The Paradox of Anti-Authoritarian Institutions The Biosecurity State and the Cultivation of Victimhood By June B. Introduction In our preceding essay, we engaged with the ethical and social complexities of technological advancements, leaning on the perspectives of Texas Slim and Paul Virilio. With Slim's layered framework for the internet and Virilio's theory of "speed politics," we explored how the pace and structure of digital life influence our autonomy, privacy, and ethical considerations. Now, as we deepen our investigation, we examine "Das Netz" ("The Net"), a documentary that scrutinizes the historical development of early internet technologies and centralized projects. Notably, these endeavors were geared towards not just scientific advances but also the prediction and control of human behavior. The film introduces us to critical terminology like "the authoritarian matrix" and "the F scale," while also discussing projects aimed at understanding human behavior for Cold War objectives. These ideas set the stage for us to confront academia's paradoxical role: institutions that profess anti-authoritarian ideologies but are entangled in systems designed for control. Virilio's "speed politics" becomes particularly relevant here as we consider how the speed at which information is disseminated can lead to states of exception—times when ordinary laws are suspended for the sake of "emergency." To further deepen our understanding, we look to Robert Malone's concept of a looming "kinetic-war," which foreshadows a conflict exacerbated by misinformation, rapid technological changes, and the politics of speed. Can decentralization, as Texas Slim discusses in "A Cowboy History of the Internet," offer a solution to these pressing issues? His vision suggests that decentralization could serve as a counterbalance to systems of control, potentially revolutionizing not just our online interactions but the academic institutions shaping our perspectives. The Historical Roots of Centralized Control: Lessons from "Das Netz" As we peel back the layers of history, we find that the seeds of centralized control were sown long before the advent of the modern internet. The documentary "Das Netz" offers an illuminating lens through which to examine this trajectory. The film delves into the development of early internet technologies like ARPANET and introduces us to seminal figures such as Robert Taylor, who contributed to these technologies under the guise of scientific progress. Yet, a more sinister objective looms in the backdrop: the desire to predict and control human behavior. The Legacy of ARPANET and Psychological Research The creation of ARPANET was not an isolated endeavor but part of a broader Cold War strategy aimed at rapid decision-making and information gathering. These centralized projects had the backing of influential organizations like the Joshua Macy Foundation and the International Institute for Social Research, both of which were invested in the "science" of human behavior. They experimented with methodologies designed to measure authoritarian tendencies, introducing concepts like "the authoritarian matrix" and "the F scale." In this context, it becomes vital to question whether these early projects cast a long shadow on our current perceptions of the internet and human interaction.

Amazon

Amazon

Virilio's Speed Politics and States of Exception Paul Virilio's idea of "speed politics" finds an eerie resonance in these Cold War objectives. The faster information could travel, the quicker decisions could be made, often bypassing any room for critical thought. Such speed could facilitate states of exception, where emergency situations could justify suspending regular laws or ethical considerations. Are we still operating under these norms, and what are the implications for academia, which should be a space for careful, reasoned analysis? June’s Escape from Academia is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Malone's Kinetic-War: The Next Frontier? Robert Malone's notion of an impending "kinetic-war" serves as a grim foreshadowing of what could happen if we do not adequately address these ethical and structural concerns. As information flows faster than ever, are we preparing ourselves for a conflict where facts are casualties and control is the ultimate prize? Decentralizing the Web: A Lesson from Texas Slim If the problems began with centralization, could the solution lie in decentralization? Texas Slim, in his seminal work "A Cowboy History of the Internet," argues for a layered approach to understanding the web. Each layer presents a new frontier with opportunities either for liberation or for control. A decentralized model could challenge the centralized norms that have been internalized, both in the digital realm and in educational institutions. In the following sections, we will delve deeper into each of these topics, exploring the ethical paradoxes they raise and contemplating the kind of educational reform that would address them. We will investigate the Frankfurt School's influence, question the pedagogies that foster a culture of victimhood, and explore how decentralization might offer a way out of this ethical labyrinth. The F-Scale and the Authoritarian Matrix: The Psychological Underpinnings of Centralization If decentralization offers a pathway to liberation, as suggested by Texas Slim, then it's vital to understand the psychological frameworks that may support or oppose such a transition. Enter the F-Scale and the Authoritarian Matrix, concepts that help us grasp how centralized control has roots not just in technological systems but also in human psychology. The F-Scale (Fascism Scale) Originating in the realm of social psychology, the F-Scale was developed to measure an individual's predisposition to authoritarianism. Designed by social scientists like Theodor Adorno in the wake of World War II, the scale gauges attitudes that lean towards authoritarian submission, aggression, and conventionalism. While the F-Scale was formulated in a different era and for a different medium—namely, the rise of totalitarian regimes—it can also serve as a lens through which to view online behaviors. Centralized online platforms can inadvertently or intentionally reinforce these authoritarian tendencies by rewarding conformity and suppressing dissent, thereby perpetuating a centralized status quo. The Authoritarian Matrix The Authoritarian Matrix is a conceptual framework that extends the logic of the F-Scale into systemic and institutional settings. In the context of the internet, this could refer to the algorithms and data structures that enforce a form of digital authoritarianism. These frameworks don't merely measure authoritarian traits; they can also reinforce them. For example, algorithmic recommendations on social media platforms can create echo chambers, reducing exposure to different viewpoints and thus stifling the democratic exchange of ideas. Relevance to Decentralization Decentralization, as endorsed by Texas Slim, serves as a direct counterpoint to the conformist and controlling tendencies highlighted by the F-Scale and the Authoritarian Matrix. A decentralized internet model could dismantle the centralized algorithms that perpetuate authoritarian traits. Instead of a few entities owning and controlling data, decentralized systems distribute control, providing individuals with the autonomy to break free from algorithmic determinism. In educational institutions, a decentralized pedagogy could encourage critical thinking over rote memorization, thereby cultivating an environment resistant to authoritarianism. June’s Escape from Academia is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Upgrade to paid Bridging the Gap However, the road to decentralization isn't as straightforward as flipping a switch. The psychological tendencies measured by the F-Scale and manifest in the Authoritarian Matrix have been deeply ingrained through years of exposure to centralized systems—both online and in educational settings. Addressing this requires an overhaul of not just the technological systems but also the educational pedagogies that shape human behavior. In subsequent sections, we will explore how the Frankfurt School's philosophy could provide intellectual tools to navigate this transformation. We will also discuss how current educational practices may inadvertently foster a culture of victimhood that, paradoxically, can further entrench authoritarian tendencies. Through a multi-pronged approach that involves technological, educational, and psychological reform, we may yet find a way out of the ethical labyrinth that has ensnared us. The Frankfurt School's Intellectual Toolkit for Decentralization If we are to seriously contemplate a shift toward decentralization, both online and in educational settings, then we would be well-advised to engage with the intellectual resources that can help us navigate this transformation. One such resource is the body of work produced by the Frankfurt School, a group of 20th-century social theorists who were deeply concerned with the authoritarian tendencies within society. Critical Theory as a Vehicle for Change One of the Frankfurt School's most enduring contributions is Critical Theory, which aims to critique and change society rather than merely understand or explain it. At its core, Critical Theory provides the tools to question prevailing ideologies, norms, and systems that perpetuate inequalities and authoritarian structures. In the context of our discussion, this approach can be incredibly valuable for questioning the centralized power dynamics inherent in the internet and educational systems. Horkheimer described a theory as critical insofar as it seeks "to liberate human beings from the circumstances that enslave them". Although a product of modernism, and although many of the progenitors of Critical Theory were skeptical of postmodernism, Critical Theory is one of the major components of both modern and postmodern thought, and is widely applied in the humanities and social sciences today. The Culture Industry and Centralization The Frankfurt School's concept of the "culture industry" is especially relevant here. Coined by Theodor Adorno and Max Horkheimer, this term describes how popular culture can be produced and manipulated by capitalist enterprises to induce passive consumption, thereby sustaining their own power and the existing social order. This idea can be extrapolated to the way internet platforms operate today. By shaping user experiences through algorithms designed to maximize engagement (and therefore revenue), these platforms become digital culture industries, driving not just consumer behavior but also political and social discourse. Educational Implications If we combine the Frankfurt School's critiques with the technological insights of Texas Slim and the psychological frameworks of the F-Scale and the Authoritarian Matrix, we arrive at a compelling argument for educational reform. Educational institutions have the potential to either perpetuate or disrupt these centralized and authoritarian structures. Properly incorporating Critical Theory into curricula could empower students to critically examine existing systems and consider alternative approaches like decentralization. Regrettably, the current application often backfires, trapping students in a cycle of societal contempt. The Dialectic of Enlightenment Another crucial contribution from the Frankfurt School is the "Dialectic of Enlightenment," which warns against the potential pitfalls of rational thought becoming a tool for domination rather than liberation. In the context of the internet, this serves as a cautionary note. While rational, algorithmic processes have created unprecedented convenience and connectivity, they have also enabled mass surveillance and the erosion of privacy. In the final sections, we will delve into how current educational practices are fostering a culture of victimhood that inadvertently strengthens authoritarian tendencies. We will also consider how decentralization could be an antidote to this predicament, offering a pathway out of the ethical labyrinth we find ourselves in. Critical Theory and the Sanitation-State Before diving into potential solutions, it's crucial to flesh out a critique of how Critical Theory has been applied, particularly in educational settings. While the theory aims to dismantle power structures and interrogate societal norms, I would argue that its application has taken a turn towards the creation of what might be termed a "sanitation-state." In this framework, Critical Theory's focus on systemic issues, instead of empowering students to challenge these systems, has led to an overemphasis on safe spaces, trigger warnings, and institutional interventions. The end result is a milieu that sanitizes educational environments, minimizes intellectual risk, and inhibits genuine discourse, all under the guise of creating a more equitable space. This outcome can paradoxically entrench centralized power by requiring administrative or even algorithmic arbitration in matters of speech, conduct, and even thought. Agamben optimistically argues that the legitimate power derived from national sovereignty is dying. That the grasping for totalitarian control via the state of exemption (“technological-sanitationist despotism”) cannot be sustained. Because people eventually see through the facade… The biosecurity state’s use of censorship and digitized isolationism, that is control of the digitized public square, is a new phenomena. New strategies, such as lock-downs, social distancing, and masking have been used to extend the state of exception. Keeping people isolated and on the sanitized net, rather than talking with each other, was planned to exert control and keep people compliant. Malone, R. (2023, August 24). A State of Exception. Robert Malone, MD. Bridging Theory and Praxis So, where does that leave us? If Critical Theory can both illuminate and complicate our path forward, its application in educational reform should be nuanced and cautious. Rather than dismissing it outright or adopting it uncritically, educators and policymakers would do well to blend the intellectual rigor of the Frankfurt School with practical insights from other spheres. For instance, the decentralizing perspectives of thinkers like Texas Slim offer us alternatives that promote autonomy and individual agency, moving us away from both the victimhood culture and the sanitation-state. The Consequences of a Victimhood Culture Revisiting our prior discussion about the phenomenon of "children parading their parents through the street," we can't afford to overlook the long-term consequences of cultivating a culture of victimhood. Take, for instance, the UK's recent changes to hate crime laws. Rather than being well-intentioned efforts at fair treatment, I would argue that these legislative changes are part of a larger, global move toward the centralization of thought and control over discourse. Through a labyrinth of legal complexities and selective protections, these laws create divisive hierarchies, which only serve to deepen societal fractures. This isn't an inadvertent outcome but a foreseeable consequence of legislation that aims to regulate personal beliefs and values. Extending the offence of stirring up hatred to cover stirring up hatred on the grounds of sex or gender. This would help to tackle the growing threat of extremist misogynist “incel” ideology, and its potential to lead to serious criminal offending.

Hate crime – Law Commission

Reforming the law

Towards a Decentralized Future: Introducing Christopher Alexander As we contemplate these complexities and look for pathways out of the ethical labyrinth, it might be useful to introduce the ideas of Christopher Alexander, particularly as articulated in his work "A Pattern Language." Alexander's work is not merely theoretical but offers concrete guidelines for decentralizing various aspects of human life and society, including architecture, urban planning, and potentially even digital spaces. His patterns present a nuanced understanding of human needs and interactions, providing a practical route to create more humane, interconnected, and yes, decentralized environments. Alexander's work provides practical methods for the social, psychological, and technological reforms required for decentralization. While Critical Theory provides the intellectual tools to deconstruct, Alexander offers the building blocks to reconstruct. Together, they could set the stage for an educational system—and a broader societal framework—that truly empower rather than stifle, liberate rather than control. In our next essay, we will delve deeper into Christopher Alexander's principles, examining how they could offer not just an antidote to the sanitation-state tendencies but also a concrete plan for the decentralization of knowledge and power, offering a transformative route out of our current predicaments.

THE INFORMATION BOMB by June B. for Texas Slim's Cuts Introduction In the digital age, the relationship between power and information has never been more complex or more critical. The explosion of data, facilitated by the internet, has implications far beyond convenience or global connectivity. This intersection of information and power raises important questions about societal control, individual rights, and the potential for resistance. One recent contribution to this discourse comes from Robert Malone's work, which investigates how states use the flow of information to normalize what philosopher Giorgio Agamben calls "states of exception." Malone is notable for challenging the ideological echo chambers that frequently ensnare discussions about power, urging us to question the assumptions embedded in the theories of "darlings of the left" like Agamben. "In every case, the state of exception marks a threshold at which logic and praxis blur with each other and a pure violence without logos claims to realize an enunciation without any real reference.” Giorgio Agamben, State of Exception, pg. 40 Agamben himself borrows from Carl Schmitt to describe situations where governmental powers expand dramatically to address emergencies, often with the tacit or explicit consent of the governed. Similarly, French cultural theorist Paul Virilio explores the socio-political implications of the rapid dissemination of information in his work "The Information Bomb," warning us of the existential risks tied to an unchecked proliferation of data. While both Agamben and Virilio offer nuanced theories on how states exert control in times of crisis or through the architecture of our information systems, they also point towards the dialectics of resistance. "Weapons are tools not just of destruction but also of perception— that is to say, stimulants that make themselves felt through chemical, neurological processes in the sense organs and the central nervous system, affecting human reactions and even the perceptual identification and differentiation of objects.” Paul Virilio, War and Cinema: The Logistics of Perception To get a more practical grasp on this complex interplay of control and resistance, this essay will delve into "The Cowboys History of the Internet" by Texas Slim. In his narrative, Slim provides an accessible exploration of the internet's layered structure, tracing its evolution from a free, open-source network to a controlled environment dominated by Big Tech companies. His perspectives provide not only a critique of the current state of the internet but also insights into possible avenues for resistance, especially in the context of specific industries like the beef sector. "Well, right now we're stuck on that third layer [of the internet], and it's an interface surface level layer. When I say that, I'm talking about all the social media companies, all these big tech companies, these software companies that basically innovated extremely powerfully on the internet. But the more they innovated, the more that they closed off and centralized what we call the internet." Texas Slim, A Cowboy History of the Internet By integrating Malone's critical perspectives with the theories of Agamben and Virilio, and grounding these ideas in the real-world evolution of the internet as described by Texas Slim, this essay aims to offer a multifaceted exploration of how information systems influence societal control and individual freedoms, and what forms of resistance might be viable in this intricate landscape. Robert Malone and the State's Use of Information to Normalize Exceptionality Robert Malone posits a compelling argument about how states have increasingly relied on the control and manipulation of information to legitimize "states of exception." A "state of exception," a term borrowed from the works of philosopher Giorgio Agamben, refers to emergency situations where the government expands its powers, often sidelining traditional checks and balances or individual freedoms. These exceptions are not new, but what is unprecedented, according to Malone, is the role that information—particularly digital information—plays in normalizing these extraordinary situations. In the era of the internet, information isn't just power; it's also a form of control. States deploy data, narratives, and images through various channels, shaping public perception and, consequently, public consent. The internet, once seen as a democratic frontier where information would be free and decentralized, has, in many ways, turned into an instrument for centralized power. Malone encourages us to re-examine our perceptions and assumptions about state power in this new technological context. Now, let's turn briefly to Texas Slim's "A Cowboy History of the Internet" to put Malone's ideas into perspective. Texas Slim introduces us to the internet's layered structure—from foundational protocols like TCP/IP, developed by Robert Kahn, to user interfaces like social media platforms that dictate our online interactions. In his narrative, the internet evolves from an open-source, text-based platform to a multimedia empire, increasingly under the control of Big Tech companies. This real-world illustration is particularly helpful in understanding how the centralization of the internet has provided fertile ground for states to normalize "states of exception" through control of information. Thus, the internet is not just a passive arena where state power is exercised; it's an active participant in the processes that legitimize state interventions, affecting diverse sectors, from banking to the beef industry. Malone's work helps us question not only how these mechanisms operate but also whether they are inevitable given the internet's current trajectory. "The use of fifth generation warfare techniques to combat the imperial state of exemption is one such tool [of resistance]. The question is, will this soon turn into a non-kinetic civil war, as the administrative state refuses to let go of their new found powers? A war that must be fought to maintain our freedoms?" Robert Malone, "A State of Exception" The Dialectics of Control and Resistance: Agamben, Virilio, and the Information Age Giorgio Agamben's theory of the "state of exception" has long captivated academic circles. However, as Robert Malone notes, Agamben's influence seems to have waned, leading to his ideas being somewhat marginalized in contemporary discussions. This is not a critique of the validity of Agamben's ideas but rather a testament to the ever-shifting terrains of power and discourse. Enter Paul Virilio, who presents a different lens through which we can examine states of exception in the information age. In "The Information Bomb," Virilio warns us about the consequences of the explosion of information and how it can create a new kind of "speed politics." The rapid flow of information not only enables states to exercise control but also accelerates societal transformations in unpredictable ways. This concept dovetails with the idea of an "invisible state of exception." In an era marked by an overload of information, it becomes easier for state apparatuses to control narratives, manipulate perceptions, and even rewrite history. The very mechanisms that could serve as democratizing forces can quickly be weaponized for control. As Texas Slim discusses in his history of the Internet, protocols like TCP/IP and DNS have been instrumental in the Internet's development but have also allowed for a form of centralized control. So, where does resistance fit in this intricate web? Both Malone and Virilio prompt us to consider new avenues for resistance that are attuned to the complexities of the information age. Traditional protests, political lobbying, and other forms of material resistance may not be as effective when the terrain of conflict extends into the digital realm. The layered structure of the Internet, as described by Texas Slim, offers some clues. Just as Slim introduces The Beef Initiative to leverage the Internet's architecture for a decentralized commerce system, so too could activists leverage the foundational layers of the Internet for new forms of resistance. By recognizing that state control operates not just in the physical space but also in the manipulation of information, bandwidth, and data flows, new strategies can emerge. Cyber activism, ethical hacking, and digital whistleblowing could be the new "sit-ins" and "teach-ins" of the modern age. Such forms of resistance recognize the terrain upon which modern-day states of exception are declared: not just on land, but in the bytes and pixels that increasingly define our world. Towards a New Form of Resistance: Navigating the Layers of Control and Freedom Agamben, Virilio, and Malone offer compelling frameworks that expose a world increasingly susceptible to invisible and omnipotent forms of state control. However, these dystopian landscapes also hide kernels of hope. The same technological systems that facilitate control offer avenues for resistance. But what would resistance look like in this new era, where the mechanisms of control are tightly woven into our very information architecture? (The above short is from Texas Slim’s Cuts, a company I helped create along with Texas Slim) Drawing upon Texas Slim's "A Cowboy History of the Internet," we can trace the evolution of the internet as a dynamic interplay between centralized control and decentralized freedom. Initially a text-based, open-source frontier, the internet has largely been tamed by Big Tech companies. However, as Slim reminds us through The Beef Initiative alternatives exist. By seeking refuge in the less-regulated, foundational layers of the internet, we find opportunities to create independent ecosystems for commerce and interaction, thereby sidestepping the centralized controls imposed at higher layers. Emerging technologies like Bitcoin and Nostr embody this principle. These applications operate at the protocol layer, far removed from the influence of central authorities. Bitcoin, by leveraging POW technology, resists the monopolistic tendencies of financial institutions. Nostr, on the other hand, aims to create a decentralized and censorship-resistant global social network. Both offer roadmaps for how to construct parallel systems that can co-exist alongside traditional ones, providing a sort of 'lifeboat' during times when traditional systems become overly oppressive or controlled. Digital civil disobedience in this context might mean engaging with these foundational layers to create decentralized networks that circumvent traditional control mechanisms. Much like the DNS and TCP/IP protocols offer a backbone of freedom beneath the surface-level internet, activists could focus on these lower layers as a space for developing alternative systems. In addition, ethical hacking and data leaks, when employed responsibly, can act as the information age's counter-culture movement. These are the digital equivalents of historical forms of resistance like investigative journalism and whistleblowing, and serve to expose malpractice and hold powerful institutions accountable. Lastly, let's not forget Virilio's "information bomb." While he warns about its capacity to inundate and confuse, this explosion of information can also empower. When wielded effectively, information can disrupt dominant narratives, serving as a powerful tool for mass mobilization and the crafting of alternative perspectives. In essence, although the machinery of control has grown more sophisticated, so too have the possibilities for resistance. As we navigate this landscape, it becomes clear that the strategies we employ must be as fluid and adaptable as the ever-evolving systems they aim to challenge or replace. Conclusion: Opening a New Conversation on Academia—Lessons and Paths Forward in an Uncertain Landscape My profound conversation with Texas Slim just a few days ago has been a catalyst for rethinking the paradigms that inform this very essay. We dissected the multifaceted nature of state power, the promise and peril of decentralized technologies, and the insidious capture of academic institutions. Slim's Cowboy History of the Internet offered a unique lens through which to interpret the unsettling encroachment of control within layers of society that we have, perhaps naively, regarded as bastions of free thought and exploration. In this age of complexity, where even the stewards of knowledge like universities become pawns in larger battles for narrative control, the cautionary tale of the Maoist Revolution looms large. The indelible image of children parading their parents through the streets, denouncing them before the masses, offers a visceral example of how perverted the institution of learning can become when leveraged for ideological ends. It's a vivid, haunting reminder that systems of learning and thought, once captured, can turn into weapons that turn us against our own families, history, and diversified perspectives. This is not merely a macabre slice of history but an evolving, adaptive narrative that's spreading globally. Slim emphasized that the very mechanisms that fueled the Maoist Revolution have been refined and transplanted, reaching as far as Australia, the UK, and now, unsettlingly, the United States. These institutions of learning are no longer isolated but connected layers in a network of influence that also encompasses the digital realms of the Internet. The urgency of Slim's insights brings into sharp focus the need for multi-layered strategies for resistance. While emerging technologies like Bitcoin and Nostr promise avenues for decentralization and autonomy, they are not silver bullets. Slim and I concurred that, like academia, these technologies could also fall prey to the same forces of institutional capture if we aren't hyper-vigilant. Thus, as we tread carefully into the future, our quest for understanding must be bolstered by dialogues like the one I had with Texas Slim. These exchanges not only unravel the complex quilts of power and control but also embolden us to take a stand, to be innovative in our strategies, and to be unwavering in our commitment to freedom and equity. The decisions we make today will have far-reaching implications, shaping not only our own future but that of generations to come. In closing, let us carry forth this expanded understanding of academia's role in a landscape that's rapidly shifting under the weight of centralized control and ideological capture. Let's continually reassess our strategies for resistance, ensuring they evolve as dynamically as the forces we oppose. We stand at a watershed moment, with both peril and promise beckoning. What kind of future will we choose? And how will our choices resonate through the annals of history? It's our collective responsibility to ensure those echoes herald a world of greater freedom and equitable opportunity.

The Information War You Didn't Know About This is not merely a macabre slice of history but an evolving, adaptive narrative that's spreading globally. Slim emphasized that the very mechanisms that fueled the Maoist Revolution have been refined and transplanted... https://juneb.substack.com/p/the-information-war-you-didnt-know

"We had some overweight dipshit from Boston, Bob, who knew he could have been working for the NSA. If you needed to know anything about computer networking in those days and times, he was the one who had the answer. His lack of social skills was inversely proportional to his level of intelligence." - Texas Slim from The Harvest of Deception Not gonna lie this sounds like some of yall lol

Coming Soon Inshallah