Nov 11 – Subjective Individuals (re-edited)

I.

The man who – whether by self-deception, principal, or clear conscience faith – earnestly believes that the objective standard and the sense of values, ethical conduct, and moral outlook that such things engender, does not and, moreover, cannot originate within his own mind – insofar as such “objectivity” remains distinctively externalized – will be no match against the man who has internalized such things; the subjective man as one who, owing no real allegiance to anyone or anything other than himself and his own evolving, amorphous whims, can always avail himself with the contrivances of deception, cunning, intrigue, manipulation, obfuscation, and subterfuge to achieve his goals, those which the so-called “objective man” cannot for the sake of the principals that he – erroneously or not – believes everyone has in common, adheres to, and believes is self-evident to all.

II.

Only Objective Men living in an objective society can successfully build a stable society and enduring civilization, the brick, rebar, and mortar thereof which is the externalized values, mores, customs, traditions, and ethics that the people implicitly share and think seldom (if ever) about, and if think, then not too deeply or critically. For that which truly builds a people together are those intimations of the spirit which remain as spirit and work effortlessly, cohesively, and invisibly as they presumably “should”; intimations which will, as the society becomes more specialized, differentiated and “complex,” begin to lose their implicit and unseen nature, breaking down to the point where they eventually become externalized as distinct “things”, and as things subject to change, decay, disintegration, manipulation, alteration, or the simple swaying influence of the teleological faculties of man.

III.

Subjective individuals only arise (usually as gadflies) when the objective function of a people has completed its task of solidifying, foundationalizing, and integrating its disparate members and groupings into a homogenously-implicit cultural block, at which point the virulence that once animated said function begins to slow, stutter, lose momentum, and ultimately falter; failures which the most decadent and depraved of a people – sensitive as such ones are to the nihilism which always awaits the existential crisis that ensues in the wake of the loss of a culture’s objectivity – begin to recognize, as Socrates, and question, as Socrates, the most hallowed values enshrined in said objectivity, the questioning of such gadflies which never finds a suitable answer but only arouses more questions, finding evermore insufficiencies, more doubts, suspicions, and finally skepticisms toward literally everything that once made “a people” implicitly that; skepticism which all the while erodes the collective moral will by which a healthy, balanced, and hierarchical civilization is maintained, never mind the futile attempts by its Socrates’ to reconstitute a new moral standard made, whether intended or not, in their subjective image(s).

IV.

The maturation of philosophy, therefore, only seriously comes to pass among a decadent, subjective people who are beginning to experience the birth pangs of their own moral deterioration which, once begun, will eventually lead to their societal, cultural, economic, and genetic collapse; philosophy which, among people of the West anyway, always precedes and thrives at the very beginning of a people’s cultural explosion, territorial expansion, and intellectual dominance, all of which are doomed to implode for lack of moral resolve which always and in every way must supply the tensile strength that might enable a civilization to grow upward; philosophy which, however, aids little in its outward growth and is, in fact, often a detriment and hindrance in the face of multinational conquest; moral character which, as stated, actually constrains and constricts a people from achieving total victory and is, therefore, the first that must be sacrificed before empire can truly begin.