The Death of Apotheosis II

In my prototypical preface of the Death of Apotheosis article, I suggested the idea of non-ideologue model, or pragmatism, that may exalt and better sought after than an ideology model would. Because it would shape an ideology in a menace light to contrast under this diffused model, it is not inevitable that there would be barriers drawn up by both models. So often consequences of an ideology are felt across and therefore the terror-and-trial synthesis shared in the non-ideologue path are less impactful.

I am not advocating for the complete rejection of ideology and replace it with non-ideologue system because that would enable the rise of primitive culture that has not yet grown or diffused, making it a sluggish endeavor at inception. You cannot criticize the ideology system if it does not exist. Rather, it is my view that there always have been at least one residual element of non-ideologue system that have fought back, adjusted to, or assimilated into ideology model.

In my private criticism towards the said ideology as a whole feature, it is necessary to outline their traits and attributes that define their parameters of the system. They may cover the subjects of politics, religion, and even ethnos. One of obvious archetypes of this model is zealotry, one that does not cease relentlessly. Other characteristic feature often overlooked is the fact that the ideological model is always in a permanent struggle against itself and the world at large. Betterment is therefore the defining feature of this struggle in the name of “ideology”.

Less obvious trait is the consolidated ethos that sustain throughout the system, though it may have been riddled with pathos. Therefore, under ideal condition of non-ideologue model, emotions and intuitive premonitions are less encouraged and not subject to mass indoctrination. Rational impulses become the norm if ideology is to be defeated and outdone by the notion of non-attached ideas or concepts that may be minimal at emotional level or stimuli interruption.

Because of the silent attacks on ideology model, it underwent a change in its phase. That phase is ideological subversion. Because it has to sustain its position on a society of its own standing, it became more political as well as more fervent in its religious zealotry and exported ethos from the seed of ethnos. It eliminates the elements of non-ideologue philosophy as a way to reach en masse. It may even issue an outright ban, which, ironically, often draw in more of the non-ideologue antagonism. The less obvious characteristic of ideological subversion is an overt fallback to the inner circle of archetypal non-ideologue model of its own making that enable the fusion of ideology back into the crowd. These may be mediums, justifications, or arguments among this circle. In effect, the marriage of secret non-ideologue groups and ideologue become the subversive effort to offshoot all the other existing non-ideologue groups into existential battle for beliefs and systematized anti-ideological ranking.

This phenomenal paragon has been largely recorded in much of the 20th century from its primitive baby-step inception in the previous century. That system was the Marxist yoke across Eurasia. The imposition of class struggle created a major rapture from the rule of Christian ethos. Ironically, it is the Christian concept of inclusive acceptance and gradual epitome of moral justification that has made Marxism possible. This sad depart from the depression of Capitalist-Nationalist fervor resulted in the millions of deaths. The struggle of communist non-ideologue groups from within has became an ideology itself. The power transformed Russia from Tsardom to the Soviet empire in transition formulated by Leninist platform.

This new phantom had outlawed, purged, exiled, and banned virtually all the non-ideologue stereotypes in an alignment to Marxist ideology. Scientific progress and society were halted and decelerated at all levels that resulted in pressures and projections of non-ideologue groups to undergo an atheism phase. The disillusionment and unhappiness with the new system were complete. Ideological subversion became the law of land. Scientists, in private, continue to practice the non-ideologue status apart from the Soviet mentality, though purged by the changes in Soviet structures and Stalinist initiatives. The rapprochement of new Stalinist policy in the struggle for Soviet ideology had imprisoned the minds of much non-ideologue archetypes everywhere after the expulsion of Bolsheviks out of the picture. The era of pseudo-scientific circles such as Lamarckism and Lysenkoism had found their way into the Communist dogma, in which they were seen as “compatible” with Marxist ideology resulting in the definitive choking points of scientific progress. The rest of non-ideologue classes were then forced to be subservient to the Communist state in state-sponsored science labs at prison camps and chained strata of gulag system, in effect creating the intoxication of non-ideologue rupture as an end-goal that was gradual and slow in coming decades. The beginning of the rupture occurred only after Stalin’s death, though Soviet mentality was reinforced everywhere thereafter.

Meanwhile, in America, a backlash was made against the Hollywood Marxism for which it continue to extol and export its leftist elements. The capitalism of mass media became ideological subversion, challenging the old and traditional way of life with new ideas, fashions, and uncultured concepts that had yet to materialize. Early indoctrination and education became the center of entertainment of Hollywood elites in its lucrative practices. The cinematic euphoria morphed into a more covert effort in tune with the elites of the Left and accomplish the agenda of Californication of the US.

Of course, non-ideologue elements were already underway, though difficult to do so under the cinematic symbolism, creating the cults and in alignment with dominance of American ethnos in 1980s. This new revival campaign of non-ideologue art accelerated the process of American ideology from within, one that strives to perfection through the practical and imperfect practices of the said groups. In the American empire, an affinity alliance with non-ideologue archetype became visible across the cinema rather than the ideological leftovers of the Golden Era of Hollywood in forties and fifties. The conquest of independent non-ideologue system was complete in that it became a semi-ideology pursuit for which it defines what it means to be an American.

Does this mean that the relationship cannot exist without ideology in place? Absolutely, the non-ideologue model needed an ideology to exist. There is no other purpose. The continuation of non-ideologue freedom is constant in perpetuity importing and exporting of the ideological state back and forth, as though it is in an eternal experimentation. This continual rupture, made to fruition through the scientific and technological progress, brought in Darpanet and the eventual publication of early Internet that would doom any ideological hopes or advances by the ruling elite and Government. But the current model cannot exist without any ideology in any form.

This analytic community therefore approaches the problems of Democracy and Republic. Democracy, in its ideal formation, continues to claim perfection through imperfect means, while Republic exists as a continuation of non-ideologue state. Thus, the problem of non-ideology system was that it simply enables the rise of “perfect” ideology in reaction. The platonic equilibrium of ideology is then assumed as a contender to the non-ideologue patterns of Internet in its so-called ideological “Democratic” platform that has done less to combat all kinds of ideological subversion, in effect creating the division of all-inclusive Left and scattered anti-ideological model of the Republic right.

Perhaps some lessons can be drawn from the 19th century. If not for Christian ethos model, non-ideologue system would not have come in existence. The Capitalist struggles and the marriage of Christian ethos model and non-ideologue groups that continue to create diffusion of ideas and personas from within created the new modern phenomena of marginalized class born from Karl Marx’s Das Kapital. The Jewish identity and their perceived endorsement of non-ideologue Marxist mindset arose under the all-inclusive ethos of civilized Christian nations in early 20th century. And the secularism of non-ideologue groups have made that possible.

When seen in the same lens of 21st century, amid the American isolationism, is non-ideologue system under threat from all-powerful Government? Would a marginalized group from the Balkanization of a nation that threat to encompass? Will the ideology of Islam overcome, as Bolsheviks had in Russia? Surely, the ideology of Democracy would exacerbate and attempt to crush the Republican form of non-ideologue groups. There is a name for that “tyranny of the majority.” It is called anti-Americanism.

Death to ideology, I say. Again. Embrace the reality. Again. You can make all the difference in world if you have a portion of faith in non-ideologue system. Democracy is the tyranny of people. Thomas Jefferson would have liked alongside you fighting against the “elective despotism.”

Death to ideology.