Fifty years ago Saul Alinsky recommended using emotional moral pressure to force established groups to share power by insisting that they live up to their own rules. This may have become easier, or at least more dramatic and self-fulfilling, as the managerial system became feminized and compliance loops were structured into it.
I think Voters and Institutions need to be in here somewhere, since so much of managerialism comes down to disempowering voters by vesting decisionmaking with unelected bureaucrats managing institutions.
Managerialism essentially reroutes executive power away from elected officials (and thus voters), and firewalls said power behind shadowy institutional bureaucracies.
I hadn't thought of that...where would you put voters in this case? I'm thinking about this OS as representing how the managerial class behaves itself, so are you thinking there's a specific thing I don't have here that shows the process of voter disempowerment?
I suppose it's less of an OS and more of a script the managerial class always runs any time they get an opportunity. Vesting decisionmaking power in institutions/bureaucracies results in more political power being accrued by the managerial class as a whole (they manage the bureaucracies, so by shifting power to bureaucracies they shift power to themselves), and it negates the ability of the plebs to overrule them via the ballot box.
The concept of hate crimes was the Pandora's Box for all of this crap. It empowered those that would exploit a victim identity to wage protected hate. It is the path of feminists and other groups wanting to bypass the hard competition of merit born of persistence and constant improvement... to jump to the head of the line because of how they appear. Critical Theory is nothing without the mistake of thinking we could criminalize a claim of someone else's emotional state. Because otherwise, being part of some old or new defined victim group, is only that and not special and not a source of group power.
We simply need a SCOTUS case to challenge hate crime laws as being racist and unconstitutional... then all the states will be forced to take them off the list and the nation can step out of that fog of wrong-think about how people should conduct themselves in a functioning free democracy.
The Professional Managerial Class then loses this exploitive power tool, and the people within become equal to everyone else in terms of accountability for their productive output.
This is an interesting direction. I hadn’t thought of hate crimes at all, but I would say that concept predates critical theory, right? Multiculturalism seems to have been a byproduct of the civil rights movement, which many people will never let us forget. By the time the managerial OS came to be there was a convenient relationship to be forged with multiculturalism.
If you just consider how the injection of this moral consideration that we can assess the emotion of hate in others and punish them for it... once you inject that into your culture as being part of your moral framework it can be corrupted and exploited for power play.
No longer is there any requirement for tangible evidence of material harm being done... all someone has to do is claim that another is hateful... that their actions were based on their own harboring of hate... and the whips are justified.
Let take another emotion... enthusiasm. Let's say that a group of people are just high on happy enthusiasm and it results in bad behavior. Do we enhance their punishment for the damage they caused with their behavior because we attribute their behavior to their extreme emotions?
This concept of the assessment of hate existing being justification for punishment results in the terrorism from the "victim" to victimize others. It is a tool of the vulnerable narcissist.
Freedom of speech, expression and association is such that we should all be free to feel hate for another. The fact is that most of the time those emotions are temporary and repairable. However, all that should matter is behavior. If you act on hate or you act on enthusiasm... it should make no difference. It is your act that should count for equal justice based on material harm caused.
Agree. I was an academic administrator in the 1980s working in the “peace and conflict resolution” space and remember being mystified when folks in Student Affairs started talking about “multiculturalism” and the need to define “hate crimes.” I could not fathom why they thought it was a good idea. The ideology of “social justice” is still incoherent to me. I continue to see it as witch hunting.
That sounds miserable, I can only imagine. I went to college in the late 00s so a lot of this was cemented by then but we weren’t yet woke. I’m pretty convinced that it all went to extremes around the same time as millennials getting out of college because we were frustrated aspiring elites.
I’ll have to think more about the concept of hate crimes but I agree that you can’t really know the line of “prejudicial homicide” because it’s internal.
Interesting, obviously people have different ways of visualizing it but the way that I think about it is this.
Similar to your own diagram, I think critical theory sits at the kernel.
But on top of it I would collapse managerial and libertarian feminism just down into “Schrodinger’s feminism”. Basically, at the hardware level, feminism means whatever you want to mean. It sits on top of critical theory because it allows feminist to simultaneously be empowered while embodying victimhood.
At the operating system you have classical liberalism (basically the options to build whatever applications you want)
But the main application is credential ism. (You can have whatever you want… As long as you have the right credentials for it)
And then things like emotional labor, passive aggressive behavior, feminized discourse, these can all be seen as a combination of APIs and firewalls. Basically ways to control the user interface.
I look forward to more. Do you want non-fully formed thought, rough opinions and polished perspectives RE the civilizational malaise. Can see how this informs and extends into many things in process and probabilistic in current trajectory.
I'm here to think together with people so anything and everything. This is still really rough in my head and so this is the first iteration, and I think this could actually really be several diagrams.
I do have more diagrams in mind…this is helping me workout my overarching theory about feminization being about managerial capitalism rather than individual behaviors.
Fifty years ago Saul Alinsky recommended using emotional moral pressure to force established groups to share power by insisting that they live up to their own rules. This may have become easier, or at least more dramatic and self-fulfilling, as the managerial system became feminized and compliance loops were structured into it.
Your response is rude. Just say what the feedback is instead of calling people idiots.
I think Voters and Institutions need to be in here somewhere, since so much of managerialism comes down to disempowering voters by vesting decisionmaking with unelected bureaucrats managing institutions.
See https://x.com/wesyang/status/1679161496377389058
https://www.notonyourteam.co.uk/p/the-fourfold-attack-on-democracy
Managerialism essentially reroutes executive power away from elected officials (and thus voters), and firewalls said power behind shadowy institutional bureaucracies.
I hadn't thought of that...where would you put voters in this case? I'm thinking about this OS as representing how the managerial class behaves itself, so are you thinking there's a specific thing I don't have here that shows the process of voter disempowerment?
I suppose it's less of an OS and more of a script the managerial class always runs any time they get an opportunity. Vesting decisionmaking power in institutions/bureaucracies results in more political power being accrued by the managerial class as a whole (they manage the bureaucracies, so by shifting power to bureaucracies they shift power to themselves), and it negates the ability of the plebs to overrule them via the ballot box.
The concept of hate crimes was the Pandora's Box for all of this crap. It empowered those that would exploit a victim identity to wage protected hate. It is the path of feminists and other groups wanting to bypass the hard competition of merit born of persistence and constant improvement... to jump to the head of the line because of how they appear. Critical Theory is nothing without the mistake of thinking we could criminalize a claim of someone else's emotional state. Because otherwise, being part of some old or new defined victim group, is only that and not special and not a source of group power.
We simply need a SCOTUS case to challenge hate crime laws as being racist and unconstitutional... then all the states will be forced to take them off the list and the nation can step out of that fog of wrong-think about how people should conduct themselves in a functioning free democracy.
The Professional Managerial Class then loses this exploitive power tool, and the people within become equal to everyone else in terms of accountability for their productive output.
Excellent expose.
This is an interesting direction. I hadn’t thought of hate crimes at all, but I would say that concept predates critical theory, right? Multiculturalism seems to have been a byproduct of the civil rights movement, which many people will never let us forget. By the time the managerial OS came to be there was a convenient relationship to be forged with multiculturalism.
If you just consider how the injection of this moral consideration that we can assess the emotion of hate in others and punish them for it... once you inject that into your culture as being part of your moral framework it can be corrupted and exploited for power play.
No longer is there any requirement for tangible evidence of material harm being done... all someone has to do is claim that another is hateful... that their actions were based on their own harboring of hate... and the whips are justified.
Let take another emotion... enthusiasm. Let's say that a group of people are just high on happy enthusiasm and it results in bad behavior. Do we enhance their punishment for the damage they caused with their behavior because we attribute their behavior to their extreme emotions?
This concept of the assessment of hate existing being justification for punishment results in the terrorism from the "victim" to victimize others. It is a tool of the vulnerable narcissist.
Freedom of speech, expression and association is such that we should all be free to feel hate for another. The fact is that most of the time those emotions are temporary and repairable. However, all that should matter is behavior. If you act on hate or you act on enthusiasm... it should make no difference. It is your act that should count for equal justice based on material harm caused.
Agree. I was an academic administrator in the 1980s working in the “peace and conflict resolution” space and remember being mystified when folks in Student Affairs started talking about “multiculturalism” and the need to define “hate crimes.” I could not fathom why they thought it was a good idea. The ideology of “social justice” is still incoherent to me. I continue to see it as witch hunting.
That sounds miserable, I can only imagine. I went to college in the late 00s so a lot of this was cemented by then but we weren’t yet woke. I’m pretty convinced that it all went to extremes around the same time as millennials getting out of college because we were frustrated aspiring elites.
I’ll have to think more about the concept of hate crimes but I agree that you can’t really know the line of “prejudicial homicide” because it’s internal.
Interesting, obviously people have different ways of visualizing it but the way that I think about it is this.
Similar to your own diagram, I think critical theory sits at the kernel.
But on top of it I would collapse managerial and libertarian feminism just down into “Schrodinger’s feminism”. Basically, at the hardware level, feminism means whatever you want to mean. It sits on top of critical theory because it allows feminist to simultaneously be empowered while embodying victimhood.
At the operating system you have classical liberalism (basically the options to build whatever applications you want)
But the main application is credential ism. (You can have whatever you want… As long as you have the right credentials for it)
And then things like emotional labor, passive aggressive behavior, feminized discourse, these can all be seen as a combination of APIs and firewalls. Basically ways to control the user interface.
This makes sense! I had a feeling you'd have actionable thoughts, thank you. Will think and adjust.
This is a superb start.
I look forward to more. Do you want non-fully formed thought, rough opinions and polished perspectives RE the civilizational malaise. Can see how this informs and extends into many things in process and probabilistic in current trajectory.
Def reference.
I'm here to think together with people so anything and everything. This is still really rough in my head and so this is the first iteration, and I think this could actually really be several diagrams.
Agree with that. Sensible approach. Hope others join in. Have 1 or more BHAGs (theses) in mind? Or purely speculative?
I do have more diagrams in mind…this is helping me workout my overarching theory about feminization being about managerial capitalism rather than individual behaviors.
Awesome. The comments are very helpful. Great to catchup after a few days off. Look forward to more devs. Keep mushing!