The Hive Mind

reply to post by JoshNorton


We're going to disagree here and I'll just quote from the very first definition of hive mind that comes up on a
search:

dictionary.reference.com...

: a type of collective consciousness where individuality is stifled; a state of conformity; also written hivemind

just to make sure it's not semantics we're trifling over.

In the examples I gave, individuality and the sacredness of life and implied liberty bow to the hive. It's not a judgement of groups and brotherhoods and sisterhoods which are the natural outcropping of individual expression seeking fellowship amongst like minds. It's the point where the longing and safety of belonging gives in to please me - think like me. It's the point where one overlooks something awful as necessary in order to belong or be safe within the group.

Originally posted by luxordelphi
We're going to disagree here and I'll just quote from the very first definition of hive mind that comes up on a
search:

dictionary.reference.com...

: a type of collective consciousness where individuality is stifled; a state of conformity; also written hivemind

just to make sure it's not semantics we're trifling over.

Sure, and that's fine, because that's how that term got started in sci-fi. I just think that today the meaning is opening up some... you see bloggers referring to their commenters as hive-mind when asking for advice. It has, to some extent, become synonymous with a "collective opinion", which may not always be a bad thing. The opinion of the hive at any given moment is like a zeitgeist.

I see the Occupy Wall Street movement as a hive-mind, and not derogatorily, but again, I may be in the minority, or perhaps there's a better word to describe it... Rhizomatic rather than arborescent?

Originally posted by partycrasher
That number 1 keeps coming up...subtle but it keeps showing itself.

But the numbers 3, 5, and 7 are more predominant than the number 1 is in Freemasonry.

reply to post by partycrasher

Well, when you're talking about a group, "we" is just going to naturally be used. That is just common sense.

reply to post by JoshNorton

Thank you Josh!!!

reply to post by partycrasher

Where in Freemasonry do we use "For the greater good?"

As for the "ends justify the means" slogan, I'd say this is applicable to the anti-Masons as they are willing to do anything to either destroy us or "expose" us by whatever means.

reply to post by AugustusMasonicus

You caught that too?

Originally posted by KSigMason
But the numbers 3, 5, and 7 are more predominant than the number 1 is in Freemasonry.

Come to my lodge, with all the tasty beer number 1 will become a much more prominent part of your life. At least for the evening that is....

reply to post by JoshNorton


You caught me red-handed and yes, I'm a fan of Orson Scott Card and his 'Enders Game.' So - yeah - probably I'm behind in the evolution of the meaning of hive. As far as rhizomes and arbors - I guess there can be as many different sorts of relationships as there are people or in this case plants and trees. My objections are not to fraternity but to a lack of fail-safe or oversight when it comes to a leader which can be veiled as a common purpose which can present itself as a greater good. The Occupy Wall Street I had viewed as some sort of an awakening that took hold with a lot of people simultaneously. Still I guess it could have been orchestrated although that serves no purpose that I can see and the right to assemble in light of a common complaint as long as there is no incitement to riot is guaranteed to sovereign men and women in the U.S. Zeitgeist I'm not familiar with so can't speak to that.

Originally posted by luxordelphi
As far as rhizomes and arbors - I guess there can be as many different sorts of relationships as there are people or in this case plants and trees. My objections are not to fraternity but to a lack of fail-safe or oversight when it comes to a leader which can be veiled as a common purpose which can present itself as a greater good. The Occupy Wall Street I had viewed as some sort of an awakening that took hold with a lot of people simultaneously. Still I guess it could have been orchestrated although that serves no purpose that I can see and the right to assemble in light of a common complaint as long as there is no incitement to riot is guaranteed to sovereign men and women in the U.S.

Arborescent is a strict hierarchal structure, like a tree. Whereas a rhizome has no such hierarchy, and spreads more like the root systems of mushrooms or other fungi. So by your own description, OWS was an organism without a central head or leaders directing things.

Zeitgeist I'm not familiar with so can't speak to that.

I was referring to zeitgeist in the original, philosophical sense—not the conspiracy theorist movie of the same name. Generally speaking, “the defining spirit or mood of a particular period of history”.

reply to post by JoshNorton


Thx for your easy definition of zeitgeist.

So by your own description, OWS was an organism without a central head or leaders directing things.

Organically speaking, yes. However, I'm going to give them something more than that at least in the beginning of the movement and that's going to be that there comes a point where spirit must express or die.

reply to post by AugustusMasonicus

Well, next time I'm out on the East Coast, I'll PM you again.

You notice how the "religious fundamentalists" and "anti-masons" around here view the world collectively. They believe there is a competition-less agenda by a collective called "Illuminati" or "TPTB". But there is no such collective.

Some believe there is a collective homosexual agenda or a collective media agenda or a collective anti-religious agenda. No such competition-less totalitarian collectives exist in reality.

Hitler and Stalin also viewed everything collectively. And if one believed in Satan, one knows he too saw everything collectively ("We are Legion").

Viewing everything collectively is in itself hive-mind mentality.

The cause of false generalizations is laziness. One is too lazy to look at the Elite and collectively labels them all as "Illuminati". One is too lazy to research each media agency and calls them "the media agenda".

and again i will type-

when republicanism makes government so small it does not exist-

when there is no government, whether due to government is no longer affordable or other political failure or catastrophe results in chaos-

number 1 will ultimately be YOU versus everybody else-

your family has left you or worse, no home, no job, no money, no food...

all you got left is your muscle and brain

versus everybody else who is hungry

the hiveless hivemind

this will be how we humans started before law

natural law, natural selection...

the strong live, the weak die....

the strongest that survive breed and further strengthen the species with their superior genes.....

mankind in this heartless unpampered state continues to grow.

the phoenix rises from the ashes.

even out of the darkest pit...hope?

reply to post by partycrasher

From the sounds of it, you follow the political theories of Thomas Hobbes instead of John Locke. You seem to be authoritarian and pessimistic of human nature.

Originally posted by partycrasher
the strong live, the weak die....

If that were the case then humanity would have not gotten very far as the weakest among us, our children, are nutured and cared for in such a manner that they are able to grow to adulthood, participate in society and then (hopefully) take care of us who, in turn, has become the weaker member of society. To protect the weak is a trait that seperates us from many other species.

I'll expound on my previous post:

Originally posted by partycrasher
when republicanism makes government so small it does not exist-

If you really want to get to the heart of the matter, the Republicans haven't really shrunk government in recent years as most R-politicians claim they are trying to do. A smaller "lean & mean" government can still effectively operate, particularly if it follows the limitations of the Constitution as it is not the only government as each state has the capability to better rule over the people. Just my opinion, but I'm also a hopeless classical liberal (John Locke), modern conservative, against authoritarian forms of government.

Originally posted by partycrasher
when there is no government, whether due to government is no longer affordable or other political failure or catastrophe results in chaos-

This was the belief of Thomas Hobbes as well. Very pessimistic, but just because a government ends doesn't necessarily mean the society ends as the people are still there interacting with each other.

Originally posted by partycrasher
natural law, natural selection...

the strong live, the weak die....

the strongest that survive breed and further strengthen the species with their superior genes.....

Wow, speaking of Force Theory (aka Statism), where force is seen as a positive attribute of society as "might makes right". This was something pushed by Nietzsche and later Hiter.

I guess the scariest form of a hive mind and the one we should be careful about in the future is voice to skull type technology and its ultimate purpose, with synthetic technology they could link us together so we would indeed be a forced hive mind to a certain extent and if you do enough research this type of tech is being worked on and in some cases has been used.


Anyway food for thought.


Here's a thread on ATS that touches upon what i'm talking about......

www.abovetopsecret.com...&addstar=1&on=13348424#pid13348424

This is an age old argument, and not likely to be decided either way here in this thread.

I will say, however, that both collective consciousness and individual consciousness can be taken to detrimental extremes.

Our individual disconnection from our environment and each other has become a scourge to our world, causing all manner of terrible and destructive behavior.

Likewise, a strict hive mentality causes the oppression of the individual spirit.

Best case scenario, we work together while protecting the rights and consciousness of the individual.

Not an easy task, as democracy has proven time and time again.

Just to reiterate and resurrect this thread (as I find it very intriguing)

With regards to the hivemind;- both Communo-Fascism (Stalinism) Fascism and Collectivism act upon the same basis, Fascism and Stalinism revolve around the Personality Cult and the State, whereby - the hivemind is centered around the Leader, whose every word is law and the hivemind follows its every whim, thought, word, etc. down to its defining character (Fight Club is a good example of this mechanic)

So in essence, Fascism is true to the hive, with its leader being the Queen Bee, this in turn is enforced as the ideal, fans of popular singers etc. act no different to believing their personality of choice has the ideal life, thus, they in turn act upon them, and simply become part of the herd.

Collectivism however, differentiates itself by making any potentially existing personality in question to be obscured, and as a result, reinforces the belief that the collective life is ideal simply by consensus thought, which leads to an unquestioning obedience and servility to the collective by means of this programmed idea of whatever matter of concern, typically - happiness.

Funnily, and somewhat ironically, it could be said Capitalism acts on the same basis, by replacing the needs of others and secured "happiness" with "opportunity" for the collective consensus which thus creates a castration of excuse for the party it concerns whensoever they may find their pursuit of happiness to be denied...as such, ideologies have been and are carefully designed for the sake of having perfected defense mechanisms...

Leaving one who seeks freedom from the herd to be left with anarchism, which as we know is not applicable in this environment save for psycho/sociopaths and nomads, and/or to seek a high-rank in the system, if and when possible, by which I mean to suggest authoritarianism as a means of escaping the hivemind, yet, both, when studied and considered carefully are two peas in a pod (Are your world leaders "anarchists" for instance?!)

Sorry for the divergence, but they are everywhere, yet there is also the matter of Subjectivism and Solipsism to consider, not to mention Narcissism, which, either as active or passive forces, seek to either create the effects of the hivemind or to mimic them, for all you know, you could be the personality in question and the hivemind acts upon your whim, but I could say the same, but many condolences to any on this thread, I've been studying this topic a long time, and it's a real nightmarish concept.

GOD HELP US! D: