Social life of insects on the example of modern civilization
Social life of insects on the example of modern civilization

Video: Social life of insects on the example of modern civilization

Video: Social life of insects on the example of modern civilization
Video: Extinction Rebellion digs up lawn outside Home Office 2023, November

According to Morozov, the existence of most modern civilizations is either dying or posthumous non-existence. The process of dying of civilization is presented as three separate sections: historical and cultural (in the first chapters), techno-biological (in the key text), biosocial (in the chapter "Insectoids"). The main emphasis is placed on the mechanisms of social organization of life: how people behave and organize themselves in different historical times. At the same time, parallels are drawn with the organization of the social life of insects.

For example, the older the culture-civilization becomes, the more insect component becomes in it in all spheres of life and the less freedom.

Civilization is turning into a hive. And every element, every person on the planet, every group performs its assigned function.

Who runs the hive? Not just one program. Material carriers of programs are contained in specific people as parts of the brain, innate and stitched through culture. When all programs interact, they become cramped, and they restrict each other.

The hive is run by a multitude of programs, a collection of programs. They are not related, they are found in separate insects. This collection of algorithmic programs that restrict each other seems to be a coherent program. But this is not - by analogy with how animals did not find the maternal instinct - many separate instincts were found.

Each person in himself is somewhat intelligent, but he is limited by other people. The limitations themselves have a structure, and as a result of their resultant a person ceases to be reasonable, and engages in unreasonable activities. By analogy - a bee builds hexagonal honeycombs in the same way - and only such honeycombs converge into a network. As a consequence of the many separate actions performed, a machine arises that makes the honeycomb a certain shape. Similarly, a machine arises in people, and this machine does the same actions, for example, it increases economic efficiency in the same way - by increasing the specialization of people. And the specialization of people increases by reducing the universalization of people.

Anthills also wage wars, like nations. But this is still the life of insects. Anthills are waging wars, but they do not know they are waging wars.

Ant queens do not tell the ants what they should do. The queen ant, like any other ant, also does not know what is happening with the anthill in general. Ants do what is written in them from birth, sometimes adjusting their actions in connection with the exchange of signals, the system of which is also embedded in them from birth. For example, pulling food is more important than pulling a stick. No food to lug around means to lug a stick. The later the humankind, the more it resembles an anthill, including in terms of management. The rulers can no longer give orders to their subordinates - the subordinates will act according to the accumulated inertia, and this will be enough for some time to survive. And permanent survival is impossible.

Ant queens don't rule. It is difficult to imagine, but in fact, a person cannot stand at the head of the imperious human beings. And the insect cannot. No one stands at the head of the imperious human beings, because it is impossible to stand at the head of them. And it is critically difficult to negotiate with the power that is scattered.

If you give a person freedom, then he will begin to show human qualities - he will begin to realize himself through this freedom. This implementation is contrary to the insectoid principle - everyone must be functional, and only consume what is just as functional (and one-dimensional). Self-realization, declaration of oneself as a man can lead him to superiority. This also contradicts the insectoid principle - everything is inherited, including superiority. Moreover, superiority and hierarchy in general can only be in one system, in a one-dimensional one.

The concept of "need" can really exist only in human society, and in post-human society - as an atavism (economic need-uselessness). Insects do not have someone who would say "must". And there is no "why is it necessary". Insects have no concept of the need for performance, but there is performance.

The level of understanding of the task decreases from individual to group. This is not about the correct understanding of the problem, but about the idea of it, about the clarity of this idea. The ant carries a stick to the anthill, and it fulfills its task. And the anthill does not know its task. A person knows that he has to work and start a family. But the larger the group, the more obscure the task becomes, up to humanity, which has no task at all, until the appearance of an alternative humanity, even theoretically. The ant always carries a stick to the anthill. If at the first stage of the life of an anthill this is correct for an anthill, then for the second it is wrong, since an anthill that has exceeded its normal size begins to die from imbalances in its size. The student has a clear idea of why he is studying; and the education system has extremely vague ideas about what it prepares the student for.

An insect can look like a human. This is an insectoid: an insect that looks like a human being. There is such a direction of horror films. In civilizations, it is found as a norm. Later civilizations are composed entirely of insectoids.

For a civilization to consist of insectoids, people need to be brought out. To destroy is not, since it is still done by people, but to squeeze from the light is the most rational and reasonable. They start with the lower social classes, when they are taken out, guest workers are brought in, and then all people in general are living out of the world.

Bullying of people occurs not only from the compensatory motives of representatives of the authorities - it is a rudiment, albeit degenerate, but human. Over time, more and more bullying does not come from human nature, but from the nature of insects. A mosquito buzzing at night does not know that it is mocking a person. In the same way, insectoids do not know this either. And insectoids over time become farther and farther from people, and there is less understanding.

Insectoids and insectoid and generate completely insane, enchanting evil, which is increasingly common and growing in late civilization. Why and why? They have no "why" and "why", they have it comes from inertial processes, previously defined as programs. Increasingly, when a search is conducted for the perpetrators of bullying people, these perpetrators are not found - it turns out that either everyone, or no one, the subject of evil dissipates as it approaches him. And this really works and gives orders to the human-beehive linkage system. And she will command, if people with human morality are not opposed to her.

The power of the human being tries to present the power itself as an extramoral system, as a large insect, a single human being, who has no good and evil, there is only functioning. The government presents itself like a church, which, according to the dogma, is not mistaken as a church, but does not exclude the possibility that any official of both the government and the church can be mistaken. But as a result, it still turns out - the power is beyond the boundaries of good and evil, and it has put itself beyond these boundaries. And the transcendences of good and evil, as you know, are not in the direction of good, but in the direction of evil, where human evil ends and inhuman begins. And where Bosch's insects begin.

So the fight against man by destroying everything human is inevitable.

Insects / insectoids attack the unfamiliar, unlike. Most talented children are turned into pathological neurotics by their parents at a very early age. Civilization is finishing off the few remaining.

When there are only insects around, there is no one to speak or listen to. Insects have no culture - literature, poetry, philosophy, and the like.

The vast majority of information, as it turns out, does not carry any information, but is pure buzz. This is especially true of information that is listened to in the background. Insects buzz - but there is no being, and there is no eventfulness.

The struggle in postmodernity is a struggle for freedom against insectization of life, which is the absence of freedom. And the fight for freedom is a fight against a human being.

A person can build a human being only in an unconscious state. An attempt to build a human man will deliberately lead to a conflict between human nature and the anti-human, insectoid task. Otherwise, a human being is built in an altered state of consciousness, when a person is turned off and an insect is turned on. An insect cannot understand a person, even if it is a switched off person.

Because at a particular moment there is no man in the insect, and then he will no longer be.

Civilization belongs to insectoids. They run in a civilizational humankind and perform their functions. And they don't understand people.

People in a humankind have no idea how few of them are. Or it seems to them that they are completely unique, single, and it is not clear who is running around them. In general, it is clear who. Insectoids and people similar to insectoids.

In civilization, not something abstract, like culture, is exhausted, but everything human, from the most complex to biology.

Only a human can notice replacement insectization. For example, he wants to communicate in a human way - and around insects, moving their antennae, humanly simply do not understand. And the insectoid will not notice this change; for him it is natural, he was born in this insect, formed and lives.

The performer - the writer, the artist, anyone else as the performer - needs listeners. The audience is his, the performer, the environment. Survival depends on the environment - how well it matches the environment. And if there is no environment at all, then survival will not work.

Developing the idea “the problem is not what they are. And the fact that we are not, "you can add:" the problem is not that there are insectoids, the problem is that no one is visible except for them."

From the side of a person, the absence of a person in another is seen, and not the presence of an insect. Understanding "these are insectoids" reconciles with reality and opens up opportunities for further decisions.

“But people somehow seem to survive somehow” - this is the main argument from which it follows that in general everything is correct, and the path, and the truth, and so on. In fact, civilized people do not survive. They degenerate and die out. Civilizations are replaced by other people, minimally affected by civilizations. And the process is constantly repeated. This is a meat grinder, constantly waiting for the next batch of human flesh. Minced meat cannot be turned back.

And this is the principle of irreversibility: from the living you can make the dead, but not vice versa; you can make an animal out of a person, but not vice versa; you can make a machine out of society, but not vice versa. Sometimes it seems that you can; this illusion is caused by the substitution taken for rebirth-regeneration. The degenerated aristocracy is being replaced by a living bourgeoisie, and it seems that the nation has revived. But it is not living from the dead, unhealthy from the sick; a replacement has occurred in the nation; if all the fish in the aquarium died and new ones were launched there, it can hardly be called regeneration (according to Gumilev). Social systems, living systems, in general, are not reformed. They die and new ones take their place.

The selection result - what kind of people will be - also depends on the environment in which people find themselves, from which side they look at these people. Civilization is an environment, an unnatural environment, displacing the natural environment, going through the process of degradation and degeneration of the natural, replacing it with the artificial and unnatural. The latter is usually weakly viable, and then only at first. Then it becomes completely unviable.

Insectoid systems proclaim welfare for all. Or later - at least a consumer minimum for everyone. And in general, the idea is becoming popular that in these times the “common man” can “just live”. But since the further, the more everything degenerates, the more everything breaks down, the more the system becomes anti-human, then the further - the more words about welfare and the more poverty. In insectoid systems, poverty deprives the vast majority of the population of economic freedom. Including the elementary freedoms to buy most of the goods. Not enough for life itself, and the average level is reduced painful reproduction. Most of the children are sick, and with each generation they are more and more sick. In order for healthy children to be born, a healthy human environment is needed. It may seem obvious, but insectoids have no concept of "obvious" in the human species.

When a person has no freedom, he cannot express himself. To which the insectoid ideology says: and it’s great, you don’t need to express yourself, you have to be an invisible cog that does what is prescribed for him - from birth. This approach destroys a person. Therefore, insectoid systems live only at the expense of people inherited from previous systems. When these people run out, the insectoid system also ends.

Human life can be insectoid for a very short time, it can only be life on the corpse of a nation or civilization, and only as long as the corpse is eaten up by insectoids.