CultState| You are more than your identity
The Internet has allowed a person to decouple their information experience from their physical characteristics. For example, a tall, white American male of heterosexual preference can legitimately create a persona of a short, black Nigerian female of homosexual preference and as long as he can explain what such an identity means to him, then others will be forced to accept that identity as valid because there are no other points of reference to utilize. As a result of this, a tremendous explosion of identity-oriented relationships have compelled people to accept the self-identification of another, regardless of other contributing factors of identity. This has resulted in turning every single person on the internet into an identity extremist. In this case study, I will put forth a theory on how to fracture these self-forming monocultures of identity so that they become trapped in a state of diminishing returns.
First, we shall examine an identity known as /pol/. /pol/ is a political board on 4chan. People who self-identify as European nationalist (and related identities) as well as those who oppose such views tend to congregate there. The structure of the communication is just as important as the communication itself. It is anonymous by default. There are no user accounts and no history of usage as contributions to the board ultimately get deleted after a short time. Any identity criteria are voluntary and can be changed on a per post basis. The structure of communication allows for an extremely flexible expression of self-identification, and ironically, the mass amount of participants of the board rarely deviate from a European nationalist identity.
The only people who exploit said flexibility are those who opposed to the European nationalist identity. Very commonly, threads are derailed, content will be intentionally pushed off of the main page, and off-topic threads quickly dominate the content space. This results in perpetual agitation of the main community. However, because of their adherence to free speech, they refuse to fix this via policy and rarely issue bans even upon the most coordinated attempts of agitation. The agitation does not provide any significant criteria for education or conversion and, instead, is rooted in achieving identity revenge and low-hanging social justice objectives.
This fixation comes from the European nationalist identity being considered the most evil and disgusting of all identities since the rise of globalism. Because of this permanent friction, the European nationalist identity doubles down and takes a permanently defensive position, certain that at every possible moment, an agitator will very overtly attempt to provoke him because of his identity preference. Paranoia dominates the typical exchange, but when self-identity is expressed and mutually appreciated, the participants resonate in a much more meaningful fashion. They generally have collective enemies, (the internationalist Jewish banking system) collective heroes, (Military conquerors) collective fears, (Heritage displacement) and collective utopias. (Homogeneity)
In short, in order for someone to embrace a self-identification that the entirety of western civilization has spent the last 70 years actively demonizing and, in most cases, have made illegal, there must be excessively compelling reasons for one to participate that go beyond the typical polemics and knee-jerk assumptions third-party observers are trained to repeat.
Actors: Pixel-based Feminism
In addition to allowing illegal and morally reprehensible self-identifications, the Internet also contains politically-sponsored and morally righteous self-identifications as well. Pixel-based Feminism is a self-identification where one engages in the expressions of female supremacy through electronic mediums. (Supremacy in relation to their current socioeconomic position, not in the absolutist sense) It has a massive social support network spanning high-traffic blog sites, content propagators, and forums that are highly identity-oriented. The structure of communication is based largely on point systems for social status. Views, followers, upvotes, comments, downloads, retweets, favorites, and many other arbitrary metrics are used isolate and deeply quantify the value of one person over another.
The primary way to game this economic system is through identity consolidation where anything that provides bombastic worship for female supremacy is considered good, while anything that does not is considered worthy of a fatwa. This incredibly simple consolidation is intuitive even to the newest of participants. Ironically, this self-identity has deep historical roots utilizing the most flexible interpretations of identity politics to its favor, but it is regulated by a very rigid regime of social status. None the less, they enjoy a monoculture that can be summoned on command to game non-anonymous systems very efficiently.
These various point-based status systems helps assist in the purging of agitators, and thus, reducing the exposure to criticisms which ultimately forms a monoculture. Free speech, as it is commonly understood in the West, is not tolerated and the status system helps eliminate that as well. Because being cut off from the identity consolidation greatly reduces one’s chances at gaming the system, internal conflicts are rare, but quickly sorted out. They generally have collective enemies, (the patriarchy) collective heroes, (Feminist authors and sociologists) collective fears, (Loss of influence) and collective utopias. (Equality)
In short, as long as one subscribes to the idea that a quantifiable status system helps propagate emotional expressions, an individual will orient their self-identify in the interests of identity consolidation instead of one rooted in personal conclusions. Conflict is frequently avoided and constantly self-corrected. Foreign ideas have zero impact on the community as a whole.
As a result of the difference in these communication structures, /pol/ is under constant criticism from feminist efforts (and affiliated identities they have collected over the century). Feminists, however, are very successful at protecting their monoculture through a layered approach:
On the outside, they appear to be invincible. However, upon closer inspection of the status system, it is actually an imperial monoculture, not a voluntary one. Meaning, one has to submit their will to the identity consolidation to achieve leveraged gains. This means if two participants of the Feminist identity self-identify themselves as women, but one woman self-identifies some other aspect of herself as one thing while another woman self-identifies that same aspect as something else, conflict will occur because that aspect’s influence will result in non-approved strategies to game the status system, and thus, be considered cheating.
This tiny difference, when compounded enough over time, can result in a fracturing of the monoculture. In theory, if a European nationalist identity could be proven to exist in that monoculture, then they would be targeted by the same branding they have judiciously handed out to others. Because this European nationalist identity is so closely tied to the common enemy of Feminism, (the patriarchy) not only would the monoculture be fractured, but those branded as “racist” will have to spend far more of their status influence just to participate in the monoculture, let alone command it as they previously had. Because the branding is eternal and irredeemable, when exposed to sustained branding, their entire apparatus will cost far more energy to operate than it puts out, and thus, put the monoculture into a state of diminishing returns.
One should always know the history of any religion they believe they are a part of.
The Marxian concept of class consciousness started by trying to leverage the yields of the Industrial Age to bring about a material version of European Christian redemption. As it failed to fulfill its promises, the thunderous applause it commanded at the beginning of the 20th century mutated into a desperate and often clumsy cacophony of identity politics. As this game of minority musical chairs evolved, the band continuously played the siren song of an unattainable yet highly romantic idea of equality. Such intoxicating chords acted as a factory that manufactured new political identities on demand. The outcome is obvious: If every person believes that the unattainable equality can only be achieved by replacing social interaction with self-regulating echo chambers of identity, then all methods of communication will carry an additional volume of risk that cannot be offset. Manufacturing political identities, then, is the only way the elite can retain control in the Age of Information.