THE YEAR IN REVERSE
VOICES OF THE UPSIDE DOWN
MONOLOGUE WRITTEN BY CLYDE LEWIS
In 2018, it was apparent that most of what we heard and watched was well-crafted for a reaction. It was as if the aesthetic was more important than anything of substance. If you noticed the mainstream news competes to see who they can put on the screen that looks like a beauty queen and with the exception of Wolf Blitzer charisma can be used to manipulate any story so that an agenda can be repeated over and over so that the intended targets of propaganda repeat like parrots a coined phrase or what Orwell called Newspeak.
For the most part, we are all trying to “keep up appearances” to our spouses, families, friends, co-workers and the world at large.
We hide behind a facade that veils the disappointment and sorrow we carry around with us.
During the Holidays, we put a smile on our faces and spend money we don’t have in order to project something we are not. This game of “keeping up appearances” has become the true affectation of worship than that of Jesus or any other dogmatic figure that we claim to adore during the pagan ritual.
“Appearance is everything,” or so the saying goes. In an image-driven culture, this statement reflects a belief that holds sway among the shapers of culture.
Style, so often, is more important than substance. As long as the appearance is convincing, what is actually underneath is less significant.
We see this all the time in politics, where gifted communication teams carefully craft a message about a candidate and his history that may or may not be true to his background and beliefs.
The same is true with non-political celebrities, who often pay millions of dollars for help in crafting a public persona or for assistance in getting back into people’s good graces after a scandal.
Certainly, appearance is an important consideration. How we present ourselves often says something about who we are on the inside.
2018 was the year of the apology tour as the #metoo movement set out to expose the male celebrities, politicians and men of power as sexual predators. Although many have not seen a trial, nor has there been due process, the appearances that most of the accused had were revealed as vile and promiscuous.
The #metoo movement and other movements like it are seen as a precursor to what the Chinese call, “Social Credit Scores.”
There are different categories that people are ranked on, including behavior, personal preferences, and interpersonal relationships. From the people you hang out with to the amount of time you spend on social media and playing video games to the types of purchases you make and how much debt you have, the world will know. You can say goodbye to privacy under SCS, because Big Brother is stepping in to monitor your every move and dig deep below the façade we have.
We have been groomed for the social credit system with social media.
People have been subjected to shadow bans, demonetization, and secret hate scale monitoring by all tech platforms.
Much of what has been banned or erased from the internet are any and all posts or tweets that deliver politically charged material that these platforms see as offensive or dangerous.
The sweeping dystopia of it all is uncannily reminiscent of the TV show, Black Mirror; in particular, the eerily prescient episode “Nosedive” and that is the irony a mirror is a reflection of opposites – it is the upside down reversed image of what we see as our self-image – it is all about vanity but what is deep inside is what matters to technocrats obsessed with consciousness on a quantum level.
They do not seek out the conscious mind – they feel that they are gaining control of it – what they want is the unconscious mind and they want to crack it open so they can program people with voices from the upside down.
This is potentially a totally new way for the government to manage the economy and society; it is a way to gain control of what people truly believe and how to gain control of the populace in areas where core beliefs are not necessarily congruent with the state.
The system would then put forward a ledger of discredited individuals and your deep thoughts would no longer be deep and hidden.
To know the future is to know human nature — the more that the technocracy knows the more they can move upon precognitive thoughts that can lead to action or what were once unforeseen circumstances.
They also can develop think tanks at colleges where terms and words can be guided and shaped to mean whatever they want them to mean. Words like Fascism, or Nazi, or even nationalism have been uttered almost in some national trance to describe people who the technocratic think tank brainwashed masses do not agree with.
Everyone who thinks outside the box have been straight-jacketed as the media has done its best to gaslight people they do not like and put words out of context to condemn those who do not participate in a well-crafted agenda.
We are getting to the point where all thoughts become political and then once they become political talking points they become literally inexpressible.
With semantics and wordplay, we lack the words to say exactly what we mean. We are cautioned to not use words or phrases in our overtly politically correct culture that context and vernacular has reached poverty levels.
Our mouths are writing checks that we obviously can’t cash because people will judge you on your social credit. A social credit system that is invisible and yet we can feel it all around us.
So our solution is to say something else, something in the general neighborhood, usually a lot less nuanced. In order to fit in – we must dumb down our words and reduce ourselves to weaponized cheerleading which is the equivalence of bleating like sheep things like “No Trump, No KKK, No Fascist USA.”
It is quite similar to Orwell’s two minutes of hate featured in his book, 1984.
I do not know why we as a country have not grown weary of the hollow chants and slogans that are nothing more than a product of Russian and Chinese propaganda that has been used to divide us and change us so that we will welcome their ideologies that keep democracy on a leash and people in perpetual slavery.
I guess we can reminisce and think of the good old days when we really did have a repertoire of concepts and names that allowed us to say exactly what we meant, pretty much whatever you notice, or whatever occurs to you.
We have to be overly careful of the way we speak and the way we think – the controls are practically all sewn up –and we give away our voice and our choices willingly in a world of social credit and intellectual retardation.
We can all chalk it up to having our minds submerged in noise and social clutter. Hyper and augmented reality are the preferred drug of the young – the injection is always easy as the tool that delvers it is the screen that is at the end of your wrist.
For the most part, our repertoire of concepts and labels for individuals is important because we use it in our reasoning. Descriptions are useful in that we can draw conclusions from them. In the most basic case, you would use a rule: when certain conditions are met then certain expectations exist.
Like for example, if someone uses the N-word in their conversation you certainly are not going to discuss with them civil rights issues.
This is why we should not be too quick to sequester language and thought – it may not be comfortable but it exposes openly those with radical opinions.
The problem is that the new social credit that we have implemented is more insidious. It forces us to cut intellectual corners which forces our experiences into becoming homogenized and watered down for those who feel they are victims of micro-aggressions.
It is counterintuitive to make language and experience fit behind a small keyhole that we have to squint through to see if the conclusions we draw still stand.
Most of the time, you don’t have much of a say in what you think is socially excepted parlance, and so you end up with a descriptive vocabulary that doesn’t quite fit what you want to think about or tell other people about.
So you are stuck with saying things that are pretty much true, or almost entirely true, or true enough, or technically true and with everyone thinking that practically everything is fake news or misinformation they believe that anything you say is too good to be true.
It is actually too bad that it’s real.
Philosophers in the English-speaking world, for the most part, think of truth as an all-or-nothing matter. The truth is, nothing anymore is absolute and the truth is more or less opinion said with confidence.
The only certainty is uncertainty and this breeds toxic forms of cynicism.
As Orwell observed, we would see all of this type of parsing of words and it would all lead to an era of “Double-think.” Double-think isn’t just something we have to cope with in politics. It is something that is used in metaphysics and with quantum physics we see that you can be in two places at once and your mind can say one thing and your unconscious mind can hold a different view.
So it seems we have a choice between two kinds of doublethink.
It also kindles dome of the age-old paranoia that you should trust no one because we are all guilty of being dishonest, not only with others but with ourselves.
We are seeing people lie to themselves over politics that thwart morality for the sake of keeping up appearances.
They wish to believe that it is okay to murder people in the guise of war, separate families in the guise of immigration reform, and decry fascism when their active membership in ANTIFA means they have to resort to fascism.
In 2018, many people have lost their souls.
The alternative to this kind of immoral dogmatism is always to accompany what you do with various hedges. We see the media do this all the time – they can blatantly lie to you in order to push an agenda and then hedge their bets with some other lie to cover their previous mistakes.
For example, before Christmas the mainstream media made it a point to criticize president Trump for not visiting soldiers during the holidays.
When he secretly landed in Iraq and visited the troops – there was no apology or even praise for what the president has done. He was met with criticism and was accused of holding a political rally. There were also other media that reported that what Trump did may have exposed Troops to danger.
Not that they face danger every day – but the words were used as triggers for the resistance that are waiting for the weather to warm up so that they can become weaponized cheerleaders for some other media issue that is concocted for the uprising.
Even what I just said will be analyzed as being pro-Trump, when it most certainly is nothing more than anti-media but of course, that is another example of hedging.
I mean, doublethink has me hating Donald Trump and yet attacking the media for being disingenuous towards him.
Does that make me dishonest?
I don’t think the choice is clear anymore. Everything is ambiguous for your own emotional safety net. At least so I think—it is based on nothing clear – how confusing can things get?
Misdirection can be a bit like self-fulfilling prophecy. Emotional investment sometimes follows those inferential investments; as you get used to thinking and talking with other people using some set of crisply misguided and intentionally programmed concepts.
I guess if we are choosing to speak upside down I prefer to be honest with my double-think because in 2019 that is all you are going to have when confronted about what you truly believe.
I know you are told that you need to choose a side but why bother when people you are supposed to choose a side for as just as fickle about their opinions and policies?
When you are upfront with yourself and with other people about your misrepresentations, misinformation, and opinions that are said as truth, you may see that there are people like you who are just getting tired of pretending.
To know or not to know – that is the new question.