CLICK THE LINK BELOW UB MANIFES
... ll even be more spiritual." Well, I'm not going to recommend all of these things
-- but I read the other day, that the alleged UNIBOMBER, Ted Kasensky - had no ...
RE: "MIEN KAMPF"
I know its probably boring or Irritating to a young German to see references to A.H.
as much as I use it it is a big part if the concept of being bad or evil so as In American
it is a sort of shorthand but as I think I say the U.B. is Inclusive of that example ,I especially
"like" the text because it Pertains to the mythic Issues of Class And Mass Media as
" Reason For Being " purposefully Cruel....
And coming to a bad end.tragically taking many others with them .
Yes this is soo dumb the Swiss & the other Axis countries should pay every dime to all of their Murdered
victims families.Have you imagined the stories that Revisionest Germans tell of not knowing that cremations
were taking place at the camps near the cities much closer than the W.T.C. Were true .the smell of burnt
flesh is in my books the ash is every where and that event took one day but in Germany that went on for years
and years
*******************************************************************************************
Subject: FW: [www.washtimes.com] Good advice: Must read Date:
Fri, 21 Sep 2001 12:49:40 -0700 From: "diane"
This is outstanding. I was thinking along the same lines as the pilot,
hoping for some useful instructions for passengers aboard commercial
flights in the future (although I'm sure some will disagree with this pilot's tack):
-----------------------------------------------------------
ABOARD FLIGHT 564
Peter Hannaford
-----------------------------------------------------------
As it was at most U.S. airports, last Saturday was the first
near-normal day at Denver International since the terrorist
attacks. On United's Flight 564 the door had just been
locked and the plane was about to pull out of the gate when
the captain came on the public address system.
"I want to thank you brave folks for coming out today. We
don't have any new instructions from the federal government,
so from now on we're on our own."
The passengers listened in total silence.
He explained that airport security measures had pretty much
solved the problem of firearms being carried aboard, but not
weapons of the type the terrorists apparently used, plastic
knives or those fashioned from wood or ceramics.
"Sometimes a potential hijacker will announce that he has a
bomb. There are no bombs on this aircraft and if someone
were to get up and make that claim, don't believe him.
"If someone were to stand up,brandish something such as a
plastic knife and say 'This is a hijacking' or words to that
effect here is what you should do: Every one of you should
stand up and immediately throw things at that person —
pillows, books, magazines, eyeglasses, shoes —anything that
will throw him off balance and distract his attention. If he
has a confederate or two, do the same with them. Most
important: get a blanket over him, then wrestle him to floor
and keep him there. We'll land the plane at the nearest
airport and the authorities will take it from there."
"Remember, there will be one of him and maybe a few
confederates, but there are 200 of you. You can overwhelm
them.
"The Declaration of Independence says 'We, the people' and
that's just what it is when we're up in the air: we, the
people, vs. would-be terrorists. I don't think we are going
to have any such problem today or tomorrow or for a while,
but some time down the road, it is going to happen again and
I want you to know what to do.
"Now, since we're a family for the new few hours, I'll ask
you to turn to the person next to you, introduce yourself,
tell them a little about yourself and ask them to do the
same."
The end of this remarkable speech brought sustained clapping
from the passengers. He had put the matter in perspective.
If only the passengers on those ill-fated flights last
Tuesday had been given the same talk, I thought, they might
be alive today. One group on United Flight 93, which crashed
in a Pennsylvania field, apparently rushed the hijackers in
an attempt to wrest control from them. While they perished,
they succeeded in preventing the terrorist from attacking
his intended goal, possibly the White House or the Capitol.
Procedures for dealing with hijackers were conceived in a
time when the hijackers were usually seeking the release of
jailed comrades or a large amount of money. Mass murder was
not their goal. That short talk last Saturday by the pilot
of Flight 564 should set a new standard of realism.
Every passenger should learn the simple — but potentially
life-saving — procedure he outlined. He showed his
passengers that a hijacking does not have to result in
hopelessness and terror, but victory over the perpetrators.
The Airline Pilots Association, the pilots' union, last week
dropped its opposition to stronger cockpit doors and is now
calling for retrofits. (It's opposition was based on pilot
concerns about getting out easily in emergency situations.)
The scandal of easily penetrated airport security will
result in congressional calls for a federal takeover of the
security system.
Previous efforts to reform security procedures and raise
standards have been talked to death. This time, however, no
lobbying efforts must be allowed to prevent airport security
from getting the reforms that are needed: federal operation,
rigorous training, decent pay and no foreign nationals
eligible for employment.
-----------------------------------------------------------
This article was mailed from The Washington Times
For more great articles, visit us at
Copyright (c) 2001 News World Communications, Inc. All rights reserved.
There's your karma, ripe as peaches.
Jack Kerouac
DESOLATION ANGELS
*******************************************************************************************
All are invited to
An Easing of the Passage of the Dead
A prayer vigil conducted by Kunzang Detchen Lingpa and
the nuns and monks of Zangdokpalri
At the Bandshell on 71st Street in Central Park, NYC
3: 00pm Sunday, 23rd of September, 2001
A MESSAGE FROM KUNZANG DETCHEN LINGPA:
GOOD MIND
Many great and terrible things have befallen America. Her enemies are arranged
against her and her might is being challenged.
There are all sorts of individuals in this world. Each of them have their own particular
mind set and pattern of behavior. There are those who wallow in negativity. You can
see many powerful people in the world today who like to create harm. As well, there
are those who want to avoid all sorts of harmful and negative actions and who
really enjoy benefiting others. When you overcome the idea that you are the center
of reality, you begin to think of the welfare of all.
We witness the most noble examples of such behavior in so many rescue workers
and citizens who helped others to safety while risking their own lives at the World
Trade Center.
We need to understand that the human mind is so constituted that it projects its own
delusion or negativity, from inside out. It then demonizes the object onto which it has
stuck its projection. Proceeding to eliminate the delusion by eliminating the person
or group to which it has pasted the projection is the root cause of suffering and
contention. Duality, the mind of dualism, the mind that remains in hope and fear and
its projections is subject to the consequences of duality.
In this world there are many kinds of people and all those different kinds have many
different religious and spiritual traditions. There are Buddhists, Christians, Hindus,
Jews and Muslims. There are exoteric traditions, and there are esoteric traditions.
It is necessary for them all to cooperate because they all have a common tenet
that: You shouldn't harm others and in fact, you should help others.
Given that the founders of all religious and spiritual traditions have always urged
love, compassion, forgiveness and peace, we see the so-called followers of some
religions not only criticizing one another but actually harming others in the name of
religion.
All of us are interrelated in a vast complex network of relationships and we should
feel the sufferings of others as if it were our own. We should realize that we are
intimately related to one another like mother and child. Sohow can we turn this around?
So, really let the necessity of overcoming egocentricity set in so that you put the welfare
and benefit of others above your own personal self interest. To state the essence of
the matter simply, it is overcoming the suffering of self and others by acting in two ways.
Firstly, do no harm and secondly, help, wherever you can.
For more information please visit
FUNWITHPARANOIA | Transmogrification | Funwithparanoia3 | eyeofthebeholder | Anarchy Joe | FunWithAnarchy | PreWW3 | POSTWW2 | Conflict of Honor | Brusselsproutings | GNP at work | OldPlanet | BLOWBACK | AntI Nuke Links | GRAILCHASERZ | fine print | fine print 2 | UB MANIFES | the new America | TrueColorz
|
NOTE: A friend of mine found the following on the net and sent it to me by E-MAIL.
I post it here for those who have not had a chance to see the Washington Post. I DO NOT
agree with the tactics and terror of the Unabomber, and I post this only to make it available.
This text is not for fun or morbid curiosity it represents the alleged ravings of a convicted
murderer and are not in my opinion an easy read.
My wish is that one can see the flaws in hatred more clearly after reading this and as
in the reading of the writing found in "MIEN KAMPF", Glimpse the madness and fear..
In our selves ..
[This man Ted Kasensky feared progress not differentiating the
abuse of advantage and wishing to retreat to a mythical time past.
Although I agree that The Quest for the ultimate worker is the return
to a state of servitude to make the robot replacing the "bottom strata"
of society is a form of class war.
So instead of that what if we replace middle men and women,
politicians, idea men, pimp's, dealers, bosses, lawyers, and
with Robots.
As far as it goes Arthur C. Clark and others see as expendable the
Bulk of what most people think of as the "middle class" and advises
"WE "eliminate the Blue collier worker with genetically modified Apes
to "Do The Skud work" IE: menial manual labor ...
That would erase the bulk of the population and "relieve the
Environment but I bet the balance of society Should live in fear
they will suffer the same Fate. Social Ecology is just another
name for Eugenics Culling Death on earth units etc....
So Robots replacing "Cheep Labor" means people loosing there LIVELIHOOD and die out! Slavery & Autonomy Bred-out Freedom
of choice Self determination eliminated no Union Labor with
human conditions required to protect the week human workers .
Bosses wishing for robot's. Sex, Safe Sex a Sex Free world
eliminate the Random nature of nature find stagnation kill of
organic life leaving only its shadow, it's pattern mimic humanity
and clamed superiority over it because it was week or stupid ...
Sounds like Multinational Corporate National Socialism to me.
ED]
"In vain we build the world, unless the builder grows" The Outer Limits
|
FBI sketch of the UnabomberThe following is full text of the Unabomber's Manifesto:
INTRODUCTION
1. The Industrial Revolution and its consequences have been a disaster for the human race.
They have greatly increased the life-expectancy of those of us who live in "advanced" countries, but they
have destabilized society, have made life unfulfilling, have subjected human beings to indignities, have
led to widespread psychological suffering (in the Third World to physical suffering as well) and have
inflicted severe damage on the natural world. The continued development of technology will worsen the
situation. It will certainly subject human beings to greater indignities and inflict greater damage on the
natural world, it will probably lead to greater social disruption and psychological suffering, and it may lead
to increased physical suffering even in "advanced" countries.
2. The industrial-technological system may survive or it may break down. If it survives, it MAY eventually
achieve a low level of physical and psychological suffering, but only after passing through a long and very
painful period of adjustment and only at the cost of permanently reducing human beings and many other
living organisms to engineered products and mere cogs in the social machine. Furthermore, if the system
survives, the consequences will be inevitable: There is no way of reforming or modifying the system so as
to prevent it from depriving people of dignity and autonomy.
3. If the system breaks down the consequences will still be very painful. But the bigger the system grows
the more disastrous the results of its breakdown will be, so if it is to break down it had best break down
sooner rather than later.
4. We therefore advocate a revolution against the industrial system. This revolution may or may not make
use of violence: it may be sudden or it may be a relatively gradual process spanning a few decades. We
can't predict any of that. But we do outline in a very general way the measures that those who hate the
industrial system should take in order to prepare the way for a revolution against that form of society. This
is not to be a POLITICAL revolution. Its object will be to overthrow not governments but the economic and
technological basis of the present society.
5. In this article we give attention to only some of the negative developments that have grown out of the
industrial-technological system. Other such developments we mention only briefly or ignore altogether.
This does not mean that we regard these other developments as unimportant. For practical reasons we
have to confine our discussion to areas that have received insufficient public attention or in which we
have something new to say. For example, since there are well-developed environmental and wilderness
movements, we have written very little about environmental degradation or the destruction of wild nature,
even though we consider these to be highly important.
THE PSYCHOLOGY OF MODERN LEFTISM
6. Almost everyone will agree that we live in a deeply troubled society. One of the most widespread
manifestations of the craziness of our world is leftism, so a discussion of the psychology of leftism can
serve as an introduction to the discussion of the problems of modern society in general.
7. But what is leftism? During the first half of the 20th century leftism could have been practically identified
with socialism. Today the movement is fragmented and it is not clear who can properly be called a leftist.
When we speak of leftists in this article we have in mind mainly socialists, collectivists, "politically correct"
types, feminists, gay and disability activists, animal rights activists and the like. But not everyone who is
associated with one of these movements is a leftist. What we are trying to get at in discussing leftism is
not so much a movement or an ideology as a psychological type, or rather a collection of related types.
Thus, what we mean by "leftism" will emerge more clearly in the course of our discussion of leftist
psychology (Also, see paragraphs 227-230.)
8. Even so, our conception of leftism will remain a good deal less clear than we would wish, but there
doesn't seem to be any remedy for this. All we are trying to do is indicate in a rough and approximate way
the two psychological tendencies that we believe are the main driving force of modern leftism. We by no
means claim to be telling the WHOLE truth about leftist psychology. Also, our discussion is meant to
apply to modern leftism only. We leave open the question of the extent to which our discussion could be
applied to the leftists of the 19th and early 20th century.
9. The two psychological tendencies that underlie modern leftism we call "feelings of inferiority" and
"oversocialization." Feelings of inferiority are characteristic of modern leftism as a whole, while
oversocialization is characteristic only of a certain segment of modern leftism; but this segment is highly
influential.
FEELINGS OF INFERIORITY
10. By "feelings of inferiority" we mean not only inferiority feelings in the strictest sense but a whole
spectrum of related traits: low self-esteem, feelings of powerlessness, depressive tendencies, defeatism,
guilt, self-hatred, etc. We argue that modern leftists tend to have such feelings (possibly more or less
repressed) and that these feelings are decisive in determining the direction of modern leftism.
11. When someone interprets as derogatory almost anything that is said about him (or about groups with
whom he identifies) we conclude that he has inferiority feelings or low self-esteem. This tendency is
pronounced among minority rights advocates, whether or not they belong to the minority groups whose
rights they defend.
They are hypersensitive about the words used to designate minorities. The terms "negro," "oriental,"
"handicapped" or "chick" for an African, an Asian, a disabled person or a woman originally had no
derogatory connotation. "Broad" and "chick" were merely the feminine equivalents of "guy," "dude" or
"fellow." The negative connotations have been attached to these terms by the activists themselves.
Some animal rights advocates have gone so far as to reject the word "pet" and insist on its replacement
by "animal companion." Leftist anthropologists go to great lengths to avoid saying anything about
primitive peoples that could conceivably be interpreted as negative. They want to replace the word
"primitive" by "nonliterate." They seem almost paranoid about anything that might suggest that any
primitive culture is inferior to our own. (We do not mean to imply that primitive cultures ARE inferior to
ours. We merely point out the hypersensitivity of leftish anthropologists.)
12. Those who are most sensitive about "politically incorrect" terminology are not the average black
ghetto-dweller, Asian immigrant, abused woman or disabled person, but a minority of activists, many of
whom do not even belong to any "oppressed" group but come from privileged strata of society. Political
correctness has its stronghold among university professors, who have secure employment with
comfortable salaries, and the majority of whom are heterosexual, white males from middle-class families.
13. Many leftists have an intense identification with the problems of groups that have an image of being
weak (women), defeated (American Indians), repellent (homosexuals), or otherwise inferior.
The leftists themselves feel that these groups are inferior. They would never admit it to themselves that
they have such feelings, but it is precisely because they do see these groups as inferior that they identify
with their problems. (We do not suggest that women, Indians, etc., ARE inferior; we are only making a
point about leftist psychology).
14. Feminists are desperately anxious to prove that women are as strong as capable as men. Clearly
they are nagged by a fear that women may NOT be as strong and as capable as men.
15. Leftists tend to hate anything that has an image of being strong, good and successful. They hate
America, they hate Western civilization, they hate white males, they hate rationality. The reasons that
leftists give for hating the West, etc. clearly do not correspond with their real motives. They SAY they
hate the West because it is warlike, imperialistic, sexist, ethnocentric and so forth, but where these
same faults appear in socialist countries or in primitive cultures, the leftist finds excuses for them, or at
best he GRUDGINGLY admits that they exist; whereas he ENTHUSIASTICALLY points out (and often
greatly exaggerates) these faults where they appear in Western civilization. Thus it is clear that these
faults are not the leftist's real motive for hating America and the West. He hates America and the West
because they are strong and successful.
16. Words like "self-confidence," "self-reliance," "initiative", "enterprise," "optimism," etc. play little role
in the liberal and leftist vocabulary. The leftist is anti-individualistic, pro-collectivist. He wants society to
solve everyone's needs for them, take care of them. He is not the sort of person who has an inner sense
of confidence in his own ability to solve his own problems and satisfy his own needs.
The leftist is antagonistic to the concept of competition because, deep inside, he feels like a loser.
17. Art forms that appeal to modern leftist intellectuals tend to focus on sordidness, defeat and despair,
or else they take an orgiastic tone, throwing off rational control as if there were no hope of accomplishing
anything through rational calculation and all that was left was to immerse oneself in the sensations of the
moment.
18. Modern leftist philosophers tend to dismiss reason, science, objective reality and to insist that
everything is culturally relative. It is true that one can ask serious questions about the foundations of
scientific knowledge and about how, if at all, the concept of objective reality can be defined. But it is
obvious that modern leftist philosophers are not simply cool-headed logicians systematically analyzing
the foundations of knowledge. They are deeply involved emotionally in their attack on truth and reality.
They attack these concepts because of their own psychological needs. For one thing, their attack is an
outlet for hostility, and, to the extent that it is successful, it satisfies the drive for power. More importantly,
the leftist hates science and rationality because they classify certain beliefs as true (i.e., successful,
superior) and other beliefs as false (i.e. failed, inferior). The leftist's feelings of inferiority run so deep that
he cannot tolerate any classification of some things as successful or superior and other things as failed
or inferior. This also underlies the rejection by many leftists of the concept of mental illness and of the
utility of IQ tests. Leftists are antagonistic to genetic explanations of human abilities or behavior because
such explanations tend to make some persons appear superior or inferior to others. Leftists prefer to
give society the credit or blame for an individual's ability or lack of it. Thus if a person is "inferior" it is
not his fault, but society's, because he has not been brought up properly.
19. The leftist is not typically the kind of person whose feelings of inferiority make him a braggart, an
egotist, a bully, a self-promoter, a ruthless competitor. This kind of person has not wholly lost faith in
himself. He has a deficit in his sense of power and self-worth, but he can still conceive of himself as
having the capacity to be strong, and his efforts to make himself strong produce his unpleasant behavior.
[1] But the leftist is too far gone for that. His feelings of inferiority are so ingrained that he cannot
conceive of himself as individually strong and valuable. Hence the collectivism of the leftist. He can
feel strong only as a member of a large organization or a mass movement with which he identifies himself.
20. Notice the masochistic tendency of leftist tactics. Leftists protest by lying down in front of vehicles,
they intentionally provoke police or racists to abuse them, etc. These tactics may often be effective,
but many leftists use them not as a means to an end but because they PREFER masochistic tactics.
Self-hatred is a leftist trait.
21. Leftists may claim that their activism is motivated by compassion or by moral principle, and moral
principle does play a role for the leftist of the oversocialized type. But compassion and moral principle
cannot be the main motives for leftist activism. Hostility is too prominent a component of leftist behavior;
so is the drive for power. Moreover, much leftist behavior is not rationally calculated to be of benefit to
the people whom the leftists claim to be trying to help. For example, if one believes that affirmative
action is good for black people, does it make sense to demand affirmative action in hostile or dogmatic
terms? Obviously it would be more productive to take a diplomatic and conciliatory approach that would
make at least verbal and symbolic concessions to white people who think that affirmative action
discriminates against them. But leftist activists do not take such an approach because it would not
satisfy their emotional needs. Helping black people is not their real goal. Instead, race problems
serve as an excuse for them to express their own hostility and frustrated need for power. In doing
so they actually harm black people, because the activists' hostile attitude toward the white majority
tends to intensify race hatred.
22. If our society had no social problems at all, the leftists would have to INVENT problems in order
to provide themselves with an excuse for making a fuss.
23. We emphasize that the foregoing does not pretend to be an accurate description of everyone who
might be considered a leftist. It is only a rough indication of a general tendency of leftism.
OVERSOCIALIZATION
24. Psychologists use the term "socialization" to designate the process by which children are
trained to think and act as society demands. A person is said to be well socialized if he believes in
and obeys the moral code of his society and fits in well as a functioning part of that society. It may
seem senseless to say that many leftists are over-socialized, since the leftist is perceived as a rebel.
Nevertheless, the position can be defended. Many leftists are not such rebels as they seem.
25. The moral code of our society is so demanding that no one can think, feel and act in a completely
moral way. For example, we are not supposed to hate anyone, yet almost everyone hates
somebody at some time or other, whether he admits it to himself or not. Some people are so highly
socialized that the attempt to think, feel and act morally imposes a severe burden on them. In
order to avoid feelings of guilt, they continually have to deceive themselves about their own motives
and find moral explanations for feelings and actions that in reality have a non-moral origin. We use
the term "oversocialized" to describe such people. [2]
26. Oversocialization can lead to low self-esteem, a sense of powerlessness, defeatism, guilt, etc.
One of the most important means by which our society socializes children is by making them feel
ashamed of behavior or speech that is contrary to society's expectations. If this is overdone, or if
a particular child is especially susceptible to such feelings, he ends by feeling ashamed of HIMSELF.
Moreover the thought and the behavior of the oversocialized person are more restricted by society's
expectations than are those of the lightly socialized person. The majority of people engage in a
significant amount of naughty behavior. They lie, they commit petty thefts, they break traffic laws,
they goof off at work, they hate someone, they say spiteful things or they use some underhanded
trick to get ahead of the other guy. The oversocialized person cannot do these things, or if he does
do them he generates in himself a sense of shame and self-hatred. The oversocialized person cannot
even experience, without guilt, thoughts or feelings that are contrary to the accepted morality; he
cannot think "unclean" thoughts. And socialization is not just a matter of morality; we are socialized
to confirm to many norms of behavior that do not fall under the heading of morality. Thus the
oversocialized person is kept on a psychological leash and spends his life running on rails that
society has laid down for him. In many oversocialized people this results in a sense of constraint
and powerlessness that can be a severe hardship. We suggest that oversocialization is among the
more serious cruelties that human beings inflict on one another.
27. We argue that a very important and influential segment of the modern left is oversocialized and
that their oversocialization is of great importance in determining the direction of modern leftism.
Leftists of the oversocialized type tend to be intellectuals or members of the upper-middle class.
Notice that university intellectuals (3) constitute the most highly socialized segment of our society
and also the most left-wing segment.
28. The leftist of the oversocialized type tries to get off his psychological leash and assert his
autonomy by rebelling. But usually he is not strong enough to rebel against the most basic values
of society. Generally speaking, the goals of today's leftists are NOT in conflict with the accepted
morality. On the contrary, the left takes an accepted moral principle, adopts it as its own, and then
accuses mainstream society of violating that principle. Examples: racial equality, equality of the
sexes, helping poor people, peace as opposed to war, nonviolence generally, freedom of expression,
kindness to animals. More fundamentally, the duty of the individual to serve society and the duty
of society to take care of the individual. All these have been deeply rooted values of our society
(or at least of its middle and upper classes (4) for a long time. These values are explicitly or implicitly
expressed or presupposed in most of the material presented to us by the mainstream communications
media and the educational system. Leftists, especially those of the oversocialized type, usually
do not rebel against these principles but justify their hostility to society by claiming (with some
degree of truth) that society is not living up to these principles.
29. Here is an illustration of the way in which the oversocialized leftist shows his real attachment
to the conventional attitudes of our society while pretending to be in rebellion against it. Many
leftists push for affirmative action, for moving black people into high-prestige jobs, for improved
education in black schools and more money for such schools; the way of life of the black
"underclass" they regard as a social disgrace.
They want to integrate the black man into the system, make him a business executive, a lawyer,
a scientist just like upper-middle-class white people.
The leftists will reply that the last thing they want is to make the black man into a copy of the
white man; instead, they want to preserve African American culture. But in what does this
preservation of African American culture consist?
It can hardly consist in anything more than eating black-style food, listening to black-style music,
wearing black-style clothing and going to a black-style church or mosque.
In other words, it can express itself only in superficial matters.
In all ESSENTIAL respects more leftists of the oversocialized type want to make the black man
conform to white, middle-class ideals. They want to make him study technical subjects, become
an executive or a scientist, spend his life climbing the status ladder to prove that black people are
as good as white. They want to make black fathers "responsible." they want black gangs to become
nonviolent, etc. But these are exactly the values of the industrial-technological system.
The system couldn't care less what kind of music a man listens to, what kind of clothes he wears or
what religion he believes in as long as he studies in school, holds a respectable job, climbs the status
ladder, is a "responsible" parent, is nonviolent and so forth. In effect, however much he may deny it,
the oversocialized leftist wants to integrate the black man into the system and make him adopt its
values.
30. We certainly do not claim that leftists, even of the oversocialized type, NEVER rebel against the
fundamental values of our society. Clearly they sometimes do. Some oversocialized leftists have gone
so far as to rebel against one of modern society's most important principles by engaging in physical
violence. By their own account, violence is for them a form of "liberation." In other words, by committing
violence they break through the psychological restraints that have been trained into them. Because
they are oversocialized these restraints have been more confining for them than for others; hence their
need to break free of them. But they usually justify their rebellion in terms of mainstream values. If they
engage in violence they claim to be fighting against racism or the like.
31. We realize that many objections could be raised to the foregoing thumb-nail sketch of leftist
psychology. The real situation is complex, and anything like a complete description of it would take
several volumes even if the necessary data were available. We claim only to have indicated very roughly
the two most important tendencies in the psychology of modern leftism.
32. The problems of the leftist are indicative of the problems of our society as a whole. Low self-esteem,
depressive tendencies and defeatism are not restricted to the left. Though they are especially noticeable
in the left, they are widespread in our society. And today's society tries to socialize us to a greater extent
than any previous society. We are even told by experts how to eat, how to exercise, how to make love,
how to raise our kids and so forth.
THE POWER PROCESS
33. Human beings have a need (probably based in biology) for something that we will call the "power process."
This is closely related to the need for power (which is widely recognized) but is not quite the same thing.
The power process has four elements. The three most clear-cut of these we call goal, effort and attainment
of goal. (Everyone needs to have goals whose attainment requires effort, and needs to succeed in attaining
at least some of his goals.) The fourth element is more difficult to define and may not be necessary for
everyone. We call it autonomy and will discuss it later (paragraphs 42-44).
34. Consider the hypothetical case of a man who can have anything he wants just by wishing for it. Such
a man has power, but he will develop serious psychological problems. At first he will have a lot of fun, but
by and by he will become acutely bored and demoralized.
Eventually he may become clinically depressed.
History shows that leisured aristocracies tend to become decadent. This is not true of fighting aristocracies
that have to struggle to maintain their power. But leisured, secure aristocracies that have no need to exert
themselves usually become bored, hedonistic and demoralized, even though they have power. This shows
that power is not enough. One must have goals toward which to exercise one's power.
35. Everyone has goals; if nothing else, to obtain the physical necessities of life: food, water and whatever
clothing and shelter are made necessary by the climate. But the leisured aristocrat obtains these things
without effort. Hence his boredom and demoralization.
36. Nonattainment of important goals results in death if the goals are physical necessities, and in frustration
if nonattainment of the goals is compatible with survival. Consistent failure to attain goals throughout life results
in defeatism, low self-esteem or depression.
37. Thus, in order to avoid serious psychological problems, a human being needs goals whose attainment
requires effort, and he must have a reasonable rate of success in attaining his goals.
SURROGATE ACTIVITIES38. But not every leisured aristocrat becomes bored and demoralized. For example, the emperor Hirohito,
instead of sinking into decadent hedonism, devoted himself to marine biology, a field in which he became
distinguished. When people do not have to exert themselves to satisfy their physical needs they often set
up artificial goals for themselves. In many cases they then pursue these goals with the same energy and
emotional involvement that they otherwise would have put into the search for physical necessities. Thus the
aristocrats of the Roman Empire had their literary pretentions; many European aristocrats a few centuries
ago invested tremendous time and energy in hunting, though they certainly didn't need the meat; other
aristocracies have competed for status through elaborate displays of wealth; and a few aristocrats, like
Hirohito, have turned to science.
39. We use the term "surrogate activity" to designate an activity that is directed toward an artificial goal
that people set up for themselves merely in order to have some goal to work toward, or let us say, merely
for the sake of the "fulfillment" that they get from pursuing the goal. Here is a rule of thumb for the
identification of surrogate activities. Given a person who devotes much time and energy to the pursuit of
goal X, ask yourself this: If he had to devote most of his time and energy to satisfying his biological needs,
and if that effort required him to use his physical and mental facilities in a varied and interesting way, would
he feel seriously deprived because he did not attain goal X? If the answer is no, then the person's pursuit of
a goal X is a surrogate activity. Hirohito's studies in marine biology clearly constituted a surrogate activity,
since it is pretty certain that if Hirohito had had to spend his time working at interesting non-scientific tasks
in order to obtain the necessities of life, he would not have felt deprived because he didn't know all about the
anatomy and life-cycles of marine animals. On the other hand the pursuit of sex and love (for example) is not
a surrogate activity, because most people, even if their existence were otherwise satisfactory, would feel
deprived if they passed their lives without ever having a relationship with a member of the opposite sex.
(But pursuit of an excessive amount of sex, more than one really needs, can be a surrogate activity.)
40. In modern industrial society only minimal effort is necessary to satisfy one's physical needs. It is enough
to go through a training program to acquire some petty technical skill, then come to work on time and exert
very modest effort needed to hold a job. The only requirements are a moderate amount of intelligence, and
most of all, simple OBEDIENCE. If one has those, society takes care of one from cradle to grave. (Yes,
there is an underclass that cannot take physical necessities for granted, but we are speaking here of
mainstream society.) Thus it is not surprising that modern society is full of surrogate activities. These include
scientific work, athletic achievement, humanitarian work, artistic and literary creation, climbing the corporate
ladder, acquisition of money and material goods far beyond the point at which they cease to give any additional
physical satisfaction, and social activism when it addresses issues that are not important for the activist
personally, as in the case of white activists who work for the rights of nonwhite minorities. These are not always
pure surrogate activities, since for many people they may be motivated in part by needs other than the need
to have some goal to pursue. Scientific work may be motivated in part by a drive for prestige, artistic creation
by a need to express feelings, militant social activism by hostility. But for most people who pursue them, these
activities are in large part surrogate activities. For example, the majority of scientists will probably agree that
the "fulfillment" they get from their work is more important than the money and prestige they earn.
41. For many if not most people, surrogate activities are less satisfying than the pursuit of real goals ( that is,
goals that people would want to attain even if their need for the power process were already fulfilled). One
indication of this is the fact that, in many or most cases, people who are deeply involved in surrogate activities
are never satisfied, never at rest. Thus the money-maker constantly strives for more and more wealth. The
scientist no sooner solves one problem than he moves on to the next. The long-distance runner drives himself
to run always farther and faster. Many people who pursue surrogate activities will say that they get far more
fulfillment from these activities than they do from the "mundane" business of satisfying their biological needs,
but that it is because in our society the effort needed to satisfy the biological needs has been reduced to triviality.
More importantly, in our society people do not satisfy their biological needs AUTONOMOUSLY but by functioning
as parts of an immense social machine. In contrast, people generally have a great deal of autonomy in pursuing
their surrogate activities. have a great deal of autonomy in pursuing their surrogate activities.
AUTONOMY
42. Autonomy as a part of the power process may not be necessary for every individual. But most people need
a greater or lesser degree of autonomy in working toward their goals. Their efforts must be undertaken on their
own initiative and must be under their own direction and control. Yet most people do not have to exert this
initiative, direction and control as single individuals. It is usually enough to act as a member of a SMALL group.
Thus if half a dozen people discuss a goal among themselves and make a successful joint effort to attain that
goal, their need for the power process will be served. But if they work under rigid orders handed down from above
that leave them no room for autonomous decision and initiative, then their need for the power process will not
be served. The same is true when decisions are made on a collective bases if the group making the collective
decision is so large that the role of each individual is insignificant [5]
43. It is true that some individuals seem to have little need for autonomy. Either their drive for power is weak
or they satisfy it by identifying themselves with some powerful organization to which they belong. And then
there are unthinking, animal types who seem to be satisfied with a purely physical sense of power(the good
combat soldier, who gets his sense of power by developing fighting skills that he is quite content to use in
blind obedience to his superiors).
44. But for most people it is through the power process-having a goal, making an AUTONOMOUS effort and
attaining t the goal-that self-esteem, self-confidence and a sense of power are acquired. When one does not
have adequate opportunity to go throughout the power process the consequences are (depending on the
individual and on the way the power process is disrupted) boredom, demoralization, low self-esteem, inferiority
feelings, defeatism, depression, anxiety, guilt, frustration, hostility, spouse or child abuse, insatiable hedonism,
abnormal sexual behavior, sleep disorders, eating disorders, etc. [6]
SOURCES OF SOCIAL PROBLEMS
45. Any of the foregoing symptoms can occur in any society, but in modern industrial society they are
present on a massive scale. We aren't the first to mention that the world today seems to be going crazy.
This sort of thing is not normal for human societies. There is good reason to believe that primitive man
suffered from less stress and frustration and was better satisfied with his way of life than modern man is.
It is true that not all was sweetness and light in primitive societies. Abuse of women and common among
the Australian aborigines, transexuality was fairly common among some of the American Indian tribes.
But is does appear that GENERALLY SPEAKING the kinds of problems that we have listed in the
preceding paragraph were far less common among primitive peoples than they are in modern society.
46. We attribute the social and psychological problems of modern society to the fact that that society
requires people to live under conditions radically different from those under which the human race evolved
and to behave in ways that conflict with the patterns of behavior that the human race developed while living
under the earlier conditions. It is clear from what we have already written that we consider lack of opportunity
to properly experience the power process as the most important of the abnormal conditions to which modern
society subjects people. But it is not the only one. Before dealing with disruption of the power process as a
source of social problems we will discuss some of the other sources.
47. Among the abnormal conditions present in modern industrial society are excessive density of population,
isolation of man from nature, excessive rapidity of social change and the break-down of natural small-scale
communities such as the extended family, the village or the tribe.
48. It is well known that crowding increases stress and aggression. The degree of crowding that exists
today and the isolation of man from nature are consequences of technological progress. All pre-industrial
societies were predominantly rural. The industrial Revolution vastly increased the size of cities and the
proportion of the population that lives in them, and modern agricultural technology has made it possible for
the Earth to support a far denser population than it ever did before. (Also, technology exacerbates the effects
of crowding because it puts increased disruptive powers in people's hands. For example, a variety of noise-
making devices: power mowers, radios, motorcycles, etc. If the use of these devices is unrestricted, people
who want peace and quiet are frustrated by the noise. If their use is restricted, people who use the devices are
frustrated by the regulations... But if these machines had never been invented there would have been no conflict
and no frustration generated by them.)
49. For primitive societies the natural world (which usually changes only slowly) provided a stable framework
and therefore a sense of security. In the modern world it is human society that dominates nature rather than
the other way around, and modern society changes very rapidly owing to technological change. Thus there
is no stable framework.
50. The conservatives are fools: They whine about the decay of traditional values, yet they enthusiastically
support technological progress and economic growth. Apparently it never occurs to them that you can't
make rapid, drastic changes in the technology and the economy of a society with out causing rapid
changes in all other aspects of the society as well, and that such rapid changes inevitably break down
traditional values.
51.The breakdown of traditional values to some extent implies the breakdown of the bonds that hold together
traditional small-scale social groups. The disintegration of small-scale social groups is also promoted by
the fact that modern conditions often require or tempt individuals to move to new locations, separating
themselves from their communities. Beyond that, a technological society HAS TO weaken family ties
and local communities if it is to function efficiently. In modern society an individual's loyalty must be first
to the system and only secondarily to a small-scale community, because if the internal loyalties of small-
scale small-scale communities were stronger than loyalty to the system, such communities would pursue
their own advantage at the expense of the system.
52. Suppose that a public official or a corporation executive appoints his cousin, his friend or his co-r
eligionist to a position rather than appointing the person best qualified for the job. He has permitted personal
loyalty to supersede his loyalty to the system, and that is "nepotism" or "discrimination," both of which are
terrible sins in modern society. Would-be industrial societies that have done a poor job of subordinating
personal or local loyalties to loyalty to the system are usually very inefficient. (Look at Latin America.)
Thus an advanced industrial society can tolerate only those small-scale communities that are emasculated,
tamed and made into tools of the system. [7]
53. Crowding, rapid change and the breakdown of communities have been widely recognized as sources
of social problems. but we do not believe they are enough to account for the extent of the problems that
are seen today.
54. A few pre-industrial cities were very large and crowded, yet their inhabitants do not seem to have suffered
from psychological problems to the same extent as modern man. In America today there still are uncrowded
rural areas, and we find there the same problems as in urban areas, though the problems tend to be less
acute in the rural areas. Thus crowding does not seem to be the decisive factor.
55. On the growing edge of the American frontier during the 19th century, the mobility of the population
probably broke down extended families and small-scale social groups to at least the same extent as these
are broken down today. In fact, many nuclear families lived by choice in such isolation, having no neighbors
within several miles, that they belonged to no community at all, yet they do not seem to have developed
problems as a result.
56.Furthermore, change in American frontier society was very rapid and deep. A man might be born and
raised in a log cabin, outside the reach of law and order and fed largely on wild meat; and by the time he
arrived at old age he might be working at a regular job and living in an ordered community with effective
law enforcement. This was a deeper change that that which typically occurs in the life of a modern
individual, yet it does not seem to have led to psychological problems. In fact, 19th century American
society had an optimistic and self-confident tone, quite unlike that of today's society. [8]
57. The difference, we argue, is that modern man has the sense (largely justified) that change is IMPOSED
on him, whereas the 19th century frontiersman had the sense (also largely justified) that he created change
himself, by his own choice. Thus a pioneer settled on a piece of land of his own choosing and made it into
a farm through his own effort. In those days an entire county might have only a couple of hundred inhabitants
and was a far more isolated and autonomous entity than a modern county is.
Hence the pioneer farmer participated as a member of a relatively small group in the creation of a new,
ordered community. One may well question whether the creation of this community was an improvement,
but at any rate it satisfied the pioneer's need for the power process.
58. It would be possible to give other examples of societies in which there has been rapid change and/or
lack of close community ties without he kind of massive behavioral aberration that is seen in today's
industrial society. We contend that the most important cause of social and psychological problems in
modern society is the fact that people have insufficient opportunity to go through the power process in
a normal way. We don't mean to say that modern society is the only one in which the power process has
been disrupted. Probably most if not all civilized societies have interfered with the power ' process to a
greater or lesser extent. But in modern industrial society the problem has become particularly acute.
Leftism, at least in its recent (mid-to-late -20th century) form, is in part a symptom of deprivation with
respect to the power process.
DISRUPTION OF THE POWER PROCESS IN MODERN SOCIETY59. We divide human drives into three groups: (1) those drives that can be satisfied with minimal effort;
(2) those that can be satisfied but only at the cost of serious effort; (3) those that cannot be adequately
satisfied no matter how much effort one makes. The power process is the process of satisfying the drives
of the second group. The more drives there are in the third group, the more there is frustration, anger,
eventually defeatism, depression, etc.
60. In modern industrial society natural human drives tend to be pushed into the first and third groups,
and the second group tends to consist increasingly of artificially created drives.
61. In primitive societies, physical necessities generally fall into group 2: They can be obtained, but only
at the cost of serious effort. But modern society tends to guaranty the physical necessities to everyone
[9] in exchange for only minimal effort, hence physical needs are pushed into group 1. (There may be
disagreement about whether the effort needed to hold a job is "minimal"; but usually, in lower- to middle-
level jobs, whatever effort is required is merely that of obedience. You sit or stand where you are told to
sit or stand and do what you are told to do in the way you are told to do it.
Seldom do you have to exert yourself seriously, and in any case you have hardly any autonomy in work,
so that the need for the power process is not well served.)
62. Social needs, such as sex, love and status, often remain in group 2 in modern society, depending on
the situation of the individual. [10] But, except for people who have a particularly strong drive for status,
the effort required to fulfill the social drives is insufficient to satisfy adequately the need for the power process.
63. So certain artificial needs have been created that fall into group 2, hence serve the need for the power
process. Advertising and marketing techniques have been developed that make many people feel they
need things that their grandparents never desired or even dreamed of. It requires serious effort to earn
enough money to satisfy these artificial needs, hence they fall into group 2. (But see paragraphs 80-82.)
Modern man must satisfy his need for the power process largely through pursuit of the artificial needs
created by the advertising and marketing industry [11], and through surrogate activities.
64. It seems that for many people, maybe the majority, these artificial forms of the power process are
insufficient. A theme that appears repeatedly in the writings of the social critics of the second half of the
20th century is the sense of purposelessness that afflicts many people in modern society. (This
purposelessness is often called by other names such as "anomic" or "middle-class vacuity.") We suggest
that the so-called "identity crisis" is actually a search for a sense of purpose, often for commitment to a
suitable surrogate activity. It may be that existentialism is in large part a response to the purposelessness
of modern life. [12] Very widespread in modern society is the search for "fulfillment." But we think that for
the majority of people an activity whose main goal is fulfillment (that is, a surrogate activity) does not bring
completely satisfactory fulfillment. In other words, it does not fully satisfy the need for the power process.
(See paragraph 41.) That need can be fully satisfied only through activities that have some external goal,
such as physical necessities, sex, love, status, revenge, etc.
65. Moreover, where goals are pursued through earning money, climbing the status ladder or functioning as
part of the system in some other way, most people are not in a position to pursue their goals
AUTONOMOUSLY. Most workers are someone else's employee as, as we pointed out in paragraph
61, must spend their days doing what they are told to do in the way they are told to do it. Even most people
who are in business for themselves have only limited autonomy. It is a chronic complaint of small-business
persons and entrepreneurs that their hands are tied by excessive government regulation. Some of these
regulations are doubtless unnecessary, but for the most part government regulations are essential and
inevitable parts of our extremely complex society. A large portion of small business today operates on the
franchise system. It was reported in the Wall Street Journal a few years ago that many of the franchise-
granting companies require applicants for franchises to take a personality test that is designed to EXCLUDE
those who have creativity and initiative, because such persons are not sufficiently docile to go along
obediently with the franchise system. This excludes from small business many of the people who most
need autonomy.
66. Today people live more by virtue of what the system does FOR them or TO them than by virtue of what
they do for themselves. And what they do for themselves is done more and more along channels laid down
by the system. Opportunities tend to be those that the system provides, the opportunities must be
exploited in accord with the rules and regulations [13], and techniques prescribed by experts must be
followed if there is to be a chance of success.
67. Thus the power process is disrupted in our society through a deficiency of real goals and a deficiency
of autonomy in pursuit of goals. But it is also disrupted because of those human drives that fall into
group 3: the drives that one cannot adequately satisfy no matter how much effort one makes. One of these
drives is the need for security. Our lives depend on decisions made by other people; we have no control
ove