Metaconsciousness: Mythology for a Post-Civilized World
I.1 | Contents | I.3
Although Howard Bloom himself makes no such suggestion, his thesis discussed in the previous section puts a very significant question into my mind: As we step forth into this new millennium, are we not witnessing the massive apoptosis – "cellular suicide" – of a global human approach to living that doesn't work? That is, are we not witnessing, and participating in, the self-destruction of civilization, from the very cells of individual civilized humans, to and including the overarching self-destructive agendas at the most comprehensive levels of international and global relations? Let us hold these questions in abeyance for the moment, noting only in passing that they bear pondering.
Contents of this section:
The Elements of Metaconscious Entities
Bloom has identified five distinct elements that combine synergistically in "learning machines" – I would call them "metaconscious entities" – of all kinds:
Paraphrasing Bloom in part, conformity enforcers act to give the constituents of a metaconscious entity a common identity, and unified patterns of behavior, particularly when things are humming along nicely. "If it ain't broke, don't fix it," seems to be the philosophy of the conformity enforcers. "Keep to the tried and true, and all will be well." Conformity enforcers (which may, like memes and genes, reside within the individual organisms they govern) insure, for example, that each member of a school of fish, or a flock of birds, keep the proper distance from their peers while maneuvering in space. Among humans, conformity enforcers see to it that everyone in the community have "got their mind right," and are not likely to upset the apple cart, for instance by researching any "wrong theories." More generally, conformity enforcers strive to insure that every member of the community shares the single hallucination that passes for "reality"1 throughout the community, or metaconscious entity.
Diversity generators balance conformity enforcers by introducing richness, diversity, variety, complexity, and liberty into the information-sharing matrix of a metaconscious entity. Diversity generators break the lock-step regimentation which is the ideal of the conformity enforcers, thereby pioneering new possibilities and potential directions for the entire entity. During "happy days," when the status quo seems to be working to everyone's satisfaction, the diversity generators are often "on the outs," and demand for their "Gyro Gearloose" inventions is at its lowest ebb. At best, they are maintained (tolerated) by the entity at a bare subsistence level. "When the going gets tough," however, the diversity generators "get going," and there may be some among them with just the thing to pull the entire entity's bacon out of the fire with an invention or discovery which had no appeal during happier days. This is the stuff of which quantum evolutionary leaps are made.
Inner-judges evaluate the "progress" or "regress" of agents that comprise a metaconscious entity, and bestow "rewards" and "penalties" accordingly. Successful agents, those who / which make discoveries, or produce innovations which advance the entity's interests, or promote its evolution, are rewarded with a flood of connections with their peers, admiration (or its analog), emulation, energy, abundance, reproductive success (e.g. sexual rewards), etc.
Unsuccessful agents who / which are unable to get a handle on the challenges confronting them, and are unable to make constructive contributions to the success of their parent entity, activate the apoptotic side of their inner-judges, and in addition to being shunned by their peers, commence their own biological self-destruction in many different ways. Their immune systems fall to ruin, their confidence sags, their energy levels plummet, they repel their peers, and even the peer-connections, or "synapses" they may have had are severed, leaving them isolated in their misery. It is the inner-judge within each agent that decides about itself "who hath," and "who hath not," and therefore "to whom it shall be given," and "from whom even what he hath shall be taken away."
Resource shifters put the "judgments" of the inner-judges into execution. It is they who distribute the "rewards" and "penalties" which manifest respectively as wealth, popularity, energy, brilliance, vibrant health, and fecundity; or alternatively as poverty, ostracism, torpor, stupidity, ill health, and death. On the basis of performance, as evaluated "within" by their inner-judges, and "without" by their peers, each agent of a metaconscious entity stands at the receiving end of the fundamental ground rule, To he who hath it shall be given. From he who hath not even what he hath shall be taken away.
Intergroup tournaments are contests which take place on many levels and in many circumstances, and which in part prove or disprove in the rough-and-tumble of "real life" the superiority of a metaconscious entity's innovations and adaptations. Conversely, intergroup tournaments help motivate innovation, sometimes for the sheer satisfaction of "winning," and sometimes for the stark sake of survival.
Just described are the five elements Bloom has identified as vital for all metaconscious entities, or "learning machines." Intuitively, I would broaden the fifth of these, intergroup tournaments, to include all challenges under all circumstances encountered by a metaconscious entity: intergroup competition being only one of many possible or probable challenges. The ability to deal effectively with challenges, obstacles, and unanticipated contingencies of all kinds is the final "proof of the pudding" for the adaptive measures taken by a metaconscious entity. Further, contrary to Bloom, I would list warfare, a particularly virulent form of "intergroup tournaments," and unique to dominator cultures, to be probably the most effective and pernicious destroyer of human metaconscious of all its enemies.
I would also suggest, for the sake of simplicity, that resource shifters and inner-judges share the single function of deciding "who hath," and "who hath not," and putting into effect the principle, To he who hath it shall be given. From he who hath not even what he hath shall be taken away; and so combine to constitute a single "vital element" for a metaconscious entity.
These simplifications leave us with a fairly succinct description of a metaconscious entity as an amalgam of many information-sharing agents with a synergistic capability of learning from experience, by maintaining a dynamic balance among three vital elements: conformity enforcers, diversity generators, and inner-judges.
Dynamic balance among the three is essential because the overwhelming domination of any one of them spells disaster for the metaconscious entity that "loses its balance." If the conformity enforcers gain the upper hand, metaconsciousness is thereby stifled and becomes impossible, because in order to thrive, metaconsciousness must enjoy a habitat of richness, diversity, variety, complexity, and liberty. These are developed and maintained by the diversity generators – which, however, might irreparably disrupt the coherency and sustainability of the entity, were they to gain an unbridled upper hand.2 And of course if the inner-judges decide for either of these reasons, or for any other, that the game is hopeless... then it is, and apoptosis takes effect and settles the matter decisively. It may be indeed that either of these two unbalanced conditions could be a trigger for, or a result of apoptosis – which returns us to the speculation with which we began this section, about the contemporary state of human civilization. Specifically, are we civilized humans right now in the advanced stages of "cellular suicide?"
[Return to contents of this section.]
The Cellular Suicide of Civilization
Today, it is scarcely an overstatement that civilized people throughout the world are now in the grip of a pandemic of degenerative diseases unprecedented in human history. Heart disease, cancer, Alzheimer's disease, HIV, and other immunological deficiencies are becoming epidemic killers among the highly stressed populations of civilized nations.3 Coincident with this is a precipitous rise in stress-related emotional and psychological disorders, including alcoholism and drug addiction – again, among civilized people. Additionally, I have learned that, according to the American Medical Association, "Prescription drug side effects [as opposed to 'street drugs'] are now the 4th Leading Cause of Death in America."4 In view of these developments, is it at all unreasonable to speculate that these may be symptoms of the onset or progress of apoptosis for the human metaconscious entity, civilization? Couple this with the unbalanced rush of self-appointed conformity enforcers to overwhelm and stifle the diversity generators,5 and what is one to conclude? That all is well?
One of the properties of metaconsciousness is that it is not at all constrained to operate at the level we humans experience as consciousness, intelligence, and creativity. Therefore, even if we are able to establish the hidden identity of the rogue conformity enforcers, as Spooner had done in 1869,6 and as Ruppert has done in 2004,7 and thus the "hidden cause" of our predicament, this still does not preclude its "cause in another dimension," from being the suicidal apoptosis of a race driven to widespread abject despair by our own follies. In other words, why have we civilized people gotten ourselves into such a predicament in the first place? Perhaps the hidden "hidden answer" is that the human metaconsciousness "knows" that civilization doesn't work, and the human predicament, "hidden causes" and all, is our metaconscious way of ending a failed experiment.
In other words, because civilization doesn't work, it is hardly surprising that large numbers of civilized people should be driven to despair by our "failure to perform." It may be that, entirely without conscious volition, large numbers of our inner-judges have "reached the same conclusion," and have unleashed a multiple barrage of self-destructive actions, from cellular to global dimensions, to bring this untenable predicament to a swift and decisive end. This may alternatively be interpreted in such terms as, civilization has not the blessing of the gods.
[Return to contents of this section.]
Challenges & Confirmations for the Myth of Metaconsciousness
A prequel to Bloom's Global Brain came belatedly to my attention, which at once supplies abundant additional confirmation of the myth of metaconsciousness, and confronts it with some sobering facts and observations.8 Contrary to my original description of the tribe,9 Bloom contends, and supports his contention with examples, that human tribes have often been far less benign than either I or Daniel Quinn may have represented them to be; and not only human tribes, but many animal species as well.
In particular, Bloom denies that warfare is unique to civilized humans, and gives examples of vicious warfare among human tribes and animal species. He points out, for instance, that African lions, their handsome, noble, and admirable qualities notwithstanding, have been supplied by "Mother Nature" with no other means of livelihood than by stalking other animals and tearing them limb from limb.10
For another example, Bloom cites the sea turtle, which lays her eggs in the sand, in a hole she digs a good way above the surf at high tide. When the eggs hatch, the infant turtles have a significant trek ahead of them, on limbs ill suited for walking on land. Moreover, the turtles' birthday is routinely celebrated by large numbers of sea birds, who immediately swoop upon the struggling infants and devour them alive. "Of a thousand hatchlings," Bloom writes, "perhaps three will make it to the safety of the ocean waves."11
Among pre-civilized humans, Bloom notes the !Kung people of the Kalahari Desert in southern Africa, long believed by civilized anthropologists to exemplify the simple, peaceful life of pre-civilized tribes. Bloom points out the "still-underpublicized fact" that "!Kung men solve the problem of adultery by murder. As a result, among the !Kung the homicide rate is higher than that in New York City."12
For examples of outright warfare, Bloom cites the work of Dian Fossey, who studied the habits of mountain gorillas for 19 years in the Virunga Mountains of central Africa; and of Jane Goodall, who similarly lived for 14 years among chimpanzees in the Gombe Reserve, Tanzania. Fossey observed gorilla groups deliberately seeking out rival groups and engaging them in brutal battles that inflicted gruesome injuries on both sides. And Goodall was dismayed to observe a group of male chimpanzees hunt down and annihilate the males of a smaller group that had previously splintered from the parent group in response to population pressures. The victorious larger group then abducted the sexually active females, and appropriated the territory of the vanquished group. Bloom then quotes Michael Ghiglieri, who observed chimpanzee warfare in Uganda, and wrote that "the happy-go-lucky chimpanzee has turned out to be the most lethal ape – an organized, cooperative warrior."13
Bloom then goes on to cite examples that demonstrate, as Kipling had it, that "The female of the species is more deadly than the male," among both animals and humans.14 He then turns to the habits of langurs, whose society is typically ruled by a dominant male, attended by a harem of sexually active females. Only... the females are sexually active with the dominant male exclusively; other males are out of luck, and are chastised severely if they attempt to poach on the chief's harem.
Comes a day, however, as the chief begins to age, and possibly lose his edge, when he is challenged by a gang of younger rivals. If the chief fails to meet this challenge, he is driven off, and the young Turks appropriate the royal harem; whereupon they indulge themselves in an orgy of infanticide, dashing the brains of all the suckling infants against rocks and trees, yet leaving the nubile females unharmed. When all is done, not an infant fathered by the old chief remains alive; with the biological effect that the females, no longer suckling infants, renew their interest in sex, and the forthcoming progeny will be fathered by the young Turks, not by their deposed chief.15
Bloom cites a very fierce human tribe that inhabit the Orinoco River region of the Amazon rain forest, which behave in a way strangely similar to the langurs. The Yanomamo are specialists in hunting and warfare, and enjoy nothing so much as attacking a neighboring village. If successful, they kill or chase away all the men, leaving the women unharmed. They then, like the langurs, methodically murder all the infants and children, and abduct the women as their secondary wives – and as vessels to carry and bear their progeny.16
Bloom's point is that warfare and violence are by no means unique to civilized humans; or to humans at all. It is part of the genetic heritage of most, if not all living species, Homo sapiens sapiens included.
Point taken. However, as unsavory to conventional sensibilities as the examples Bloom cites may be, I hold that there is nevertheless a significant and vital difference between the "warfare" Bloom describes and the standard practices of dominator civilization. All living things sustain themselves at the expense of other living things, and humans are no exception. The patterns that have emerged through the processes of natural selection are not necessarily what "civilized folk" would call "nice." But they work – most of the time. They work in the sense that they nurture and promote the ever-expanding spiral of richness, diversity, variety, complexity, and liberty throughout the biosphere; hence they promote the expansion of metaconsciousness, to the ultimate advantage of every organism and species that practices them. This is something that dominator civilization does not do – which is precisely and succinctly why dominator civilization does not work.17
We may disapprove of the !Kung, for instance, for dealing so severely with adulteresses as to murder them, thereby statistically surpassing New York City's homicide rate; yet I cannot imagine that the !Kung, individually or collectively, inflict even a measurable fraction of the lethal damage to the life-sustainability of the planet that New Yorkers do routinely, just going about their daily lives.
I am sure that brawling bands of gorillas and chimpanzees are not pretty sights to behold, and must be distressing indeed to the scientists who have invested years studying these creatures. Yet can anyone reasonably compare such jungle skirmishes with the genocidal slaughter practiced in every "civilized" generation, in every corner of the world?
Even the bloodthirsty Yanomamo – whom I probably would not relish meeting personally in the Amazon jungle – seem naïvely tame when compared to the daily acts of "civilized" humans, committed behind closed doors in plushly appointed rooms in every "civilized" capital on Earth – and I am by no means talking about "sexual indiscretions."
[Return to contents of this section.]
The Barnyard Pecking Order
Bloom devotes large portions of his book to the pecking order observed in nature and in barnyards in a widely diverse spectrum of contexts. "Who pecks whom" is evidently of vital importance to the biological success of many individuals and species throughout the biosphere; and it is certainly important in civilized human hierarchies.
Of course, Bloom, unlike myself, is a proponent of contemporary civilization, and he looks for civilized solutions to the human predicament. I believe that if such solutions are forthcoming at all, their source is likely to be anything but civilization (dominator civilization, that is). Nevertheless, what Bloom has to say about the pecking order, particularly among superorganisms, such as nations and ethnic groups, is highly illuminating and thought-provoking.
What Bloom calls a "superorganism" is an example of what I call a "metaconscious entity" composed of myriad information-sharing nodes, or component participants. Nodes can be synaptically connected neurons, individual cells, networking microbes, members of an animal or human population, etc. The important point is that they share information, and collectively learn from experience. The nodes that make up the superorganisms Bloom discusses are persons in identifiable groups, such as Americans, or Muslims, or Africans; and the vitally important information they share are called memes.18
A meme is to a superorganism as a gene is to a biological organism. It defines the character of the superorganism, and like a gene, it replicates from person to person throughout the superorganism. Religions and myths are examples of memes that define the character of a superorganism. To illustrate how memes are conceived, incubated, and replicated, Bloom recalls the case of Karl Marx, and the meme that bears his name.
Between 1852 and 1864, the meme that became Marxism flickered feebly in the mind of only one rather disagreeable man, who spent much of his time in solitude within the British Museum library. The results of Marx's researches were published in 1867 as Das Kapital, a seldom-read book which eventually entered Russia past the vigilant examination of the Czar's censors – who found it incomprehensible. The book was passed around in some obscure circles, but for the most part was no better understood by its few readers than it had been by the censors who might have kept it entirely outside Russia.
Meanwhile, Marx's book also fell into the hands of a group of disgruntled Russian expatriates exiled for their radical views: one Vladimir Lenin, and associates. These had the potential to replicate Marx's meme, because they were actively engaged in the business of propagating ideas and recruiting converts to the revolutionary cause – although it was a near thing. The nascent Bolsheviks were often too preoccupied squabbling amongst themselves to take advantage of every opportunity that came their way. They missed the boat in 1905, on the occasion of the disastrous (for Russia) Russo-Japanese War, and Czar Nicholas recovered from the resulting revolution, in which the Bolsheviks did not take a hand.
If the Russo-Japanese War had been a disaster for the Czar, the Great War of 1914 proved catastrophic. By 1917 millions of Russians had perished on the eastern front; the Czar's armies were impossibly ill-equipped, supply lines broke down, and people were starving in Mother Russia's most prosperous cities. Revolution spontaneously combusted in Moscow and Petrograd..., and Lenin returned to Russia.
Upon Lenin's arrival in Petrograd, he immediately began ranting to the crowds, and the Marxist meme at last fell upon fertile ground. By the mid-1980s the meme that had had such a modest and inauspicious beginning ruled the minds, bodies, souls, and property of over 1.8 billion human beings. Such is the replicative power of a meme.19
One of Howard Bloom's points for this story is that memes take on a life of their own, and like all living things, they have an innate "ambition" to expand, grow, and propagate – that is, to "be fruitful and multiply." This is also the impulse behind genes, of course, but memes have demonstrated enormously greater scope for their ability to replicate; because they are able to draw together superorganisms which vastly transcend the arena available for genetic replication. Genetic organisms, including humans, can be very chummy and mutually supportive of others of their kind, meaning with kith and kin who share their genetic makeup; yet be murderously vicious toward foreigners of a different lineage. "Memetic organisms," or superorganisms, are able to transcend such limitations and replicate limitlessly beyond the fences established by genetic makeup.
Bloom cites Christianity as a superorganism that spectacularly overcame the limitations of its genetic origin. The group's founder and original organizer preached only to fellow Jews; which is to say, to those who shared his genetic heritage. The Hebrew god too was a genetic god, presumed to have interests only in the affairs of those of the Hebrew lineage.
Like Marx's meme many centuries later, the meme of the Galilean carpenter did not enjoy initial success among his gene-mates, who were mostly uneducated pastoralists from an obscure backwater of the Roman Empire. After his crucifixion, however, an urbane fellow from the trade center of Tarsus showed up, initially with the intention of persecuting the Christian community in Damascus. On his way there, this fellow, Saul, had an arresting experience. He was blinded by an enveloping light, and he heard the voice of Jesus. He converted to the Christian faith on the spot, took the name Paul, and commenced an energetic career as the last apostle of Christ.
Paul didn't enjoy any more success among the Jews with the new faith than Jesus had; but unlike Jesus, Paul did not feel bound by the genetic constraints that had inhibited the outreach of his fellow Jewish Christians. He turned instead to "the gentiles," a cosmopolitan mix of Greeks, Romans, and peoples from the far corners of the Empire. He spoke the international language (Greek) and had a more receptive hearing among his wider audience than he had had among the Jews.
How much Paul's meme had in common with that of Jesus is a matter open to theological debate. It certainly enjoyed a more fecund capacity to replicate, and it eventually drew together a global superorganism that recognized no border or genetic fence. The meme, not for the last time, had demonstrated its spectacular effectiveness as a replicator for the onward evolution of metaconsciousness.20
Organisms and superorganisms alike experience a motive to strive for advancement in the social pecking order – a term coined by a Norwegian naturalist named Thorlief Schjelderup-Ebbe, who spent time during the early part of the 20th century observing and carefully noting the behavior of barnyard hens. Schjelderup-Ebbe discovered that the relative "peace" that reigns in the barnyard is the outcome of a vicious competition that yields vital consequences for all participants. Those who successfully fight their way to the top of the pecking order wind up with the best of everything – the most and best food, the most and best sex, the most preferred roost. Nobody pecks them, yet they have the undisputed prerogative to peck whom they please.
Conversely, those at the bottom of the pecking order fare the worst in all conditions of life, and they peck no one: everyone pecks them. Those at the bottom of the pecking order are even affected emotionally, and biochemically – as are the aristocrats at the top of the heap – by their relative status in the barnyard hierarchy. Winners in the struggle for status experience a surge in the testosterone level in their blood – the male hormone that promotes aggression and confidence. The testosterone level plummets for losers; instead, they experience a rise in glucocorticoids, which are stress hormones that slowly poison the low-rung members of the barnyard hierarchy. This ties in with the discussion earlier about conformity enforcers, diversity generators, inner-judges, and the onset of apoptosis in a metaconscious entity.21
Investigations subsequent to those of Schjelderup-Ebbe have disclosed that the social patterns observable in the barnyard are applicable to an enormous variety of social settings – including competitions among superorganisms. Bloom describes the vicissitudes in the rivalry between Carthage and Rome during the Punic Wars between the years -260 and -203; during which allies flocked enthusiastically to the aid of either Carthage or Rome, depending upon their victories and defeats, and consequent rise or fall in the superorganismic pecking order.22 "When you're smiling, the whole world smiles with you; when you're crying, you cry alone." Isn't there a song lyric to that effect? It seems to be true, under a wide variety of circumstances.
A parallel pattern took shape much more recently, during the Cold War rivalry between the Soviet Union and the United States. In 1957 the Soviet Union – until then definitely on a lower rung of the international pecking order – shocked the world by launching Sputnik, thereby demonstrating a technological competence the U.S. in particular had not anticipated – and a military capability the U.S. had not suspected. The result was a significant rise for the U.S.S.R. in the superorganismic pecking order, and a corresponding demotion for the U.S. Nations all over the world reacted vocally, many openly applauding and forming alliances with the Russians, others cautiously distancing themselves from America.23
[Return to contents of this section.]
Lessons From the Barnyard
The lessons I draw from these disclosures and observations are two: a) there is even more reason than before to take seriously the myth of metaconsciousness; and b) the essence of dominator civilization may be discovered in the barnyard. The presence and behavior of superorganisms demonstrate the universality of metaconsciousness in information-sharing matrices of distributed agents, at a scale one step beyond that of the individual human. Although not conclusive, this is certainly suggestive, and supportive of the myth of metaconsciousness. Also, the behavior of human superorganisms demonstrates that they are as yet at the most rudimentary and primitive stage of their evolutionary path. That is, "civilized" superorganisms have not yet risen above the "barnyard" stage of evolutionary development, at which the condition of human life is determined exclusively by the pecking order; or in other words, by the primitive formula, "Might makes right." This may be taken as a retrograde devolution of human civilization, for as we will be seeing in subsequent sections, human civilization had at one time reached much higher cultural achievements than those of contemporary "barnyard civilizations," particularly in the field of what we will be calling "social dynamics."24
That humanity may legitimately aspire to "higher things" is demonstrated by the fact that, not only have humans achieved "higher things" in "prehistoric" antiquity, we are able to imagine and aspire to such "higher things" today. The state of the contemporary world demonstrates that we had best be about bringing such "higher things" into actuality; and that although civilization as practiced among humans may work satisfactorily among barnyard hens, it manifestly does not work for a global human population. Our metaconscious superorganism evidently understands this quite clearly, and is in the process of shutting down. It is incumbent upon us to bring a functional replacement into the vacuum being vacated by our dysfunctional dominator civilization. Evidence will be developed in subsequent sections to support the notion that such a replacement is possible, and potentially applicable to the contemporary human predicament.
[Return to contents of this section.]
1. Bloom, 2000, Chapter 7, "A Trip Through the Perception Factory," pp. 64-70. See also Yes, but What Does it Mean?, item f, in section I.4.
2. To preserve this vital balance, I have long advocated the formula, a) Do whatever you like; b) Allow all others the same liberty. Provision a, the "masculine principle," absent the tempering provision b, the "feminine principle," is a formula for the chaos of runaway diversity generators – which may in turn, as in the instance of contemporary civilization, morph into rogue conformity enforcers.
3. Following are a selection of representative comments:
4. Dr. Schulze's Common Sense Health & Healing Newsletter, January 2005, Front Cover, Dr. Richard Schulze, [www.herbdoc.com]. See also On Cellular Biology in section II.6, wherein it is stated that "According to a study published in 2003, based upon analysis of ten years' accumulated government data, the leading causes of death in America are the fatal effects of allopathic medicines prescribed by U.S. physicians."
5. I can think of no more appropriate a synopsis of the final achievements of dominator civilization on this planet, after a five-thousand-year run, than Michael C. Ruppert's 674-page book, Crossing the Rubicon: The Decline of the American Empire at the End of the Age of Oil, New Society Publishers, P.O. Box 189, Gabriola Island, BC V0R 1X0, Canada.
6. Spooner, 1869, XVIII, writes as follows:
These money-lenders, the Rosthchilds, for example, say to themselves: If we lend a hundred millions sterling to the queen and parliament of England, it will enable them to murder twenty, fifty, or a hundred thousand people in England, Ireland, or India; and the terror inspired by such wholesale slaughter, will enable them to keep the whole people of those countries in subjection for twenty, or perhaps fifty, years to come; to control all their trade and industry; and to extort from them large amounts of money, under the name of taxes; and from the wealth thus extorted from them, they (the queen and parliament) can afford to pay us a higher rate of interest for our money than we can get in any other way. Or, if we lend this sum to the emperor of Austria, it will enable him to murder so many of his people as to strike terror into the rest, and thus enable him to keep them in subjection, and extort money from them, for twenty or fifty years to come. And they say the same in regard to the emperor of Russia, the king of Prussia, the emperor of France, or any other ruler, so called, who, in their judgment, will be able, by murdering a reasonable portion of his people, to keep the rest in subjection, and extort money from them, for a long time to come, to pay the interest and the principal of the money lent him.
7. Ruppert, 2004.
8. Howard Bloom, The Lucifer Principle: A Scientific Expedition Into the Forces of History, The Atlantic Monthly Press, New York, 1995.
9. See What I Mean by Tribe, in the Prologue.
10. Bloom, 1995, pp. 24-5.
11. Loc. cit., p. 25.
12. Loc. cit., p. 27.
13. Loc. cit., pp. 27-9.
14. Ibid., pp. 30-5.
15. Ibid., pp. 36-7.
16. Ibid., pp. 37-8.
17. This theme is developed further in discussions of The Wider Dimensions of Warfare, and the differences between Warfare and Predation in section II.3.
18. See Prologue, pp. 11-12.
19. Bloom, 1995, pp. 98-101.
20. Ibid., pp. 103-5.
21. The Elements of Metaconscious Entities, above.
22. Bloom, 1995, pp. 203-8.
23. Ibid., pp. 208-9.
24. See Dominator and Partnership Civilizations in section I.8; and II.2. Myth of a Golden Age.
Metaconsciousness: Mythology for a Post-Civilized World
I.1 | Contents | I.3