington Presented at the Colloquium on Political Philosophy of the Center for Theoretical Study, Charles University a.ˇStiˇr´ın Castle, Prague, Sept. 25–27, 1992) The legitimation of myhtopoetic thinking and indeed its primacy over rational discourse affords both to create stronger bonds amongst group members, as well as to dumpen down the critical function potential of members, hence more susceptible to orders and decisions. . “To speak simultaneously of myth’s power both to disturb and to protect the balance of the soul might seem paradoxical, but the paradox is an inescapable result of the inherent ambiguity of the sacred, of the mythic foundation of community, and of the human spirit itself.” (To speak simultaneously of myth’s power both to disturb and to protect the balance of the soul might seem paradoxical, but the paradox is an inescapable result of the inherent ambiguity of the sacred, of the mythic foundation of community, and of the human spirit itself.) 3.The strictly intra-group support of members in different professions
    • 4.Infusing the sentiment of superiority and pride in members (making them feel like they hold on to some sort of superior truth- which keeps them in distance to other lodge members) The drivers for participation in the lodge system 1.Primordial need-states, such as safetu 2.Social needs, such as belonging or being – with (this is one of the basic psychological aspexts on which intelligence services depend for orienting someone’s self otlook and world view according to predefined goals- insofar as social interaction with significant otheras is the primary method whereby one’s personality is formed (and concomitantly one’s values framework) progressively cutting down on contacts and circles that are deemed to be inappropriate , while seeding societal relationshuips with system agents who are deemed more appropriate in carrying out the self (re)engineering project is effected through meticulously conceived ways. Orientation or reorientation of one’s values framework is effected through piecemeal discursive formations (such as seemingly friendly consultations , rewards and punishments; and these do not work, more advanced suggestibility methods are recruited as previously described). 3. Ontological needs – the quest for one’s truth (simply put) 4.Pragmatic needs (developing a network of affiliates) a.Also maintaining power relationships- insofar as the lodge in which one participates v(even temporarily) conatins members from particular social strata (do not be misled into nbelieving that traditional freemasonry’s focus was on the essence of its teachings; traditional Masonic texts are as good as anything for masking from uninitiated the power play that takes place among lodge members. Differene level members have access to different social groups (hence the importance for distinguishing degress at the cutoff point of the 18th degree- while maintaining the inherent symbolism of 18, that 3 times 6, or members above the 18th degree participate in deeper workings of the system from their respective professions; in planet 7, value frameworks that are differentiating among different lodges merely mask the masking that takes place in traditional freemasonry ; it is deception raised in the powrt of nth ; this is why normally lower level societal o0rganisms oparticipate in planet 7 lodges; traditional freemasons normally head these lodges, asthety act as bridges to the traditional system- they filter recruits and cut ofdf unwanted by further sinking them in misconception and deceipt) “Sacred fire” or pure cybernetic play? In exactly the same way as happens in traditional freemasonry, the language of planet 7 and the correct interpretation of the signs employed in its hyperreal trajectory depend solely on the level of inside information to the system's workings one possesses (cross – refer to the concentric circles of the Rosicrucians, which largely reflect the ways socities are hierarchically structured up until now- leaving aside any pseudo-claims to openess and meritocracy). Thus, while bearing in mind what was above mentioned with regard to the channeling of one’s goal orientation and behavioural patterns according to preconceived / preordained archetypes, the mechanism of communicative fire is employed or exchanged as a valid communicative token for achieving this end. To an unwary mind, something metaphysical or tramscendenjtal or whatever resounds in this notion. Yet, its function is purely pragmatic in the context of a cybernetics project. As Goldstein notes in the following passage:
    • “When a system is at equilibrium, its nonlinear creative potential does not reveal itself; the observable linear processes are sufficient for system functionality. Under far-from-equilibrium conditions created by “heat,” the inherent, nonlinear potentiality emerges as the system reorganizes itself into a more complex structure (Goldstein, 1994). Correct interpretation of a set of sgns always depends on their placement in the rigtht context . Otherwise, one is merely drifting emndflressly among the plethora odf interpretations thtat open up in the face of a set of signs. A dissipative structure is not just a result, but a selforganizing process that uses disorder in order to change (Prigogine, 1996). Strange attractors are synonymous with the term mathematical chaos. Strange, or chaotic, attractors are nonlinear trajectories drawn into irregular, seemingly random cycles of behavior. Control parameters are opened up through increased information or energy flow, thus generating increasingly complex behavior. All nearby trajectories are drawn into its orbit, yet no two orbits overlap. The trajectories separate because of the property of sensitive dependence on initial conditions, which means that small changes may be escalated into major differences in behavior. The strange attractor literally “attracts” or pulls the broad range of behaviors into an order that emerges from the within the randomness of behavior, patterns of behaviors that organize themselves within defined boundaries (Kauffman, 1995). As a system generates everincreasing complexity through the chaotic cycles of behavior, it continually bifurcates until it reaches the strange attractor state. Just before it does so, it may pass through a phase transition in which order coexists with chaos. This phase transition is described in the literature as the edge of chaos (Kauffman, 1995; Theitart & Forgues, 1995). What was new about planet 7 after all? From maximum disequilibrium to a new equilibrium Movement from a situation of perfect equilibrium to one of greater complexity occurs through a destabilization process, not unlike mathematical, deterministic chaos (Lewin, 1992). The system is being pushed away from stable equilibrium (which takes the form of a stable attractor) through a series of bifurcation points toward a strange or chaotic attractor. The dissipative process illustrated in the Prigogine’s experiments exemplifies the need for destruction of the old structure as it makes way for the creation of a new (Stacey, 1996; Goldstein, 1994). PLANET 7 AS A DYNAMICALLY CHANGING COMMUNICATIVE ECOSYSTEM OR COMPLEX CO-EVOLVING ADAPTIVE SYSTEM (WITH PRAGMATIC ORIENTATION) How the rules of the linguistic games are constantly changed? Mutual partaking of the language games and maintenance of a (within bounds) private language are not mutually exclusive. Some of the rules are conscious and explicit; others are implicit and unconscious (Goldstein, 1994; Stacey, 1996). Because complex adaptive systems are self-organizing learning systems that function in environments containing other complex adaptive learning systems, “it follows that together they form a co-evolving suprasystem that creates and learns its way into the future” (Stacey, 1996). Agents within a complex adaptive system operate within a collective schema as well as unique individual schemata for interpreting their context and 1) adapting behavior according to its consequences (simple or single-loop learning), or 2) changing schemata that occur in the form of creative shifts during conditions far from equilibrium (complex or double-loop learning).
    • Environments of systems within systems continually change, requiring rules within an organization’s shared schema to be continually adapted to fit existing conditions. In complex human systems, individuals choose behaviors according to their own unique schemata, NEW LODGE VALUE FRAMEWORKS ARISE , WHILE OTHER FORMATIONS FALL IN THE PROCESS OF A DYNAMIC REGENRATION OF THE SYSTEM. DISTINCTIVE LODGE AGENTS ARE ACTIVELY ENCOURAGED TOJUMP AROUND LODGES, IN ORDER TO CULTIVATE THE TRAIT OF ADAPTIVENESS AND OPEN UP TO THE ENDEMIC SHIFTS THAT SHOULD BE EXPECTED IN EVERY INSTANCE IN THE BY DEFAULT FLUID STRUCTURES OTHE SYSTEM. Component parts of complex adaptive systems do not interact in a linear, straightline, direct cause-and-effect sequence but rather display nonlinear, oscillating, random-like dynamics. • Because movements are nonlinear, exact prediction and control are not possible. • Nonlinear interconnectedness within self-organizing systems results in selfreinforcing feedback loops that lead to increased complexity. The social psychological perspective (in social psychology: experimental and critical approaches) Becoming part of the herd : or willful enslavement through communicative pattern oriented modeling As above mentioned, neotribalism and the prmitivization of language are on the rise in the context of planet 7 and the ephemeral constellations of human microorganisms that make up its cybernetic hyperreal edifice. Why is a return to primitivism so important in the context of planet 7's communicative trajectory and the communicative exchanges that take place in it? For these reasons, we claim that the pattern-oriented modelling approach is particularly adapted to the study of primitive communication mechanisms through the combination of a diversity of patterns. Surveillance & Society 3(1): 1-20 http://www.surveillance-and-society.org/articles3(1)/return.pdf © 2005 Surveillance & Society and the author(s). All rights reserved. ISSN: 1477-7487 The Return of Panopticism: Supervision, Subjection and the New Surveillance Bart Simon1 The capacities and competencies of the supervisor (or supervisory system) form an integral part of the panoptic structure, more so in fact, than the walls of the prison. When the walls are removed but the supervisory capacities remain we enter the condition of the new surveillance. With respect to making sense of the supervisory aspects of a generalized panopticism, surveillance studies has gone further than Foucault in demonstrating how information collected from individualized persons is organized and manipulated to alter, manage or even control the life-chances of those persons (Gandy, 1993). Mark Poster (1992) has perhaps developed the clearest articulation of what a Deleuzian reading of Foucault along these lines might entail. Poster understands the shift to control societies in terms of a kind of superpanopticism which he argues does not operate via external force or internalized norms but rather in terms of discourse JOURNAL OF SOCIOCYBERNETICS VOL3N02 FALL/WINTER 2002-03 SOS AS A DECODING PLATFORM FOR THE SOCIOBIOSHPERE OF PLANET 7
    • LUHMANN SEMIOTICIZED Søren Brier∗ The present article1 reports results from ongoing work on the project, Cybersemiotics, part of which has been published in semiotic, informational, systemic and cybernetic journals, but now for the first time presented in a sociocybernetic context. The article is a short overview of the model. SELF-ORGANIZATION, CLOSURE AND MEANING The combination of systems theory and cybernetics was necessary to make a theory pertaining to organization, function, and control of mechanical, living, and human systems. This combination was instrumental in producing the theory of information from which information science grew. Through modern second order cybernetics, autopoiesis theory, and chaos and complexity research we have developed a view of the body and the mind as self-organizing and self-producing systems. These scientific and materialistic approaches seem to have accepted a statistical information concept as a tool in describing the organizing ability of nature, including the role of DNA. But even the cognitive science information- processing paradigm used in cybernetic and systems approaches does not have a theory of signification and meaning that encompasses the phenomenological view. A theory of signification is necessary to understand how signs are created and become meaningful. Only the semiotics of Charles Sanders Peirce (1931-1958) includes non-intentional signs, and as such, signs of the body and nature. Human life is lived in meaning. As Niklas Luhmann (1995) states, we use meaning to reduce complexity. One aspect of stress is being overwhelmed by complexity. Luhmann (1990) argues that we are composed of three major closed, autopoietic systems: a biological system, a ∗ Direct correspondence to Søren Brier, Associate Professor, Philosophy of Science, Section for Learning and Interdisciplinary Methods, Department of Economics and Natural Resources, KVL (Royal Danish Agricultural University), Copenhagen, Denmark; e-mail: sbr@kvl.dk.. 1 Epistemological and ontological analysis, developed as a foundation for the model, can be found in Brier (2000b, c, 2001a, 2002a and 2002c). An application of cybersemiotics in library science and information seeking can be found in Thellefsen, Brier, and Thellefsen (2003). Further documentation and argumentation can be found in the selection of papers included in the appendix. 14 Søren Brier
    • psychological system (that does not speak, a “life world”), and a socio-communicative interpersonal system. A symbolic iconic model is shown in Figure 1. Unfortunately, theories of meaning are scarce in the sciences and technology and usually left to continental philosophy. Contrary to this division, Peirce's semiotics is a doctrine of signification, thinking, and communication with the capacity of encompassing modern scientific information theory. Peircean semiotics is unique in its ability to engage aspects of the sciences, humanities, and social sciences. In biosemiotics, developed by Thomas Sebeok (1976, 1989) on this basis, it becomes a theory of meaning for all living systems. Signification processes combined with the environment are seen as creating a signification sphere of meaningful objects in the cognitive apparatus of livings systems (see Figure 1). This is what Jacob von Uexküll, before the birth of biosemiotics, called the animal's “Umwelt”, and Maturana and Varela (1980) call its “cognitive domain” (which is built through the “eigen functions” of the cognitive apparatus, as Von Forster would say). Simultaneously, on all levels, there are internal and external communication and signification processes taking place. Figure 1: Three organizationally closed systems working separately make communication possible. This figure is the first in a series visually summarizing my theory. They are not the theory itself but very simplified symbolic icons that hopefully can provide an easily remembered visual overview. But one must not forget that they are only symbolic iconic pictures of the system in relation to the body. Psychological processes, for example, are not only in the head and so on. The sphere of signification is the biosemiotic term for Uexküll’s "Umwelt" (Uexkull 1934) and Maturana and Varela’s (1980) "cognitive domain". I have imported Wittgenstein’s term "language games" describing what goes on in Luhmann’s socio- communicative systems. Their surroundings are human bodies interacting with nature and each other in "life forms". LUHMANN SEMIOTICIZED 15
    • When biosemiosis is combined with Luhmann’s systems theory, it creates what I call "cybersemiotics" and becomes a theory of biological, psychological, and sociological-cultural meaning. It indicates that signification and communication processes work on all three levels in closed systems. These systems are like blind boxes to one another, and can only function through interpenetration. Thus, language offers classifications of emotions, but cannot control the reality and correctness of the classification, as in "am I really in love, or is it just a stomach ache?" Emotions offer a classification of awareness of biological situations, both externally and internally, which they cannot control as such; for instance, "I feel uncomfortable, is this situation dangerous? Do I want to fight or to run?" About internal biosemiosis Sebeok wrote: Semiosis is the fulcrum around which another emerging interfacial discipline recently dubbed “semio- immunology” or “immunosemiotics” turns. The central problem immunologists keep struggling with is how the healthy immune system manages to recognize and respond to an almost infinite number of alien organisms and yet fails to assail components of self. What has become reasonably clear is that a single line of defence against potential pathogens is not enough and that there are dissimilitudes between antigen recognition by T cells and that by B cells. Jerne has proposed … a model of particular interest to semioticians, including especially linguists, with his claim that the immense repertoire of the vertebrate immune system functions as an open-ended generative grammar, "a vocabulary comprised not of words but of sentences that is capable of responding to any sentence expressed by the multitude of antigens which the immune system may encounter." The human immune system consists of about 10 12 cells, dissipated over the entire body, excepting only the brain, but the former and the nervous system are known to exercise pervasive mutual sway one over the other by means of two-way electrochemical messages (Sebeok 1999: 390). Thus inside the body there are endosemiotic processes (Uexkull et al 1983) a work among the nervous, the immune, and the hormone systems. Sebeok writes about the endosemiotic processes: “The endocrine and the nervous systems, as noted above, are intimately fastened together via signs. As for the neural code itself, semiosis is what neurobiology is all about” (1999: 391). But there is also the level of the inner life of the pre-linguistic mind or psyche. In the inner “life world” of Merleau-Ponty, wordless (pre-linguistic) phenosemiotic processes of emotions, will, and images play themselves out. I agree with the phenomenologists that there is an inner pre-linguistic world that is neither rational nor irrational, neither objective nor subjective. It is the “innen welt” of Uexkull that interactively produces the Umwelt. In a modern semiotic understanding this whole area is, although pre- linguistic, still semiotic! It is even biosemiotic, as it is the product of mostly un- or pre-conscious processes in perception stemming from bodily processes and from social interactions (the "habitus" of Bodieau). Between the endosemiotic levels of the body’s own biosemiosis and the phenosemiosis of the mind there is a connecting system of what I call intrasemiotics (see Figure 2). We assume that the sign vehicles are somehow chemical, but we still know very little about how the mind- body interaction functions. In a Peircian philosophy it is all in a semiotic framework, not denying a physico-chemical level, and an information level of signals 16 Søren Brier
    • (protosemiotic differences, not triadic and not with meaning). The triadic organization of the autopoietic and duel-coded (digital in the gene, analogous in the body) self-organization of the living, brings forth the semiotic qualities of meaning that express the immanent possibility of Firstness existing inside matter. In Peirce’s triadic philosophy, Firstness is "unmanifest qualia", pure feeling, logic, and basic forms in mathematics that only manifest through their connection with Secondness (force, will power, differences and resistance) and become stabilized through Thirdness, which refers to regularity, habits of nature (laws), and understanding. The dualistic absolute difference between mind and body (seen as matter) is avoided. The worldview is pragmatic and evolutionary through the triadic process that leads to new emergent levels. Figure 2: The relation between phenosemiotics (prelinguistic experiences), endosemiotics, thought semiotics, and intrasemiotics (semiotic interaction between the biological and the psychological levels, now reformulated in cybersemiotic terms). I have in this way constructed a semiotic analogue to Luhmann’s three levels of autopoiesis. The semiotic processes occur within the autopoietic systems. Where they interpenetrate, communicative systems like intrasemiotics appear, which are created inside; outside sign games appear as the exosemiotic aspect. LUHMANN SEMIOTICIZED 17
    • COMMUNICATIONAL LEVELS Peirce’s semiotics needs theories of self-organization, non-trivial systems, closure, autopoiesis, and structural couplings to explain the role of embodiment in conceptualization. This can be delivered by Luhmann’s system thinking that draws on autopoiesis and second order cybernetics’ theories of closure, structural couplings and self-organization. In this framework, structural coupling occurs between the organism and its significant surroundings, thus creating the Umwelt. Between two autopoietic systems, mutual structural couplings can be created to make a channel for signal-based communication. This is what Maturana calls "languaging". Next I extend Wittgenstein’s idea of language games on the linguistic level to a concept of sign games at the level of motivated animal communication, as described by the ethologists. Here the meaning of signs is tied to significant life functions, such as mating, hunting, defending, fleeing, food searching. Cybersemiotics is, then, a trans-scientific theoretical framework (see Figure 3) that places: 1. The languaging (Maturana) of reciprocal structural couplings at the level of signals and information. These processes are considered protosemiotic. 2. The instinctual, but motivated sign-games of living systems on one level, and the interpenetrations of the biological and psychological autopoiesis at another level. 3. The language games of humans on a third level, coinciding with Luhmann’s socio-communication. Semiotics starts with the process of knowledge, asking how signification is taking place in living systems making perception and cognition possible. Peirce’s semiotics unites our explanatory schemes of deduction and induction through abduction within the process of semiosis. Peirce suggests that we look at triadic semiosis as the fundamental process of reality. Consciousness is built of semiotic processes. As the first step, cognition is mostly established through abductive meaningful processes and after that follows deduction and inductive testing. Biosemiotics acknowledges that semiosis is an essential part of all living systems and that semiotics should have the sign games of all living systems as its subject area. Again the problem of total explanation arises: can we go on from here to a pan-semiotic view without wanting to explain too much? It is my view that the advantages of using semiotic concepts are lost if we make everything semiotic, because then nothing is not semiotic. We have then overstretched the concept and made it uninteresting for pointing out significant differences to us. It is also against Peirce’s triadic category teaching to make signs primary as the three categories form the basic parts of the foundational processes of reality. 18 Søren Brier
    • Figure 3: The three different levels of communication systems described in cybersemiotics. At the basis is the informational exchange of signals of orientation and other reflexes. On the next level are the biosemiotic sign games of all living systems, mostly within the species, also valid for the basic biological drives in humans. Then there is the level of language interchange as dialogue between self-conscious persons, "language games" as Wittgenstein (1958) calls them. I have argued that it seems more fruitful to accept and work with five different levels of interaction in nature, but not necessarily assume any evolutionary causal links between them. This means that I do not assume that one level gives rise to the other or that causality goes from matter to mind only. These five levels are: 1. A non-manifest level with hypercomplex or chaotic interactions. The concept of vacuum in Quantum field theory is one attempt from science to describe this state but without Peirce’s synechistic frame. Peirce calls it Firstness and it contains qualia and pure feeling. 2. An energy level with energy based causal interaction by natural forces. 3. An informational level with signal and/or code causality that creates self-organization. 4. A semiotic level with sign game causality within and between living systems based on biological and psychological meaning. LUHMANN SEMIOTICIZED 19
    • 5. A linguistic level with language-game-causality based on conceptual linguistic meaning between conscious social systems. The point then is that the description of these levels did already exist in different areas of modern science, but they had never been connected in one theoretical framework that included the humanities and the social sciences, unless you believe that this is what eliminative mechanistic science has accomplished. THE CYBERSEMIOTIC MODEL Meaning is seen as coming from semiotic processes in the body and the psyche, their coupling to the environment, and between two individuals in the sharing of signification spheres that actualize mutual understanding. Peirce’s semiotics is special in relation to Saussure’s as it allows semiosis with non- intentional aspects of nature and culture. Thus, on all levels there are both an eco-semiotic and exosemiotic component placing humans in both nature and culture at the same time. Figure 4 illustrates the cybersemiotic model built up so far. On the left side we observe the cybernetic- autopoietic-functionalistic processes. Left of middle we see the communicative aspects or the Exosemiotics between two organisms and right of middle the internal semiotics of the organism. Finally, to the far right we look at the organism’s perceptual connections to the environment, ecosemiotics, contributing to its signification sphere. The functional and the semantic aspects, then, are coupled for the first time here in a theory that connects biology, psychology and sociology with a theory of signaling, signification, cognition and communication. The cybersemiotic approach works by making synergies between the socio-communication systems theory of Luhmann with its basis in Spencer-Brown’s logic of distinction, its inclusion of Maturana and Varela’s theory of autopoiesis and Heinz von Foerster’s theory of second order cybernetics on one hand, and on the other hand, Peircean pragmatic semiotics, in the form of the new biosemiotics of Thomas Sebeok (including all living systems and the human body in the semiotic sphere), combined with Lakoff (1987) and Lakoff and Johnson’s (1999) embodied cognitive semantics and Wittgenstein’s language-game theory. 20 Søren Brier
    • Figure 4: Cybersemiotic model classifying different types of semiosis and protosemiotic processes: The model is a cybersemiotic development of the Luhmann model in Figure 1. The localization of the processes has nothing to do with the actual bodily locations as the head, for instance, is also a part of the biological autopoiesis, and has endosemiotic processes. To limit the complexity, I have placed all the cybernetic- autopoietic concepts on the left person and all the semiotic ones on the person to the right. But all concepts concern both persons. Each person is placed in a signification sphere. When these are combined through socio-communicative autopoietic language games, a common signification sphere of culture is created. One part of ecosemiotics’ signification is based on the linguistic processes of conceptualization and classifications. Underneath language games is the biological level of instinctually based sign games, and under that, the cybernetic languaging game of the coordination of coordination of behavior (of two black boxes). Thus, ecosemiotics also has a level of bio-psychological or emphatic signification, as well as a level of structural couplings, which the organism, or rather the species, has developed through evolution. If, from this model, we go back to Figure 2, we can now place the linguistic motivations in the area of thought- semiotics and the animal motivation in the intra-semiotic area. ECOSEMIOTICS INTERNAL SEMIOSIS AUTOPOIESIS EXO-SEMIOTICS Similarities between the usefulness of cybernetics in social formations and organizational settings The usefulness oof the concept of isomorphism (an attempt to divest behavioural phenomena from their contextual contours and streamline them analogically against Co-existing social milieus Do not be misled into thinking that the social cybernetics reengineering project that has been taking place over the past few years applies to all. Its main ield of application concerns the cleansing of the socius of unwanted social cells . In essence it is a postmodern rendition of communist totalitarianism. In a state of communism absolute determinism reigns in every aspect of a social organization. Each individual has been preallocated to a specific functional box according to a stable hierarchical schema that is masked by an apparent egalitarianism. Insofar as in the xcontext of postmodern democratic regimes, such a direct channelling of one’s potential or allocation to a specific functional box woulod not be tolerated , it must be attained through insidious and unnoticed (by the final recipient ) processes. Hence, all the mind control and psychological warfare tactics , as aforementioned, are recruited in order to promote the intended plan. JOURNAL OF SOCIOCYBERNETICS Volume 6 Number 1 Summer 2008 In my opinion, then, the discipline of Sociocybernetics must specially register and emphasize, first of all, the OUTPUTS (the system of values both wanted and produced by the system for the benefit of its population, after having separated objective and subjective outputs); and second to reduce the deviations produced, either by feed-back or by a feedforward anticipatory strategy. And carrying out this cybernetics operation, not only in a permanent search for a humanistic approach (that is to say, to contemplate the system from the position of the man in the street) but also using, if possible, a quantitative treatment of data in the line of scientific operational definitions of concepts (Lazarsfeld, Simon, Boudon) in order to approximate as much as possible to the scientific verification of hypothesis. Sociocybernetics, strictly speaking, obliges us to see the system in terms of the automatic or systematic control of the difference between DESIRED and ACHIEVED outputs. The new information technologies facilitate the automatic control of deviations. (this is still repeating
    • an earlier point with minimal advance over two pages now). The above sounds correct as a generic platform for coining practical principles, be concerrnig social interaction. However, in the context of the planet 7 control system, their application is manifested as a platform of psychosomatic warfare among social cells, . Wjhereas in cen5tralized totalitarian regimes (eg nazi germany, soviet staluinism ) cleansing was enforced by sanctioned state institutions , in a in the contgect of self governed , seklf regulated post modern matrix social organizatiosn, cleansing is effected through psycho somatic warfare techniques (refer to the negative spiralling feedback loops erected around micro systems , that encompass food poisoning, negative feedback mechanisms, overcoding , undercoding and other rhetorical / propaganda techqniues aimed at streamlining a cell’s actions and self oulook according to a an agreed pattern that has been carved by lodge controllers). Based on which of the aforementioned needs are met through participation in a lodge (or multiple lodges, since members are actively encouraged to =hioft worldviews through the interaction with other lodge members), viz social, needs, ontological, and based on thewhat is expected of oineself from participation inn a lodge, intersubjective reality is steered towards a particular orientation. Insofar as intersubjective reality is shaped primarily through discursive formatiosna nd semiotic systems , the primary bond among a lodge members is safeguarded through partaking in the same wavelength, so to speak, of communicative requirements and engaging in mutually reinforcing language games. In simple terms, insofr as communicative (and other...) chemistry has been established among members , the group formation game has begun to roll. Entry As with traditional freemasonry, acceptance to other lodges and/or ascension to higher levels of planet 7 hyperreal formation is effected through material and / other sorts of exchanges (occasionally it features tribulations on a bodily level). . THIS SYSTEM OF EXCHANGE AND GENERAL EQUIVALENCES IS DOMINANT THROUHGOUT BOTH TRADITIONAL FREENASINRY AND PLANET 7. In either case, social (and other) mobility is effected through exchanging someone’s misdeeds (based on a largely fluid and evolving values system) for a sewt of tribulations (monetrary, corporeal punishment etc) or passing these misdeeds to someone else, through a logic of inversion. Remember that this system is based on the reification (ie making concrete) of ontological pprinciples, pertaining to variable classes of Being (in traditional theologfical discourse) or aspects of being (in a secular , postmodern era). Hence, on an ontological [perspective ascent to a higher level of systemic truth must be exchanged for some loss. It is not a matter of epistemically correcxt or wrong propositions about a given state of affairs, but of pseudo-moral axiomatic, legitimated through ephemeral referenda (see previous nallusion to Baudrillard about the prevalence of referenda in deciding about the truth of a phenomenon, wherever relativism has swept over any previously held notion of epistemological legitimacy). (from the lexicon of social sciences) The functionalist approach is exemplified by †Max Gluckman (1963). Gossip, Gluckman begins, is a culturally determined and sanctioned process, a social fact, with customary rules, and with important functions. Notably, gossip helps maintain group unity, morality and history; for the essence of gossip is a constant (if informal and indirect) communal evaluation and reaffirmation of behaviour by assessment against common, traditional expectations. Furthermore, gossip enables groups to control the competing cliques and aspiring individuals of which they are composed; for through gossip, differences of opinion are fought out behind the scenes (through customary innuendo, ambiguity and conceit) so that outwardly a show of harmony and friendship can be maintained. Finally, gossip is a hallmark and a privilege, even a duty, of group membership. A group gossips, gossip is group property, and to be a member is to gossip—about other members. The transactionalist approach, The need to apply bsystems thiunkiung in the xplanation of planet 7 netwroekd lodges as a grand control system According to Bateson, one pof the forefathers of modern cybernetics, “Systems are comprised of a unified pattern of events, and their existence, as well as their character are derived more from the nature of their organization, than from the nature of their components”. In crude terms, a system “. In essence, the notion
    • of a system refers to essence, the notion of system is a relationhal one. It does not concern a particular object or a particular state of affairs, but the way whereby Objects and or states of affairs interact , thereby formin g a particular aspect oiof reality. SInsofar as the reality prionciple (in Freudian terms), is what holds together se[arate egos , while yielding a common ground ffor meaningful action, acting and thinking may not be conceived as such outside of a systemuic configuration. The main question that arises at this juncture, concerns the ways whereby this configuration is controlled in oits configuring. Insofvar as a system is somuch a relkational concept, as it is a dynamic one (configurations change, they hardly everv remain the same), while there must be acentral agency responsible for channelling these configurations towards such duirectioins, as to undercut any potentially destablisizing oscillations at the very point of inception. The role of intelligence agencies consists primarily in this task. However, when we view transpose this process of constant configuring of objects and states if affairs , which in interaction form an aspect of a system or a temporary configuration from the plane of explanatoiry or interpretive schematics to the paplane of particular objects and states if afaiurs that are singled out each time a new configursation is about to emerge, we are confronted with another fundamental questions. Which objects are singled out and which states if affairs? Put slightl;y differently, according to which criteria, for whom, where, for how long and other questions aiming at qualifying the selection process that leads up to a configuration, must be answered. . Even thogh these questions are intriguing in themselves, they may not be answered in a holistic fashion or for the entire spectrum of configurations, as that would amount tto being able to predict every single action and oatterning that takes place . However, what may be atattained through patterning and relative opredictability,l is the configuration of particular behavioural blocks oin the systemic matrix . Thus, instead iof trying to control chaos a posterior, the creators of planet 7 opted for creating a priori behavioural typologies as polar attractors where various rational agents (or otherwise) myst be attracted. Each lodge typology essentially constitutes another facet of Being or another systemic configuration of the gigantic rebus that is called planet 7. Insofar as you are color coded according to the proinciples of each lodge, you do not risk being harassed for not partaking of the new world order. In a similar fashion (and this will take us from the processual part to the lignsuituc aspect of planet 7 cybernetic system), in the context of the rhetoric that was amoly employed during the initial stages of the viral of the viral expansion of planet 7 was a compulsory urger to “be in the system” The rhetoric was enforced in every occasion and indeed social automara even took pleasure in believing of themselves and their peers as being in the system, thanh otherwise. The social needs catered for through the lodge system have already been exemplified in previous passages. What is of more importance in this section is to render as c;ear as possible that this new outlook on system formation, substance and expansion derives from systems theories and cybernetics and constitutes its practical rendition. OR ITS FLESHING-OUT IN THE FORM OF AN UNQUESTIONABLE REALITY PRINCIPLE. Th e gimmicks emoloyed for avoiding questiong (through a return to a primitive frorms of communicatiosn and the establishment of neotribaloism, among others, which boith evade rational scrutiny) jhave already been illustrated. What may be questioned, and rightly so, is who is controlling these constant reformations or dynamic reconfigurations? Planet 7 lodge controllers, plan and simple. How do they avoid potentially harmful osciullations? Do they confer judgment from a brid’s eye view perspective, so to speak? No need to to do so, insofar as , (as already explained), the transformation of rational agents (or lodge members) dcoes not take place in a chaotic, unstructuyred fashion, but in a highly structured one, insofar as it is always already channelled according to preordained behavioural paradigms (witin the acceptable range of variation or degrees of freedom). . In this arena or chess-like field, members or social cells, are active;ly urged to compete against one another against the background or relatively fluid behavioural norms in order to gain admission in new lodges or simply maintain theor positions. Is it just a game? Yes, but it has significant material repercussionbs, insofar as failure or unwillingness to abide by these (fluid( rules would amount to exclusion from the game. Who is attracted more to tbhis game? Children 2-10, teens and later age bracket losers or scum, who have nothing better to do in their (anyway, vain and derelict)lives- THE LATTER CONSTITUTE THE BEST CLIENTS OF THE INTELLIGENCE SERFVICES INSOFAR AS THEY ARE CONLETELY “OPEERATIVE” ACCORDING TO THE GUIDELINES THEY RECEIVE FROM THE “SYSTEM”. Also, kids are ideal clientrs, insofar they are infiltrated at s Ch an early age with the “system” requirements, that it is impossible to shake off this second skin later on in their lives. This is equivalent to the indoctrination tactics traditionally employed by the freemasons and the illuminate ,who have always relied onthe selection of youngsters (especially from families composed of
    • scoundrel and criminals, whose only opportunity for sparing their lives was to abide by the directives given to them by intelligence agencies, working for the new world orderO). Indoctrination is highly individualistic Why indoctrinate on an individual level? There are various explanations. Th fundamental ontological one assumes as its starting point the notion of appropriation (a traditional theological notion, also prevalent in ontological systems). Appropriation (also see das Ereignis or the event of appropriation in Heidegger) literally denotes making one's own . Its conceptual leanings are psychoanalytic ( for example, the incessant quest of an infant at the stage of primary narcisissim, that is not yet culturally mediated behavior, to devour everything in its way, thus appropriating itself through the digestion of everything that gets in its way). Thus, unless sentiments of pride and individual possession accompany the indoctrination process, it is hardly unlikely that the process of becoming configured within the system will be successful. The notion of the monad , as encountered in Leibniz, may be quoted as suitable parallel for the way individuality is formed through appropriation in the planet 7 system. The monad, according to Leibniz, is the window to the world, the irreducible self-same unity that may be not be further fragmented. In the same fashion, unless partaking of the lodge system is viewed as a particularly personal, individual experience , and pride accompanies the possession of planet 7color-coded t-shirts (in the same fashion, once more, as regalia constituted honorable emblems for traditional freemasonry, standing for symbols of status and distinction in the lodge) , the process of inscription through recognition may not be kick started , as emblematic of “being in the system”. Now, one might ponder, isn’t this one of the greatest self deceiving fables ever? From a rational agent perspective it sure is. There is nothing individual about the whole process. On the contrary, the process is a classic case of replication through imitation and empathy , so often encountered in different totalitarian regimes, where the success of a dominant ideology depends on its uncritical inscription in individual automata. The main difference between totalitarian regimes and the postmodern simulacrum of openness exemplified under the heading of planet 7 concerns the covert manner whereby the latter functions (whence stems the unconditional demand for secrecy and indeed the preponderance of secrecy as the very ineffable underpinning of each lodge or micro-community). Let us dwell a bit longer on the notion of system as the relatum among members, rather than objects and states of affairs. The relatum is by definition immune to criticism. You may not reflect on or about the relatum as such, but only on the configurations to which it gives rise. The same principle holds for the Hegelian Absolute Spirit, perhaps the most cunning philosophical stratagem ever coined (at least within the confines of the self referential system of diealectics). The absolute spirit or arche-relatum is the enabler for shifting among planes of ek-sistence or lodges. In structural homomynmy or isomorphism, it is the system as relatum that allows for partaking of different configurations, or lodges. The system in itself is never presenced in the process, but always remains as the material and ideal underpinning of the process itself. Planet 7 glue: between pseudo-morals and small talk Pseudo morals consist in purely adhocratic value judgments enforced by the power of the many that confer their legitimacy, however ungrounded they may be. The incidence or phenomenon on which a value judgment is predicated normally is prefabricated and usually assumes the character of an inevitable enmeshment. The expected response pattern by the community that fabricates the incidence determines to what extent the target that is caught up in the particular behavioral loop is a member or not. The normal behavioral pattern actively promoted by pseudo lodgers that have had a cataclysmic impact on the entrenchment of the new ethos (again largely adhocratic with no clear and distinct rules and regulations, whence their aversion to every established and explicit regulatory framework that obviously conflicts with their ends and more often than not illicit means to their achievement) consists in a set of desired response features, such as the following: -maintenance of a low, submissive, slavish profile in every social encounter, backed by an abundant and omnipresent mystical comportment towards the motives behind the incidence and phenomenon. Hence, at the backdrop of this implicit new ethos lies the legitimation of non-resistance towards any possible configuration of events that may inflict the personality and civil rights that guarantee a person’s autonomy at the benefit of a nouveau herd instinct that prioritizes each lodge’s welfare against the benefits of its members. The phantasmatic collective that is structured against a background of superficial and easily
    • deconstructed underpinnings (in short on quick sand) resembles a primordial animal collective whose members function mainly on instinct and motivated by a concerted will. -Unquestionably yielding to the demands of a secret authority structure, which has nothing to do with established classes of trade, discrepancies in revenue levels, educational and professional achievements. In a fully predetermined world, which was the dream of many Medieval philosophers you simply have to follow the path that has been carved out for you by overseeing lodge members, who normally walk by unnoticed, checking on verbal and non verbal response patterns in order to ensure that you are “walking on the “right” direction”. Should any of the above mentioned fundamental and expected response archetypes not be met, then a series of external censors are applied. The aim is to engrave them through repetition in the expected set of behavioral response patterns of the individual who is to be molded into a particular category, thus progressively becoming internal censors. These tactics thrive in the literature of social cybernetics and corporeal pragmatics. Let us now turn to an overview of some fundamental concepts of these two disciplines with view to laying out their importance as interpretive repertoires for mapping out and deconstructing the very groundings of the ethos, while pointing out their constitutionally conflicting profile. First and foremost, it would add real value if we answered the question of “who” benefits from this establishment. It is quite self explanatory to stress that it is on the one hand those at the top 10% (in terms of revenues) and the bottom parts of a societal edifice (this is applied on a global basis). The latter have “nothing to lose” as their career and personal development horizons are characterized by default by limited social mobility, while the former have at their disposal all the means to enforce controls in case of non conformance, be it light controls, such as behavioral sanctions or more ardent controls (in case a subordinate’s behavior goes out of hand), such as imprisonement or incarceration in a mental institution (exactly what happened in the most extreme totalitarian regimes). Implicit legitimation of pseudo morals: Formal moral systems as propounded by great thinkers over the past have nothing to do with pseudo morals. The main differences lie in the following: Formal moral systems (eg Aristotle, Hegel, Kant) record a vast array of social encounters and map out sanctioned behavioral response patterns, based on experienced value judgment. These maxims, in Kant’s terms, are potentially universally binding (hence the importance of the notion of categorical imperative) and explicit (no hidden assumptions). Certainly, no contents of a moral system could be as extensive and exhaustive as to encompass not only the plethora of particular social encounters, but also their minute shadings that give unprecedented new twists to particular encounters However, ramifications may be termed as such only insofar as the general guideline or stream of thought/perception has been defined and agreed upon. Pseudo-morals consist in infinite ramifications not attempting to map out shadings of a universal rule, but to legitimate the absence of universal rules in quest of an ever multiplying network of exceptions, spreading at such a speed and with such an intensity as to efface the general guideline (thus rendering disorientation and suggestibility easier). Tantamount to this loss of referential background is the nexus of disorientation tactics. If a referential background is equivalent to a polar attractor that governs and regulates a goal oriented behavior, constant disorientation amounts to a strange attractor, which aims at enforcing a nihilistic attitude (that is an outlook devoid of goals) which in turn gives way to utter submission and slavery. Pseudo morals is legitimated by lodge communities in order to divert attention of those that have been termed “profane” or non lodge members- this is a so very fluid term, largely pragmatic, nothing to do with Gnostic principles. Hence the prioritization of formalism in every societal and other encounter (remember extreme formalism is the main trickery employed by freemasonry, which attained to invest it with a glowing aura to outsiders). The preponderance of formalism is evidenced in the preponderance of everyday aesthetics (both in terms of keeping in shape, as well as displaying an overarching interest in looks- community spirit is primarily grounded on a reflet/refletant base, hence members must all look alike if the community is to be sustained as such. Also, the preponderance of bodily formalism paves the way for the legitimacy of corporeal pragmatics and the institution of a primordial herd instinct over reason, hence the end of dialectic. The same systemic function is accomplished by the use of a “natural language” or a shared common discourse that safeguards a commonality in response patterns among members of a speaking community. An exhaustively recorded (such as Leibniz’s dream of a universal mathematical language) natural language is an impossible oeuvre by definition, and yet membership to a particular speaking community is implicitly guaranteed by recognizable signs, symbols, indices, body language, which cement bonds among members, while
    • affording to recognize aliens. Pseudo-morals and natural language, and this will bring us to the systemic function of corporeal pragmatics, walk hand in hand. What is important in this turn, which at the same time determines the specific tropes that a natural language assumes, is exactly the implicit element of its fabrication. Implicit may be tautologous to mystical insofar as they both share the element of latency in their manifestations, that is not overt, yet agreed upon and recognizable platforms of response patterns. The more minute the inscription / instantiation of ephemeral pseudomoralistic universals, the more “porous” a body becomes and the more metaphors/analogies/synecdoches in an ever multiplying chain of signifiers that unfold against the moving background of a constantly self-effacing referential center (remember pseudo morals are by definition ec-centric, hence purely adhocratic) colonize an inter subjective communicative trajectory, the more silent membership in the community is certified. In essence, the strange attractor of the community that is enmeshed in this purely irrational theater of vain/vague exchanges consists in a powerful eccentric and self effacing center, which masks its absence through constant transformation (whence the obsolescence of agents once they have been worn out by the constantly revolving attractor). Now, this interpretation is a meta systemic inscription of the way freemasonry has been functioning over the centuries. The main difference between the planet 7 and traditional freemasonry lies in that the latter constitutes a rigid system with a massive set of ethical and behavioral rules, the former is a case of floating in chaos or a constant stabilization/destabilization and interweaving of plateaus, thus merely affording to redefine the territory of a self deterritorializing nexus. Armed with legions of interdisciplinary scientific teams, what once emerged as a seemingly exclusive force (the initial clean-up) aiming at fending off heterotopias that might combat a pseudo open system dynamics, once each heterotopia had been deconstructued and interpreted to its outermost limits, by initially testing their individual or combined effect on the attractor’s backbone, they reemerged as sanctioned milieus for channeling libidinal activity. To this end, the application of rigid and all encompassing pyramid like social controls was instrumental in order to check on the degree of imbalance specific behaviors and heterotopias might have on higher strata. Again, through a system of constant inversions, aimed at masking the “sacred” from the “profane” ( a dialectic that subsists throughout one’s life insofar as the level of access to privileged information and wealth largely determines the level of approximation to the “sacred”, which, of course, performs a purely systemic function as a limit metaphor of what can be achieved throughout the multiplicity of entropic ramifications) what once was deemed to be sacred is now deemed to be profane and vice versa, thus rendering these schemata obsolete. Progressively all schemata will be forced to extinction, giving way to silence or the reification of nihili locus . “How” -Psychological warfare -Traumatic mind control programming (cf Freud’s pathbreaking essay on post traumatic syndrome and how the notion of trauma affords to escape the pleasure principle and substitute pleasure with pain through an unconscious compulsion to repeat the original condition that gave rise to the particular traumatic experience) oThe effects of traumatic control programming oDisorientation tactics, closed feedback loops/self referential conditions and double binds, aiming at shaping a stressful environment for the individual oDisorientation tactics in a corporate environment consist in the following, among other: Conflicting guidelines and feedback provided by a supervisor to the subordinate, either stemming from a single source or from multiple sources, yet in the same position of authority. The whole matter is whether these internal conflicts crystallize in such a fashion as to constitute a norm for a particular individual who is intended for the slaves rather than the rulers class and this crystallization consists in two tropes, intensity and frequency of repetition. The higher the volume is turned up, the more succinct the stressful situation for an individual is expected to be, thus inscribing a loss of focus in every aspect of its daily comportment. If uncontrolled, a chain reaction will start to unfold. Loss of focus will give rise to dissatisfaction, especially to a subject that is goal-oriented. Repetition of feelings of dissatisfaction will give rise to defeatism. If transformed into brackground expectation and self fulfilling prophecy, defeatism will give place to fatalism, thus bringing through progressive elaborations the subject to the initially intended condition of slavery, that is uncritical acceptance of everything as unavoidable, thus paving the way to a sort of consented euthanasia. “The victim will develop life assumptions about being vulnerable, about having little
    • personal worth, and that life is not fair. They may develop phobias to constantly check their environment for safety and constantly monitor others to make sure they are not mistreated” The Illuminati Formula Used to Create an Undetectable Total Mind Controlled Slave
    • i ii Cret is the locus of an imaginary inscription on whose basis madness or sex will subsequently become exchangeable as value Orgy ad rite of passage