A while ago i posted “It’s the juwes…”.
Fellow comrade “SOL” commented:
““We should meet”. We should definetely meet sometime, this must be actualized reality between Illuminists so we can start doing something now, rather than just writing updates on Facebook or whatever or Tweet Illuminati signs. And im not referring to these weird, psycho-stalkers and moronic, narcissistic and self-proclaimed Illuminatus types (who in reality have a very sore ass still from Mike Hockney’s God Series). The type who likes to play two horses at once and follow the stream, waiting for the winner to emerge before supporting. I telling you my friend, if you go to Facebook and traverse into the Illuminism community there, you will mostly find there is a shitload of people claiming to be Illuminists, but are almost all total faker hypocrites in reality. Really last-man’ish, and some shit-faced Masons too that just talk shit about how great they are, and how they are the real Illuminati and blablabla. It is truly a fucking amazing mystery of un-explainable kind how ontological mathematics has not blown the scene yet to fucking dust. But these fuckfaces are so slow to understand the real thing, or maybe just will not admit that Masonry or Discordianism or whatever shithole they belong to is not a complete fraud and that Illuminism has nailed all of that shit to the cross, so to speak. Narcissistic psychopaths indeed, of which being the Illuminati is more important to them, than actually setting free Mother Gaia and its children and securing the future from the Old rinkled, bastard fuckers of the OWO. Then even also destroying, discrediting and intentionally totally ignoring the genius work of the actual Illuminati? Bro these fuckers are truly some weird beings, who like to be stuck with lies and hypocrisy, which is just pure disgusting rat human nature. Most never like the real truth, only censored and half-truths. So Ontological Mathematics and Illuminati-Meritocracy is totally ignored by almost all of the deluded pricks. This really is some shitty situation, where some dickhead fuckers lie must be protected so badly, that the truth must be supressed, and ignored. This is basically what all Discordant, Masonic bitches have done to online Illuminism. They truly to all in their power to supress Hockney’s work, and then come up with some RAW shit, or some Aleister Crowley or Albert Pike or whatever. Like Hockney pwned them all fuckers, and you know it, but they will still not give due credit where it belongs. They remind me of Hollywood stars, with the narcissistic psychopathism and self-worship hidden behind the altruist cover and philanthropist title. Fuck them ALL!
This revolution in the social media section has died, except for G300 which is now (sorry to say) but totaly shooting themselves in the foot. In my subjective estimation with relation to tangible revolution (not just R=0 social media revolution) they are also dead now. No hope in this social media. But I do not know if G300 is planning real life actions.
We need to fucking meet, learn eachother, talk and develop new ideals for the revolution, discuss, create bonds, progress dialectically and create something in the real world, a group of enlightened autonomous and heroic Meritocrats, who are all for the NWO. Real Illuminists only, and no more of this Masonic Zionist and Discordian pacifist bullshit. No more of this exchanging messages online, riddled words and trolling shit, no more NOT understanding and organizing eachother under the banner of the greater good. Fuck social media, we need to organize in real life and work from there. Only that way can we create the real connections and organized network of people, plus it is no more trolling. People do not have balls in real life for trolling the Illuminati, becus they are directly and verbally owned. Not behind a screen where they can set up thousand profiles and shit. Also solving issues and disagremeent in real life is much easier. But it must ofc not be for those that are not welcome, and seciruty measures must be taken for that.
I truly hope at some time that we can meet, an group of Illuminists together in real life and no, not to kill the Illuminati – I am no idiot after all!”
To answer you SOL, on this subject, here are 2 communications from true Illuminists, One is a close friend of mine, the other his “mate” so to say:
” “Life’s but a walking shadow, a poor player,
> That struts and frets his hour upon the stage,
> And then is heard no more; it is a tale
> Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
> Signifying nothing.”
> Shakespeare (/Macbeth/)
> Social networking sites, ostensibly all about friendship and
> communication, are merely “opportunities” for advertisers to target
> otherwise hard-to-reach demographics. The founders of these sites are
> switched-on business people, playing the tried and tested capitalist
> game of exploiting the dumb masses. Have you been sucked in by the hype?
> The /Facebook/ devotees have the dubious distinction of being the first
> hyperreal generation, living in a fantasy world of signs of reality
> rather than reality itself.
> So, have you signed up to /Facebook, MySpace/, /Bebo/ or /Friendster/
> yet? What is it about these social networking sites that people find so
> compelling? As with most contemporary phenomena, the answer lies in the
> extraordinary philosophy of the late Jean Baudrillard. His great insight
> was that humanity has been steadily replacing reality with /signs/ of
> reality, leading to the creation of what he described as /hyperreality/,
> the “more real than real”.
> Advertising best illustrates the process. Take the /Virgin /
> /Media/ advertising campaign featuring Uma Thurman. Thurman’s image is
> one of supreme coolness (whether she’s cool in reality is another
> matter). So, the idea is that by linking a sign of coolness (Thurman)
> with /Virgin Media/ then /Virgin Media/ becomes cool too and people will
> feel compelled to purchase its services. This campaign is conducted
> entirely at the sign level. Thurman probably has little connection with
> her screen image, certainly doesn’t use /Virgin Media/ services,
> probably couldn’t care less about the company, and surely a company
> can’t become cool just because a “cool” person is paid a fortune to say
> that it is. You don’t hear /Virgin Media/ talking about the reality of
> its business operations: poor customer service, technical unreliability,
> expensive products, limited programming output (of inferior quality), no
> discernible advantages over comparable services offered by rivals.
> /Virgin Media/ wants us to consider its hyperreality and definitely not
> its reality. We’re supposed to swallow its self-chosen propaganda signs
> as accurately describing the truth of the company rather than its real,
> measurable performance.
> Advertising relies on our willingness to privilege signs of reality over
> reality itself. This process has accelerated in the last few years,
> driven by the unholy alliance of advertising, internet, TV, 24/7 news,
> tabloid newspapers, Hollywood and celebrity culture. All around us is a
> sea of signs, and these signs are disconnected from what they’re
> supposed to signify. (If you’ve ever had the misfortune to be a /Virgin
> Media/ subscriber, you know for sure that it’s not and never will be cool.)
> This brings us back to social networking. The essence of these websites
> is that your friendships must be visible to everyone else, indeed to the
> whole world. It’s not the friendships themselves that are important
> (i.e. the reality of friendship), but the fact that everyone can see who
> all of your friends are, how “cool” they are, what they do, how much
> they like you and how many you have (i.e. the hyperreal signs of
> *The /Facebook/ generation are the first hyperreal generation and have
> lost all contact with reality. A couple of decades ago, a friendship
> would have been considered an essentially private matter, something to
> be treasured, and certainly not paraded in public as if it were a cheap
> status symbol. A friend was someone you could confide in, a person to
> whom you could reveal your true, hidden self. Trust, discretion, and
> even a certain exclusivity were all required. These qualities are
> destroyed when they’re flaunted on the internet. Everything that defines
> friendship has been lost, replaced by the desperate plea, “Look, I have
> friends – no, /really/ – and these are who they are and this is how many
> I have.” Only a member of the hyperreal generation could find any
> pleasure in being stuck on a hundred /Facebook/ profiles, their photo
> forlornly staring out from web pages under headings of the ilk, “Mike
> Cool Guy has 168 friends.”*
> Nietzsche, one of Baudrillard’s primary influences, said, “We have
> measured the value of the world according to categories /that refer to a
> purely fictitious world/.” This could easily be applied to the
> /Facebook/ generation. Their measure of value is determined by the rules
> and conventions of social networking: a simulated reality, a fiction, a
> world of signs signifying nothing.
> No one pays to subscribe to these social networking sites, so how are
> they funded? The answer is advertising. Social networking is nothing but
> an opportunity for advertisers to reach a particular, lucrative
> demographic. The users of these sites exist to feed the advertising
> machine. They see themselves as cool, trendy, fascinating individuals.
> In fact, they are mindlessly conformist marionettes being yanked around
> by the capitalist puppet masters. The founders of these social
> networking sites have become multi-millionaires, and even billionaires.
> If you’ve ever heard them speak, you’ll know they’re pitch-perfect in
> the language of big business.
> *The people who flock to social networking sites are often the same
> people who protest about the war in Iraq, Global Warming, Animal Rights,
> G8 abuses, all the “right on” causes.
> Yet there they are feeding the voracious advertising industry, helping
> to create the finest billionaire capitalists. In other words, they’re
> doing everything required of them to sustain the capitalist
> military/industrial complex that they oppose so vehemently. This is the
> beauty of hyperreality. Capitalism, by judicious use of signs, can
> manipulate its opponents into doing its precise bidding, while managing
> to convince them they’re doing the opposite.*
> The truth is staring us in the face. Social networking is for losers.
> None of the users of these sites has any really friends. They are naïve
> and clueless individuals lacking any comprehension that they’re being
> cynically exploited by advertisers, and that their real, and indeed
> /only/, function is to create another handful of super-rich individuals.
> Sad, lonely, and desperate – that’s the /Facebook/ generation. They’re
> trapped in hyperreality, much as the unknowing masses were trapped
> inside /The Matrix/. But no Neo, no Saviour, will be coming along to
> free them.
> If you want to be a real person living in the real world, the first
> thing you must do is get off the grid. Take the first brave step and
> delete your /Facebook/ profile. After all, you surely wouldn’t want the
> words carved on your headstone to be: “I was registered with /Facebook/.
> I had 101 online friends (and I even knew a few of them). My current
> mood is: /Sad/.”
> Social networkers are, to use Shakespeare’s immortal words, walking
> shadows, poor players, strutting and fretting, raging furiously. They
> are idiots engaged in a game of signs that signifies nothing.
> (Final note to all the cool dudes hanging out on /MySpace/ – Rupert
> Murdoch, the unacceptable face of capitalism, is its owner. Ever feel
> like you’ve been swindled? Isn’t it time you woke up?)
> From the book: Mad as Hell: Why Everything is Getting Crazier (The
> Political Series Book1)
“The article is right in my opinion (but many exaggerations as usual – not all
“users” are the same kind for ex. this is referring to some special
types of users, which may represent the majority though). It also
reflects some of my own thoughts that I had long time ago when there was
no facebook but only myspace – fuck Mr. Murdoch, but it was a paradise
of individuality and creativity, compared to what we have now… it’s
become much worse.
The article covers only the details of some visible(!) interactions and
advertising/replacing reality with signs. I think the latter aspect is
of much more importance because first it is not only about visual things
and second it can easily be controlled/manipulated for society as a
whole, and we have a hard time to escape it by just quitting social
media. It’s not just about relationships, news and advertising. It’s
about total control. I will explain my view a bit more detailed (sry for
wall of text)….
I think we agree the web 2.0 is a bad thing beyond the surface. When I
talk to other people about it, they laugh at it (saying either it is not
important for their daily lifes, or you cannot change it anyway – which
maybe true, see below…) or (the uninformed) say I’m paranoid. Most of
the time it’s not the case that they are completely unaware of what’s
happening, they seem just not to care. “What else should I do?” –
typical answer. Leave it! Today I just wanted to check a practice and
interview date for -censored- – and boom, two hours gone. Not only that, I
don’t need to tell you how much these incorporations spy on all of us
and how deliberately people give away so much personal info etc (the
article scratches only the surface of this huge topic). Btw I must
include myself here and for the follwoing criticism, I’m not perfect in
any sense. Anyway, then the secret or semi-secret services (both, those
of the state and the so-called free market) can easiliy extract any
information they want. If the state did it openly, people would rage. If
you offer them some toys, all are happy and deliver. Same old story…
Now with whatssapp etc.
Approximately 1 in 100 persons I meet or talk with take the step like
you and leave, accepting the consequences (and this is much, cause my
life/world is pretty much biased a “non-conformistic” way). How many
people you know have no smartphone?
As a band or artist, it’s also a big dilemma because it’s so easy to
aquire new fans (or at least, people interested in your stuff – what
else would you want as a band??) and get live gigs and so on via social
media. Seems like nobody (ok, maybe some Black Metal fanatics) wants to
go back to the 80s or early 90s where people were sending tapes and real
hand-written letters. Some sessions ago, I handed over a CD to one of my
bandmates, and the answer was literally “I can’t use this at home”.
Everything now is dropbox, youtube, soundcloud, bandcamp, spotify etc. I
still have some of that old stuff collected, because as I began to
listen to metal, the whole tapetrading and writing stuff was still
actual (also self-made fanzines which almost all died except those
online). There is a strong old-school movement in the extreme metal
underground atm, where bands release tapes again and stuff. But with
“strong” I mean if you’re on top, you’ll sell like 300 copies. I’ve
recently talked to a label guy who makes tapes about that. So it’s a
So do we want all that gone? Is there a real chance to get rid of all
that without going back to middle ages, communication-wise?
A “traditional” answer would be yes, forums. Everyone can set up a
server and run some forum software to talk abour your pets, cooking
recipes, music or the next world revolution, whatever you are interested
in. All that without giving away too much information but a nickname and
email address. The problem is how to get people to use it nowadays if
you’re not already a big player.
Even if people start populating your realm, I think the best example is
the armageddon guys and the M movement soon encountered problems
specially related to online forums (maybe you had similar problems while
running the Mathmonism site?): The trolls… So, no perfect solution here.
I have some better technical insight now since I began studying not only
philosophy, but also IT. And the more I see there I start thinking
there’s no hope.
“Capitalism, by judicious use of signs, can manipulate its opponents
into doing its precise bidding, while managing to convince them they’re
doing the opposite.” This is especially sad but true.
Your internet provider will know where you are, what you do, they will
hand it on to other companies (usually with names not so well-known to
the public), those share it with facebook, google etc – there seems to
be no way out of their web. The Darknet? maybe, but get people to use it…
Did you know that if the density of WLAN capable devices reaches a
certain point, there would be no need for providers at all? A world
where everything is connected with everything, but without any companies
offering “services” except the hardware? This could be easily possible,
but I doubt we will live long enough to see it happen. Politics will do
anything they can against it pretending various reasons, “security” etc.
In fact helping the companies ofc.
The upcoming web 3.0 will be much worse in any aspect. Once google has
fulfilled their plan and everything that is worth more than a dollar
gets it’s own IP adress – including clothes, cars, furniture, literally
everything you could buy that’s not meant for instant consumption (they
will continue with that – food, medicals for ex. – if the technology
gets small and cheap enough). RFID will be everywhere, and most
technical devices already have it. You won’t get out of that unless
you’re totally quit any interaction with society – which means, you have
to build your own. Good luck!
You will not be able to leave this just by not actively using facebook,
twitter, or any social media. In the worst case, it will be a world of
total control where you’ll have no choice. For most of us, the so-called
“hidden self” which the article you sent me speaks about maybe gone forever!
So, the internet could look a lot different, but nowadays also
technically much is dependent on companies like google (and also
twitter, they play a role with their “bootstrap” CSS design platform
which makes more and more sites look the same). They have kind of taken
over the former W3C exclusive task to define standards – like AJAX or
HTML5 for example. Ofc from a programmer’s point of view they make stuff
easy and simple. And that is maybe the whole question: Do we want stuff
to be easy and simple? Yes, humans usually want that, because nobody has
time to waste. Ok then we will probably take the facebook, Google,
I didn’t even talk about shopping (amazon) or search engines (in fact
so-called “alternatives” DuckDuckGo or others rely on google technology,
they are just tolerated). I guess you can figure out yourself what I
would say…. Funny thing to note: Even the article you sent refers to
an amazon link. So they’re not off the grid in any true sense.
So, SOL, as you see, we are not alone with our thoughts – we never were.
The secret movement.
Copyright A.W.E. 😉