No Incrementalism in Resistance

There is an old story, which tells of a frog in a pot. When the frog was put in the pot while the water inside was boiling, the frog would immediately leap out to safety. But, when the frog was placed into a cool pot, which was then heated up, it would remain in the pot until, eventually, it was cooked and dead. Now, I’ve never put a frog in boiling pot of water, nor have I ever tried to steam a frog, but the thought remains. Then again, maybe it depends on the frog.

For ages, however, this old tale has served as a metaphor for rulers, who, with their instinct of self-preservation intact, have used symbols along specific lines to lead individuals and the collective-mind, according to their self-declared jurisdiction and oft dark desires. Just as the latter frog might have only cooked because the process was incremental, those who make global policies rule by a philosophy of control that can be termed “incrementalism”; in other words, they are ever-so-patient in getting their way.

The capstone income-earners, the rulers–that is, those to whom the mass of wealth and power, in a contrived, yet natural manner, flows–direct investments, actions and reactions so as to unendingly consolidate, secure and promote their unswerving pre-eminence on earth. As monopoly men, they steer economic society in such a way that they increase their profit share. With goods and services on a centralizing course, those at the core of an economic system manage to perpetuate this arrangement. After all, that is how they view it: as managing the planet.

That such behavior is maintained, even when it is only those at the core of the system who benefit, at the fatal expense of a great many, speaks to the psychopathic nature of those who, in their minds, have successfully worked towards becoming CEO’s of the planet. In the captain’s helm of the neo-politburo, which guides the command-and-control economy of Western Civilization in its current stage, conscience is composed of an entirely different arrangement of matter as down below in the gallows, “where the men hang on for their dear lives.”

In incrementalism, the rulers persuade people to follow the path which, in their minds, will most likely result in the preservation of power for themselves. There is too, of course, a pseudo-spiritual or pseudo-religious aspect to this power, as the abuse of it, and the masochistic wielding of it, satiates their sick yearnings, perceived to be of luciferan origin by some of the players. Preserving the power, to be sure, is merely a means to an end, and this is where incrementalism comes in.

Totally authoritarian rule, complete domination and subordination, are the makings of a well-organized and orderly system in which rule is guaranteed to those who have previously wielded it. According to their logic, why they deserve to rule is quite simple: because they have previously ruled, and so therefore it is natural.

However, it is far from easy to implement such measures of control. Historically, in order to do so, ruling classes have, without fail, resorted to bringing in such systems slowly, so that, just as the frog won’t jump from slowly boiled water, people won’t notice and, therefore, act. In incrementalism, there are naturally stages through which society passes, and, as each stage comes into view, the paradigm of society shifts, although the general trajectory is logical in light of its predecessor.

There is no incrementalism in resistance. In a civilization scientifically dissected by/ for the capstone class, opposition to the dominant culture and its overseers would be futile were it to be bit-by-bit; that is, slow motion resistance can never re-create such a civilization towards less nihilistic and grotesque movements. Therefore, our civilization cannot incrementally be reoriented, not when “full spectrum dominance”, the literal construction of an omnipotent God as the system, is the never-ending agenda.

For these reasons, it is crucial for those who seek to help to become self-sustainable. This is done by learning skills such as acquiring even small plots of land, gardening for food, learning weapons skills, investing and securing wealth through gold and silver, seeking a network of reliable friends and family, and educating oneself and others in the techniques of control, consistently utilized by rulers, to protect the cognitive fabric of man.

Justin O'Connell blogs at The Handshake Times. He can be reached at: Read other articles by Justin.

One comment on this article so far ...

Comments RSS feed

  1. John Andrews said on August 19th, 2010 at 11:58pm #

    “learning weapons skills”…?


    We are not yet so oppressed that armed resistance is necessary (I know we’re getting there, but we ain’t there yet), and even if we were it’s not a useful lesson to be advocating… it alienates more people than it attracts. Any fool can learn to shoot a gun in five minutes if they have to.

    But I agree with the basic point that learning self sufficiency is good. However, it would be more useful to encourage people to learn skills for independent employment (i.e. not working for a boss), than how to shoot a gun. More important to read a history book or two (the right sort, obviously) than how to live on bugs and ground water.