Totalitarianism Is Here

The most important thing you will read today is this. This is coming for everybody and soon. We are ignoring the most crucial development of our times, and we will pay the price for it.

32 thoughts on “Totalitarianism Is Here”

  1. Can’t say we weren’t warned. Poof! goes the first amendment, and no laws had to be changed at all!

    You just won’t be able to get any kind of job that requires professional licensing, if you’re not enthusiastically onboard with the progressive agenda in public, in private, online and offline, every second of every day.

    Brilliant.

    I’ve been watching it happen for some time, and it makes me… sad. My husband is going into a medical profession, and I fear that the sacrifice we’ve made for him to go to school will be worthless in a year or two. We will not be leaving our church so that he can keep his job. He hasn’t deleted his social media because he’s a much more optimistic person than I am. That will come back to haunt us, I’m sure.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. I should add that I already have an up-close, first-hand, front-row-seat to what this looks like in real life. My sister used to have an okay (not great, but paid well enough to get a mortgage and buy a very modest house) career in newsmedia. She got very publicly duped by a famous con artist, and now, if you plug her name into any search engine, the very first thing that comes up is the incident with the con artist (who remains extremely popular and made millions). That was fifteen years ago. She was fired, had to sell her house and move back to our hometown, and spent many years working overnight security gigs to pay for groceries. Our parents helped out with emergency expenses. When she applied for better jobs, they’d google her name, and the first thing that pops up is the incident with the con artist. It’s in Wikipedia. She’s untouchable in the professional world, and will never, ever be able to work in news media again. She loved that job. She was good at it.

      She has finally got on, for reasonable pay, as an office assistant at one of the companies she used to work security for– they appreciated how reliable and conscientious she is. She’s too old to do much else now.

      That is what Big Tech and the progressive agenda want for all of us: wrong friends? wrong church? Said something on FB five years ago that’s now taboo? Have an opinion that’s not on the Approved Opinions list? Congrats! You’re now a professional pariah! There goes your dental hygienist license! Now you can maybe wash dishes at the Taco Loco and get paid $20 cash and a free dinner at the end of your shift.

      My friends in Viet Nam have lived with this kind of professional discrimination all their lives. They are smart, resourceful, incredibly hardworking, and devotedly Catholic. And because of that last one, they were until very recently barred from every government job (including universities). When they took college entrance exams, their scores were docked to prevent them getting into programs such as science, mathematics, and engineering. When these same folks move to America, they are wildly successful. At home, they remain poor. Not starving, but on the thin edge where they can’t really afford medical care, or luxury goods like electric fans and washing machines. And this is forty years on, when things have liberalized considerably.

      Liked by 2 people

  2. Pretty sure that would be unconstitutional, be challenged in court, and result in some entity or other being sued for wrongfully denying someone a license.

    Like

      1. @cliff: I don’t think that Americans would accept that a judge making an unconstitutional decree makes the decree constitutional. It would lead to violence imo.

        @methylethyl: I’m not an expert in these things (and from another country besides) but from what I understand of how governments are set up, the way it usually works is that one law allows an entity to be set up and create whatever procedures it wants to, so long as the procedures do not violate the constitution.

        If the procedures do violate the constitution, then the question becomes “does law X that allowed the creation of the entity override the constitution that created the country that created the entity?”, the answer for which is obviously “no”.

        Also from what I understand from what you’ve said about your sister, it seems that if she could prove that someone denied her employment based solely on what they thought about her wikipedia entry etc, where whatever was stated in that article had nothing to do with what was needed to perform the job (ie was unrelated/arbitrary) then she would be able to sue successfully.

        By the way, my own situation is, in a way, similar to your sisters, which is one of the reasons that I know so much about politics – although I was not tricked but rather lied about.

        Like

        1. “I don’t think that Americans would accept that a judge making an unconstitutional decree makes the decree constitutional. It would lead to violence ”

          Like nightly riots in a bunch of cities….. (already blamed on ‘white supremacy)…..?

          I’ll just say I hope your optimism is justified.

          Like

          1. @cliff arroyo: (apologies for writing your name – I still don’t understand this software): To clarify, I think that the USA is in a state of pre civil war. The population has already separated into different groups, but those groups (and the individuals in them) still overlap and interact with each other peacefully, generally according to the old social contract. For wont of a better term, the groups have not become balkanised.

            Imo, the Democrats (or any other party) stacking the courts so that one group of people can rule (rather than govern) by decree (rather than by constitution) over the other groups would imo balkanise the thinking of the subjugated groups, and lead to the worst kind of violence.

            I also don’t think that anyone should feel optimistic about it, because there would be no coming back from it without one of the groups being practically destroyed.

            Like

            1. “I think that the USA is in a state of pre civil war”

              It seems to me that one side has all but won already. The events of the last four years tell us that this side controls everything that that needs controlling – the economy, the intelligentsia, the media/social media, the state bureaucracy including the leadership of the military and the intelligence agencies – and is poised in the near future to change the rules of the old constitutional order to institute a “one-party democracy” so that the plebs will be unable to mount any coherent, politically legitimate challenge to their control.

              Like

              1. At best, they’re poised to attempt to change the rules. They’re not poised to change them, and also, even if they did manage to change the rules, the question becomes how long they could hold things together.

                Personally, I think that any attempt to turn the USA into a one party system state is more likely to balkanise the USA, breaking it into 4 to 6 pieces, than to succeed. The reason for a breakup doesn’t even have to be ideological, since the fact of it is that many Americans – even the would-be one party systemers – expect high living standards that one party systems seldom provide. Wealthy Chinese people leave China for this reason.

                Like

              2. “many Americans – even the would-be one party systemers – expect high living standards that one party systems seldom provide. Wealthy Chinese people leave China for this reason.”

                You absolutely don’t know what you are talking about – at all.

                “ZURICH, (Reuters) – The number of rich Chinese has surpassed the count of wealthy Americans for the first time [2019] as both countries keep churning out millionaires, a study by Credit Suisse showed. The Swiss bank’s annual wealth survey released on Monday found 100 million Chinese ranked in the global top 10% as of the middle of this year versus 99 million in the United States.”

                Like

              3. GSW, I know exactly what I am talking about. More than half a billion Chinese people live on less than $150 a month. The commonly cited figure of 800 million Chinese people lifted out of poverty is largely an accounting trick, since those earning $1.89 per day or less are counted as being in poverty, while those earning $1.91 per day are counted as being lifted out of it.

                In reality, the gap between rich and poor is even bigger than that in the West – mostly because kleptocrats rule single party systems of authoritarian capitalism – while the size of the economic pie is not only smaller, but has to be shared between several times more people.

                As for the so-called Chinese middle class that people like to talk about – well, there are some ugly surprises there too. For a start, given that the CCP has a membership of about 100 million people, which largely corresponds with the size of the so-called “Chinese middle class”, what is found on closer investigation is that much of the Chinese middle class is actually comprised of the children of party members, or lower ranked party members, which means that the Chinese middle class is more like the kleptocrat class in disguise.

                Not that that saves them a lot of the time anyway, since it is reasonably common for Chinese people in the so-called middle class to have their money and/or assets extracted from them even while overseas via various different modes, with the most common being blackmail, as a way to shore up the failing state.

                So, in one party states like that in China, the ugly fact of it is that wealth is either reserved for those higher up in the hierarchy, or the wealth is temporary and can be reclaimed at practically any time.

                The people here in the West agitating for communism to somehow save them from deprivation are enormously delusional, because if they have been left behind economically or socially here in the relatively easy and generous and prosperous economic systems of the West, then they would very probably be trampled into the dirt by the far less forgiving systems in single party states.

                Like

              4. “many Americans – even the would-be one party systemers – expect high living standards that one party systems seldom provide. Wealthy Chinese people leave China for this reason.”

                “given that the CCP has a membership of about 100 million people, which largely corresponds with the size of the so-called ‘Chinese middle class’, what is found on closer investigation is that much of the Chinese middle class is actually comprised of the children of party members, or lower ranked party members, which means that the Chinese middle class is more like the kleptocrat class in disguise.”

                Your second point undercuts your first. One-party states, by definition, transfer wealth from the proles to the ruling class. American elites who propose constitutional reforms to turn the U.S.A. into a “one-party democracy” do this precisely in order to stabilize their social, economic and political power by creating strong institutional barriers to block future populist challenges.

                (BTW nice try recasting/minimizing China’s wealthy 100 million as just “middle class” to account for the fact China that overtook the United States in 2019 to become the country with most people in the top 10% of global wealth distribution,)

                Like

              5. Nothing undercuts anything in either paragraph. In China, the economic reality for about 90% of the population is horrible, while reality for another 9% isn’t brilliant either. About 1% has it good and that’s it.

                Looking at the figures, less than 1% of Chinese people are in the upper class earning $50 per day or more, and a little over 9% being in the “upper middle” class earning between $20 and $50 per day.

                The remaining 90% or so of the country, or something like 1.3 billion people, are making less than $20 per day, where something like 400 million of them making between $10 and $20 per day being called “lower middle class”, and about 600 million of them making less than $150 per month.

                By way of contrast and for the sake of comparison, the USA has a real middle class (not a fake so-called ‘lower middle class’ in hardship) which exceeds 50% of the population, and a working class that lives to a much higher standard than the so-called “lower middle class” of China making $10 to $20 per day that is really, at best, the Chinese working poor.

                Anyway, in the post that you disagreed with, I stated: “The people here in the West agitating for communism to somehow save them from deprivation are enormously delusional, because if they have been left behind economically or socially here in the relatively easy and generous and prosperous economic systems of the West, then they would very probably be trampled into the dirt by the far less forgiving systems in single party states.”

                Well. I can’t see anything wrong with that statement. In the West, the middle classes and above exceed 50% of the population. In China, the (actual) middle class and above is about 10%, with 90% being working poor or worse.

                Imo, any American who thinks that a one party system where 90% of the population is working poor or below by Western standards is better than the US quasi-two party system that at least creates a real middle class for a 5 times greater proportion should go back to school.

                Like

            2. “I think that the USA is in a state of pre civil war.”

              What are the two (or more) sides?

              It’s in a state of pre….. increased domestic unrest and chaos but US society is far too splintered and scattered and intermixed for anything like an organized civil war and no matter who wins the current unrest will continue and probably amplify until something major happens (like the implosion of one of the major parties or some state with a serious and credible secession movement).
              The alternative dystopian alternative is the tech giants Bezos and Zuckerberg winning and we have Eden from Stanisław Lem’s 1959 novel of the same name.
              This is an “information-controlled civilization that is almost self-regulating, with a special kind of system of government—one that officially does not exist and is thus impossible to destroy. The society is controlled through a fictitious advanced branch of information science … based on the control and stratification of information flows within the society. It is used for molding groups within a society and ultimately a society as a whole to behave as designed by secret hidden rulers. One example described in the novel is (a) kind of a “concentration camp” without any guards, designed so that the prisoners stay inside apparently of their own “free” will”

              from: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eden_(Lem_novel)

              Like

              1. I can’t name the sides at the moment because the groups have not coalesced enough, nor formed clearly delineated edges. In the Balkans, what mattered was religion and ethnicity more than ideology, so I’d expect something like that.

                Regarding any particular event that would precipitate everything, I don’t know, and am not an expert in that. From where I am sitting, it looks like the USA will tear at itself for a while before anything becomes clear enough for a prediction.

                As for Zuckerburg/Bezos or any of their kind setting up some kind of dictatorial surveillance state, I don’t see that happening at all. The Chinese leadership has been trying to do that for years and has failed miserably. Organisation around religion and money seems much more likely/viable – a bit like the Russian Federation in the 2000’s or so.

                Like

        2. 1) None of it can be proven. And I don’t believe there are any explicit legal protections for “not hired because of something unrelated that turned up on the internet”.
          2) It would require a good lawyer. She is totally thrilled to be working for $15/hr and put the whole sordid affair behind her. I certainly don’t know any lawyers who’d work for what we can afford, and at this point… it was rather traumatic and nobody wants to re-hash it.

          And therein lies the problem. Things like this Realtor Assoc. business are just making official what’s already rolling out on a completely un-provable, informal basis. Potential employers absolutely do look at your social media presence, and some have admitted that if you don’t have a social media presence, or if you have a FB page but it’s private, they’ll give your resume a pass. They will not say so in public, or in any legally-actionable venue, but they absolutely do look you up online and judge you by what they find –or don’t find– there.

          My sister, arguably, is a liability in newsmedia, because of The Incident. She was duped, and her company’s reputation took a hit because of it. It’d be reasonable not to hire her in the same executive-type capacity in which she had been working previously. But she had worked her way up through the ranks to that position, and was very good at a number of other, lesser jobs in media. She couldn’t get those jobs, either, despite years of experience, excellent references, ex-coworkers going to bat for her, a willingness to take a pay cut for it, and zero chance of a repeat of The Incident. She also couldn’t get any traction in other industries, and at this point doesn’t even try, because it’s been fifteen years, and the technology has changed, so she’s no longer up to date on the type of skills those employers are looking for. She’s radioactive. Mistakes were made. We deal with it. The internet doesn’t let anyone forget.

          What I’d like to point out is that her experience is becoming much more common, and is happening to people with far less provocation, now.

          We are entering a phase where people won’t be able to get jobs in a whole swath of professions because somewhere, online, they’re listed as a member of the “Women for Trump” brigade, or a volunteer coordinator for the Knights of Columbus charity food drive, or winner of the 1998 Fire Department Turkey Shoot (OMG a gun enthusiast!) or perhaps they were the spokesperson for the “Parents against Propaganda at Podunk Elementary” protest. Progressives are creating a world where having such information out there in the world is grounds for rejection from professional associations, because “it’s not the image we want to project” or “this makes people feel unwelcome” or “your coworkers don’t feel safe around you” or just “we don’t feel you’re a good fit for our corporate culture”. And as far as I know, there’s not yet any legal recourse for that. Probably over the next few years, we’ll be cranking it through the courts, but it hasn’t been done yet AFAIK.

          Brendan Eich got fired for a political donation. He’s rich and well-connected. I don’t see much recourse for ordinary people like us.

          Like

          1. @Methylethyl: (hope this post pops up in the right spot): Regarding point 1: I understand that it wouldn’t be able to be proven, and think that a decision to not hire someone based on a perception of what they may have done in the past is simply discrimination. Regarding point 2: as someone who has gone through something similar, it sounds like you all have made the right decision. Sometimes it just isn’t worth it.

            As for what the Realtor Ass. are doing, I don’t think that they can get away with formalising their abuse.

            Constitutionality aside, what they’re doing is an abuse of process at best, malfeasance at worst. Both of those are illegal, but can only be proven if intent can be shown, which, of course, is almost always the problem for whoever has been wronged.

            But the minute the intent is written down, it is a legal proof, and the whole thing comes undone.

            Anyhow, I understood your point. It’s a good point, but I don’t think that it can go the way you say because the problem that you’re talking about is when a very large number of people target and cancel one person who has nowhere else to go and nowhere else to turn to.

            What the Realtor Ass. is attempting though is totally different, because it is a small number of people trying to target and cancel everybody who doesn’t go along with whatever they say, each of them separately, yet all at the same time. It’s inverted.

            Anyway, according to my understanding, that kind of authoritarianism could only work if the Realtor Ass. had an army, which it doesn’t. If the government in charge tries to uphold what the Realtor Ass wants using the bureaucracy/police/army etc, then the government has become tyrannical, which then forces the population to choose between being ruled or governed.

            I just don’t see the US government doing that for the sake of who gets to sell real estate.

            Like

            1. I hope you’re right! But I’m enough of a pessimist to think that, while this one will be legally challenged… corporate employers are already making it into unspoken HR policy.

              My sister’s case is not directly analogous, but IMO is a useful illustration of what it’s like to be professionally blacklisted. People have a false sense of security about their jobs, their employ-ability, and the usefulness of their expertise.

              Like

              1. I think that it’s already unspoken HR policy, which is why so many people have fake accounts, or have deleted everything about themselves online, and also why internet scrubbing has surged as a business in the past 5 years or so. So you’re right on both counts imo.

                Still, it’s probably good for your sister, since in my experience, the worst thing is when you’re the only one that it’s happening to. If she was a certain kind of person, she might even make money off it by starting a blog or forum for others, using a fake name or something.

                Anyway I’m sorry to hear that it happened to her. One day, maybe, we can all swap stories 🙂

                Liked by 1 person

              2. Absolutely, HR looks up your social media. And drives by your house if the job is high-paying enough to see if your sense of decor matches their view of what’s good. Is your lawn well-mown? Then maybe you don’t work hard enough if you have time to think about lawns. Slacker! Is it overgrown? Then you have no attention to detail and are a slob. I’m not inventing this. I’m quoting an absolutely real person who is big cheese in HR.

                So yes, they comb through your social media. You need to have it and it must be well-developed but in a very specific way. There’s a whole range of professions where you’ll never get hired without a LinkedIn profile that’s very well-developed.

                Liked by 1 person

              3. @George

                I admit I find a certain grim hope in the growing human scrap-heaps cancel culture is creating. There’s even a self-help book: “So You’ve Been Publicly Shamed”. I hate that it’s happening to so many, but at the same time… People are becoming more aware of the problem, and somewhat more sympathetic. I think the day is coming when attempts to drum up an internet lynch mob will fall flat. It’ll seem distasteful, once most people have a friend or relative it’s happened to. There will still be trolls. And we will ignore them.

                I hope.

                Like

    1. On what grounds? My sister has been effectively barred from white-collar employment for more than a decade because of what comes up for her name in an internet search. There’s nothing whatever illegal about it. Progressives will simply be expanding that circle until it encompasses all of us who don’t actively embrace their beliefs. Big Tech will make it possible.

      Like

  3. “This is coming for everybody and soon”

    Extremely Soviet…. create a law that all violate, create a few public examples to encourage the rest and then ‘relax’ and selectively enforce when needed.
    Since, essentially, no human alive has, or could, live up to the strictest reading of this code everyone is already a criminal at large – so they need to keep their heads down in other areas lest the selective enforcement kick in…

    Like

  4. By all means, let us not maintain that separation of one’s professional life from one’s personal/private life.
    Their motto should read: “You can work for a fantastic company like ours so long as you’re willing to no longer have a life of your own”.
    Newfound “biological AIs” lavishly rewarded.

    Like

  5. I appreciate the post and especially the comments. Are they tracking our comments on the internet as well? These are public. I am so careful on social media but this platform now has me wondering. I don’t use an alias. I will always be unapologetically true to my faith in God and that is what I always try to espouse online. I recognize I could be fired or rejected for a job for that and therefore accept the consequences of my actions. I am sad to read @methylethyl’s story about her sister and the other stories shared.
    I think the “court of popular opinion”, i.e. the totalitarianism implied in in the Realtors Assn. post, is the most dangerous. Everything I have read about Russian collectivization is happening on American soil now. The agenda to turn us against each other–to discourage civil debate–to encourage hatred and mistrust–isn’t this the heart of the “woke mob”?

    Like

    1. According to my understanding, the core ideology of the so-called “woke” mob is Marxism, while the core principle of Marxism is that everything that is not “communism” should be destabilised until something is left called “communism” (which is madness, by the way), which in turn means that the answer to your question is (imo) yes.

      Like

  6. “I can’t name the sides at the moment because the groups have not coalesced enough”

    And people smarter than me (like Peter Turchin) don’t think they will, there’s just not enough organization in the US for clearly defined sides. The Civil War happened at a time of nation building which requires lots of coordination and so it was easier to break down geographically (since different states had different interests from the beginning of the country).
    From my view as a once insider now outsider the closest to actually sides looks like a semi-racial breakdown (given the general demonization of ‘white supremacy’ and ‘racism’) with working (and lower) class whites on one side and everybody else on the other but the latter side is too fractious (and too depending on cooperation of people who don’t like each other and who have diametrically opposed goals).
    So my guess is more unrest, no matter who wins the election until it eventually dissipates or there’s some Big Event…

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Since it is too difficult to name which groups will begin the fight or continue it, maybe something that would provide a bit of clarity is to think of which groups or regions are more likely to be stable enough form the nucleus of new power & decision making centres later in any conflict.

      Based on that idea, it seems logical that the more religious, pragmatic, and less densely populated states in the centre and South of the USA would become the backbone of some important peaceful groupings, with things following on from there.

      Like

    2. “there’s just not enough organization in the US for clearly defined sides”

      Only one “side” is “organized” – in the sense that their elites hold a near monopoly of institutional power in the economy, within the intelligentsia and mass communications sectors, and the bureaucracy including the military and intelligence services.

      In contrast, those elite actors who at present at least rhetorically oppose the self-described “progressives” have been pushed to the margins of societal/political power and are extremely vulnerable to being co-opted or isolated and eventually pushed off the stage.

      Modern civil wars only occur where there is an irreconcilable split in elite interests/opinion, societal institutions have failed to mediate their differences, and the sides can claim meaningful and somewhat balanced access to significant sources of institutional power.

      Like

  7. “HR looks up your social media. And drives by your house”

    This is why I’ve said that no sane person should show ‘loyalty’ to their employers who would enslave them if they thought they could get away with it. Do your job as well as you can, but tell them to fuck themselves to hell and back if they want to become the Stasi and spy on your down time.

    Liked by 2 people

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.