Friday, August 11, 2017

Google fires employee for speaking out

Guest post by Derek Coulter
(posted with the author's permission, the title was added by me, S.B.)

James Damore is the author of the now-famous internal critique of Google's oppressive leftist culture for which he was summarily dismissed. This, despite his thoroughly impressive resume and education. The eternal war against wrongdoers, loudmouths, and idiots can often overshadow the fact that our society is (still) mostly populated by good, upstanding, well-meaning people. Some are especially impressive in terms of achievement, as in the case of Mr Damore. In the minds of cultural Marxists, however, such glaring inequity simply cannot be.
The obviousness that we are all different, each with our own unique advantages and disadvantages, worse pointing it out, and worse still pointing out the idiocy in denying it, is what piqued the wrath and scorn of the legion of brainwashed malcontents that infest places like Silicon Valley and companies like Google. To them, he committed a thought crime: He spoke his mind on diversity, the tactics used to further it, and the pathological egalitarianism at its core. These, as it so happens, are among their most treasured ideologies.
The tech industry, by the nature of the work, is stacked with left-brain, analytical thinkers. Certainly, society desperately needs such people, and we have benefitted greatly from their contributions. As individuals, they do very well in academics, as information sponges and in linear problem-solving. Intelligence to this type of individual is measured by how much and how well they acquire, retain, and execute provided information (e.g., from academia, media). The other side of the coin, however, is that questions as to the veracity of said information seldom occur or have little priority. This type of mind exhibits a blindness for big-picture considerations, and often fails to grasp the broad consequences of its decisions and actions. Not surprisingly, these individuals also tend to be highly susceptible to indoctrination. These are our Ph.D's, our so-called experts. It's no surprise that Google and other tech companies are majority leftist, where most of its employees readily buy into the idealistic, googly-eyed (pun intended!) notions they were taught to buy into, no matter how bereft of supporting reason, evidence, good sense, and wisdom.
The tech industry certainly comes up with interesting and impressive gizmos and stuff. Their wares are products of pure intellect, but I question the wisdom of elevating its people to positions of social and cultural influence. A healthy society cannot have as its thought-leaders those who are pathologically unaware of and cut off from the higher facets of life and of being. The character of thought bound by the physical and the formative (intellectual) is entirety analytical, linear, and morose. As complete beings, as conscious monads, we are more than this, but sadly most people at this time in history are not even aware of the higher aspects of the self, the creative and the archetypal. These higher aspects yield an almost forgotten treasure, synthesis in thought. This entirely different character of thought yields a breadth of awareness in the individual--knowing without learning. We need doers as the engine of society, but seers must sit in driver seat.
Diversity of thought, diversity of perspective: These make for a strong social order, at any scale. This is the essence of the free market of ideas, which has the lovely property of tending to act as a thought optimality engine. Emphasis on ethnic or gender diversity, on the other hand, displaces the mental for the physical, and misunderstands that one of these facets of being is the dog while the other is the tail. This is not to mention that a potentially happy consequence of a culture favouring a diversity of thought also finds that it guarantees a (real) diversity of people.
We actually need a 'left' in a politically healthy society, as a counterbalance against a supposed 'right'. This may be a false political paradigm, but its true basis is in the concept of the divine feminine and the divine masculine, which are aspects of being found in everything and in every one of us. However, today's leftists, judging from most of their positions, are engaged in nothing less than a war on reality. It has to be reformed from the inside out. But at present, the left finds itself in a dreamland of its own making.

Derek Coulter



Saturday, August 5, 2017

Societal destruction using radicalized minorities - Marcuse legacy

Ever wondered why does the Left whack the unsuspecting middle classes with the salvos of politically correct intolerance? Why did radical Left o focus on black Americans, working hard to radicalize them even after all the legislation has been equalized? Ever wondered why the Radical Left and the academics are now focusing hard at radicalizing LGBT community setting them up against a generally tolerant mainstream society, creating artificial conflicts where there has been none and escalating various issues and pressing new demands? Ever wondered who and why exactly unleashed a flood of bogus refugees upon Western Europe, accusing everybody who spoke against to be "racist"? Why are "Antifa" actions so frequently violent? Why have so many of the university campuses became riddled with SJW radicals, becoming intolerant against a free debate? It has all been written below and planned since early 1960-ties. It is called a "Repressive Tolerance" theory by Herbert Marcuse. Since he recognized the fact that by 1960-ties Marxism has failed because the tolerant Western societies have largely satisfied the needs and aspirations of the working classes reducing their desire to change anything in the society. Furthermore, the radical left was no longer very successful in organizing the radical groups around various ideas because the society was already so tolerant of multiple ideas and allowed expression of so many ways of life and thoughts that there was no real need to be radical about anything. One can just do, say or worship almost anything, within the law.

Marcuse came up with the idea that in order to change (read - destroy) the existing order in the society, one has to attack the source of the "problem" (from his point of view) - the tolerance itself. He came up with the idea that in order to radicalize a minority and make them rally around a single cause, one has to dispense with any idea of tolerance to diverging views within that community, then keep pressing demands upon the mainstream society accusing them of intolerance, then escalating demands up to a point when the society begins firing back reverting from the tolerance into self-preservation mode, giving more opportunities to accusing the mainstream society of oppression. Eventually those accusations may turn out to be true, and a minority may have to pay a high price, however the main goal of the leftist radicals is not helping any minorities' causes - these are just their tools, but rather of destroying or destabilizing the society.


Last but not least. I believe that the Left, the Statism, Collectivism and all social manipulators will sooner or later fail here because Humans are wonderfully unpredictably disorganized, irreverend and noncompliant!

Heretic

Other Links and References:


(watch from minute 33-37)


"A CRITIQUE OF PURE TOLERANCE", ROBERT PAUL WOLFF, BARRINGTON MOORE, JR., HERBERT MARCUSE, 1970


Dr. Ben Carson on Hillary Clinton's Saul Alinsky Letters: ‘We've Had These Kinds of Warnings Before'

"I'd Organize Hell" - Saul Alinsky TV interview 1966

TOLERANCJA REPRESYWNA HERBERTA MARCUSE [by Krzysztof Karoń, in Polish]

Po czym rozpoznać marksizm? Krzysztof Karoń [in Polish, "How to recognize Marxism"]
Note: above video essay is fascinating. The author is putting a thesis that marxists and socialists lost out because most of the working class people choose good work ethics and organic work leading to organic economic growth benefiting an entire society, over their proposed revolutionary path. To counter that trend, the Left decided to undercut and denigrate the organic growth and good work ethics by undermining the entire professional education system in the West. There is a lot more, very insightful presentation and well worth watching.

Grzegorz Kolodziej - Fragment dzisiejszej odpowiedzi... [Facebook, the main post is in Polish, the comments are in English]