logicp_writings/collectivist_theology/WhoIsCritical.md

Critical vs Critical

Introduction

From DQSH:

... bring your notes and put on those glasses, everybody, because this requires reading on multiple levels.

"They love coded language which requires "reading on multiple levels", because any good Marxist with a postmodern flavour knows that language is power, and if you're concerned with getting rid of structural oppression then it is your MORAL DUTY to manipulate everyone by employing a double meaning to language wherever possible"

Double meaning / multiple levels

Their goal is to get you to agree to statements by exploiting the best aspects of humanity (open minded tolerance and good faith) by inserting words in those statements with hidden / double meaning.

Kind of like arguing over the definitions, but even more sinister. For example calling everything critical so that liberal minded people agree on the basis of critical thinking, when they are in fact getting you to agree that critical consciousness should supersede critical thinking.

Good to let them know it's Critical Consciousness. Wokes will agree while uneducated will ask what you mean, and then you can reveal the game.

Call them out

You can also call out the woke on insidious, bad faith behaviour and take away their moral high ground.

Critical is the word, because then you debunk the assertion that CRT and the like are "history", and reveal the path from Critical Theory, which comes straight from Marxism.

Connect the path and make them defend base logic that less educated people are more familiar with (Marxism, Maoism, Lenninism, Socialism by the original definition - not social safety nets from capitalist countries).

Gnostic thinking

Important to remember that "gnostic thinking" means that they feel there's something not right about how things are.

It goes beyond wanting to make incremental improvement. Things are not right in a very intolerable way, as though one is being forced to believe lies. And this is actually happening, depending on how you want to frame it, so it's easy for people to keep being redirected back into these thoughts.

For the gnostic, critical thinking/logic/reason are not enough, because if those tools were indeed our way of discerning truth, then things would be right. But they're not right, and since those tools are regarded as those that, when utilized in a pure form, are free of corruption and bias, they believe that they're actually being chosen so that people can induce corruption and gerrymander the world to their bias (and even if they're not doing it specifically on purpose, it at least done in service to others).

Whereas in Heretical Christian offshoots that developed Gnostic traditions, which believed the demiurge had created the material reality to separate Man from his rightful state of being, which is as a God, or at least a spiritual being, the modern "gnostic" thinking sees the beneficiaries of inequality as being that entity - pulling a false reality over everyone's eyes and robbing them of an existence more in line with the true nature of things.

What ends up happening is that the idea of "truth" is something which is based on actuality, rather than reality. It is what has been actualized "so far", but it's not in line with reality. Reality is when things as are they are supposed to be - so reality is becoming.

In this way, what is true is what Works. Not what is evaluated as most true with critical thinking. That provides the rationale to fool others in pursuit of speeding up the becoming of true reality. It's a moral duty to fool them. To fool you.

Logical Consistency

Your incessant insistence on logical consistency recharges the forces which cause things to not be right. The domination and injustice.

It pisses them off, you asshole. The words are like poison. Words are magic.

If you to ascribe to them word with hidden meaning where the normal definition is neutral but the hidden meaning reveals something about them, they'll double over and have spasms.

I remember once I used the word "discourse" in a dispassionate and neutral way to mean exchange/communication, and my woke conversation partner was like "IT'S NOT A DISCOURSE!". Lol, ok.

Strategy

You have to know all their hidden meanings, and be able to spit it out on the spot, if you want to engage the word games. Alternatively you can just not cooperate in a more passive way