Who is running everything?

by | August 21, 2018

You’ve probably been convinced it’s someone “above” you. But is it really?

Chaos / Blogs / Who is running everything?

Who is running everything?

by | August 21, 2018

You’ve probably been convinced it’s someone “above” you. But is it really?

Chaos / Blogs / Who is running everything?

What does it take to wake up from the system we are in and break free of all of the prescriptions? Is the answer to “control” the outcome?

Changing it is not about control… I think this level of realization isn’t that hard to get to. Maybe once you start truly realizing that this narrative includes self-identity and that all of it is a construct defined by either what we believe, think we see, or want to believe, that then it gets a bit more realistically actualized and action might be useful. Perhaps making it so we realize things may not matter in the same way we once thought. But I feel like this is not really leveling up. It mainly just points out all the connections in a system of connections, and it seems to imply something that I think is still very problematic…

…That it is being done to you, by others…

While I do understand how attractive and of course scary this is, it does give you a sense that something can be done about it, and that people just haven’t done it the right way. It’s the same reason people think voting in the “right” people will fix the system. We still assume human conscious agency and control are what is wrecking the system. It’s quite an arrogant hubristic but completely predictable aspect of our anthropocentric self-delusion. That it’s still us making the things happen because we abuse things on purpose, when it’s not (well, not exactly).

Then we use terms like “sociopath” or “psychopath” and concepts like “evil” and demonize specific attributes of human nature and this doesn’t work either. It’s still trying to fix a problem by doing the same thing that caused the problem; as in trying to control it.

I no longer generally see humans as individuals with agency making will-based choices which all combine to create this reality. I more so tend to think of humans as phenomena in a system of chaos creating patterns of order and almost exclusively unconsciously creating these outcomes.

It’s much scarier to realize that this narrative is self evolving, not written by people in control. Sure, those people have different types of power to get messages spread further, but the ways the memetic evolution of that information moves, transfers and changes, is not in anyone’s control or power.

Imagine the world is your body, and each cell of your body is a spot of consciousness trying to survive (an individual). Survival means working with the cells around you to find an equilibrium of outcomes that supports the whole system. Each cell thinks of itself as having its own will and choice. It decides that to act this way or that is best because it helps ensure it will grow and multiply and be replaced by cells it divides into which will carry on the tasks. The illusion of choice doesn’t matter, as the whole system is also considered a conscious entity. At each step in evolution, individual separate entities had to choose between cooperation or a predator/prey kind of scenario (being eaten). Sometimes it ends up being both, but ultimately the choices that benefit the most and keep the whole system working depend on the narrative being cohesive. Now you might think that the brain represents the people in power making choices for the whole system. But really this is the true metaphor for the notion of the narrative. The body and it’s parts are not actually controlled by the brain in such a direct way. It’s far too much control to actually work. Evolution and any system will never ultimately favor that level of micromanagement, as it requires more energy and cost than is possible. The brain is more like a task scheduler that delegates operations. Those people in power, or this public figure, or the authors and artists and musicians which appear to have so much influence, are more controlled by the needs of all the parts than the parts are by the supposed centers of power.

Another analogy I use is to think of an ocean. There are larger and smaller epicenters of power. But when a big influencer causes a tsunami to emanate over the whole ocean, all of the parts that make up the whole are also continuously absorbing and redistributing the influence into different directions than the original source may have pushed them. And in the same way, without all of the parts, the big source of power would have no vehicle or medium for the power to be useful in, and ultimately cannot control what the power does.

Point is, this “narrative” is not actually something others dictate and the masses follow. If this were actually true, then governance would be easy and people would just do what they are told and we wouldn’t even need to have this discussion. It would also make the whole system far more failure-prone than it already is, as any single point of great power is also a singular point of great failure, and humans as a self-replicating species of recombinant diversity overcome this potential for weakness through constantly varying how things are received and passed on.

The bad tendency humans have is to think we need to find better and better ways of controlling outcomes to increase survival potentials for everyone. Every effort to make the system do what you wish it would, reduces the robustness of the system and simplifies the points of failure. The harder we try to make a world that is more peaceful and secure through control, the more fragile it becomes. Thinking it’s that that dude was evil and did something bad is often even antithetical to the unconscious functions of nature. The worst killers and society destroyers acted like any disease… to strip out and strengthen simultaneously. And they were morally reprehensible. While now saving everyone no matter what, no matter what state or capacity, and building structures to keep everyone alive and passive, and closely packed and dependent on the system, are leaving the whole place (world) full of disaster-ready holes. This is considered morally good. And everybody wants to know who to point the finger at while it crumbles and everyone is confused as to why.

Nobody is responsible in that way. There is no moral right that will correct the system. There is no law that will make people not behave according to their nature. And our nature has been stripped of the room it needs to develop freely and outside of the confines of control and blame. Responsibility is something we put as far away from ourselves as possible. Not simply because it’s scary, but because on some unconscious level, we know we are out of control and don’t want to have to admit it. So pointing fingers while not looking at ourselves and not realizing this is a universe of chaos, makes us at least able to continue to buy into the delusion that it can be fixed.

That said, nothing is broken. But if anything would be fixed it would come from us not trying to make the world safe and certain, but allowing nature to find equilibrium organically.

This “narrative” that others control the narrative is the same notion. Nobody is in control of the narrative. Some power does exist where there are greater and lesser influences, but it’s not anything that we can actually point a finger at, and no single solution will ever exist which can make it what we think it should be.

About the author:

Glen Allan is a ridiculous person with thoughts and ideas which fly in the face of normal convention and challenge many assumptions about what people generally think of as reality.

He recognizes that many people will either disagree or claim the ideas to be founded in delusion, and only has to say that he'd like it if you could try to realize the world might not be what you think it is.













The concepts of both 'Good' and 'Evil' are merely subjective associations in relation to a conditioned reaction to pain and pleasure.