One of the most harmful modern superstitions are the notions that all people are equal, and the underlying democratic idea that every individual’s vote should be counted equally. All individuals were not born equal, and certainly after birth they don’t develop equally. Some are born with genes that make them inherently stronger, others are weaker or somehow disabled at birth, while most of us are average in this manner. This also applies to people’s mental and spiritual faculties. Personal lifestyle affects the development of individuals greatly, as well. Chances are that someone who trains several days a week is more likely to qualify for the Olympics rather than a person who sits on his ass drinking beer and watching TV. This is generally understood, and therefore you don’t see many beer bellies in the Olympics. However, our society treats politics differently. A person who has spent years studying politics does not get more votes than the person who spends his life drinking beer.
The supposed idea behind modern democracy is that people get to decide for themselves how their lives are run, instead of some despot making the decision. Sounds appealing in theory, but in practice, democracy ensures the despot gets to rule over you as the masses who only care about beer and TV always vote him in. As long as the despot looks credible as he promises them more beer and TV (or Obama phones), the masses will always vote for him, whereas the minority who actually sees through the act get trampled over. The reason why democracy is such a failure in the modern-day is not that it has been hi-jacked, but it is based on the false premise that all people are equal.
A great number of people are mentally on the level of animals. They only care about immediate satisfaction. In their personal life it is manifest in behaviour such as only looking forward to the next weekend when they can get drunk. In politics and social issues it means they vote for someone they think looks good and sounds good, without bothering to take into account the fact that politicians are known liars, nor do they bother to find out if the politician is saying what you want because in the current climate this issue will gain him popularity. Four years ago they might have advocated the exact opposite. When dealing with these animalistic people, the ideas of human rationality and nobility are a bad joke.
These people do not care about, or are incapable of understanding, the truth in matters. They do not ponder over issues, and look at the from different angles trying to understand. They want premade TV-dinner packages that look and taste good regardless of the actual content. Let’s look at the issue of the origin of the Earth and humanity. For a couple of millennia, the vast majority of people believed in the story that God created the Earth in six days, and on the seventh he rested. Sometime later God made Adam out of clay, and Eve out of his rib. The majority believed it, since they were told to believe it. Nowadays, however, the majority, or at least that’s how it appears, believe the universe was created in the Big Bang and eventually Earth came to be. Life on Earth emerged from primordial goo, gradually evolved from single-celled organisms into fish, the fish evolved into land-dwelling creatures, eventually into mammals, apes and then into humans.
In the Christian Era in Europe if you did not believe in the Biblical creation story, you were deemed a dangerous heretic or heathen, and possible were tortured by the inquisition or burnt at the stake. Nowadays if you don’t believe in the so-called scientific explanations of the Big Bang and Evolution, you are ridiculed as a stupid, backward religious nut, or as a simple-minded fool. Personally I don’t find either explanation adequate, the Biblical one or the Scientific one. Both stories have some merit, but overall I find them lacking. I simply do not know what the truth is.
The animalistic masses though, based on my observations, do not care what the truth is. Or more like they only can see the truth as some almost tangible trophy you can hold by pummeling the opposition into the ground, like in a sports game with two teams. They only seem to care that someone with authority claims that a certain story is the truth, and the masses accept it as the unquestioned truth. They don’t care about the facts as much as they care about the social consensus. Let’s say for the sake of the argument that the Big Bang theory is correct, however I would say that the vast majority of people who believe in the theory, do not believe in it because they have done the research, but because the Scientific Authority says it is. This is the crux of the matter.
The animalistic people seem to have a simulated rationality or consciousness. They are like NPCs in a roleplaying game, or generic characters in a movie with only one line. They can be characterized as an archetype like shopkeeper, police officer or student. They lack true individuality. Their sense of reality does not come with experience and observation of the external world, but rather by the social consensus. Whatever they feel is the norm in society, is real and necessary to them. When they come face to face with a claim such as “9/11 was an inside job”, they do not care what narrative unfolds by perusing the facts, but rather they look at the social implications. They have heard that only crazy people care about conspiracy theories, and were they to express such opinions they would be ostracized from society, and to these people this is the worst fate imaginable. The animalistic people do not care about issues such as truth and justice, they only can see how an issue might benefit or hinder their well-being.
It does not mean that everyone who thinks 9/11 was a false flag is somehow magically a proper, conscious human being either. The conspiracy theorist-subculture has been growing in popularity in the recent decade, and the main stream explanation for many issues has become less sustainable, so the conspiracy culture has attracted many animalistic people as well. You can see plenty of people who accept only one version of 9/11, for example, and people who suggest different theories are attacked.
The animalistic people view reality in sense of the social consensus. Whatever the society thinks is good, is good, and whatever it regards as bad is bad. If a psychopath is in charge, they become sociopathic. The animalistic people seem somehow disconnected from both the natural and the spiritual aspects of life, despite me using the word “animalistic” for them. It’s more like mentally and spiritually they are on the level of animals, but you wouldn’t resent a dog for its inability to play chess or vote wisely in the election, but you would for a human being who seems unable to put two and two together. I certainly have. However, this is based on the assumption that the guy supporting Bush/Obama is somehow spiritually or mentally equal to me, and the same sense of responsibility applies to them as to me. Yet if, as I argue, there are significant differences in the mental and spiritual potential between different human beings, and some people are simply incapable of reaching certain conclusions by themselves, then it is pointless to resent them for it.
I do not know what the actual difference between animalistic and conscious human beings is, except that it is a metaphysical one. I don’t think it is a mental one. Some people may simply be too dumb to look at the evidence regarding 9/11 or understand that Obama is capable of lying too. But I think for the vast majority who still keep buying all sorts of blatant lies, a deeper metaphysical inability to detach from the social consensus, is the issue. You can use the Hindu/Buddhist explanation to say that they haven’t lived enough lifetimes and evolved enough spiritually to think independently, or you can say that God rolls dice when people are born to determine their potential. I don’t know how to explain it, but I merely think this is a profound spiritual difference between two types of people.
This isn’t a simple digital yes/no scenario, however. There’s no absolutely certain way of telling who is conscious and who is animalistic. I think that some people are more or less incapable of arising beyond this animalistic state, but a lot of people have potential to arise beyond it, but they don’t always manage to do it. Fear is one obvious reason. Although deep down they might suspect that some piece of dogma held sacred by the social consensus might be wrong, they are unwilling to look into it because of fear, or it might take years to admit to themselves the truth. The difference between fearful individuals and animalistic people is that the animalistic people believe the dogma, a man-made construct, is the only reality, whereas some people deep down might understand that is not true, but are unwilling to go there.
It is time for conscious people to face the facts, and understand that some people are incapable of higher mental functions. Do not waste your energy trying to “wake up the sheeple” because many of them can never be woken up. They will always follow the social consensus. To help the sheeple we need to change the consensus from one filled with lies to a truthful one. Also, in case it wasn’t clear, my message is to stop resenting the animalistic sheeple for their lack of understanding, for it is the best they are capable of. We need to have the courage to lead them. Have compassion for them, but be realistic and do not fool yourself that you are equals. In a sense, they do not have free will. We do.