The Many Types of Parinciters

Newthinkers see oppressors everywhere. This fact has driven many of the salient trends of progressive society — the redistribution of wealth, the removal of male-dominated institutions, the toppling of European-American culture, a diminishing Christian influence, and so on. In the future it will lead to many new trends, such as the treatment of meat-eating as a disorder like smoking is treated now (because humans are seen to be oppressing animals), and a significant upsurge in Godless theologies such as the new age movement and Neopaganism (because God is perceived to be oppressing humanity).

A new character archetype, defined earlier, has emerged as an integral part of newthink by adapting itself to these social dynamics. Parinciters define the antagonism between pseudoppressors and pseudoppressed, incite conflict between them, and then feast on the carnage they’ve created.

parincitement n : the process of defining, inciting and feeding off a conflict between a pseudoppressor and a pseudoppressed group – parincite vb

Parinciters are common in progressive society. Because they seek fame as a means of increasing their ability to stoke and profit from conflict, these newthink demagogues tend to be public figures, either on a local or a national scale. Progressive society dangles powerful incentives to parincite: fame, political power, champion status and progressive virtue.

Wealth parinciters pit the wealthy against the poor, stoke that conflict, and gain power by doing so. Karl Marx was the first great wealth parinciter. The history of the 20th and 21st centuries is heavily populated with his imitators – Vladimir Lenin, Mao Tse-Tung, Fidel Castro, Hugo Chavez and others – and depopulated of their victims.

English: WASHINGTON, BOOKER T. Digitally retou...

English: WASHINGTON, BOOKER T. Digitally retouched. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Ethnic (they use the term “racial” because it’s more divisive and inflammatory) parinciters have infected the once-healing wound caused by slavery and civil inequality. Without using that term, Booker T. Washington, the prominent African-American educator, author and political leader of the post-slavery period, wrote about ethnic parinciters back in 1911:

There is another class of coloured people who make a business of keeping the troubles, the wrongs, and the hardships of the Negro race before the public. Having learned that they are able to make a living out of their troubles, they have grown into the settled habit of advertising their wrongs – partly because they want sympathy and partly because it pays. Some of these people do not want the Negro to lose his grievances, because they do not want to lose their jobs . . . I am afraid that there is a certain class of race problem solvers who don’t want the patient to get well, because as long as the disease holds out, they have not only an easy means of making a living, but also an easy medium through which to make themselves prominent before the public.*

Environmental parinciters define an exploitative relationship between humanity and nature, create fearful and fantastic scenarios about eventual disaster, and gain fame and money from their efforts.

Gender parinciters tar their political opponents with a fictional war on women.

Religious parinciters describe an oppressive Christianity or Judaism and use that phantom to incite conflict with their pseudoppressed religious group.

Global parinciters pit the United States against the rest of the world and ceaselessly attack America. Powerful global political movements are based on global parincitement, sometimes blended with religious parincitement (Islamism) or wealth parincitement (communism).

Because parinciters are public figures, you can probably put names to each of these (and other) types of parinciters. Try it, it’s fun!

* Booker T. Washington, My Larger Education, (Doubleday, Page & Co., 1911), pp. 118-120.

Advertisements

Parinciters

Progressives tend to believe that society is populated by warring groups, and that the dominant group ruthlessly oppresses and exploits the weaker group.

The unconscious logic supporting this belief goes like this:
• Society is a Battlefield
• Social interaction is war between groups.
• Warring groups either dominate or are dominated.
• The dominant group ruthlessly oppresses and exploits the weaker group.
The unconscious logic branching out of this belief is:
• The oppressed tend to be virtuous.
• The oppressors tend to be unvirtuous.
• Some of the oppressed become so damaged by the oppressors that they engage in antisocial behavior.
• The oppressed should reject the oppressors’ culture and values and create their own culture and values.
• The oppressors got their advantages by exploiting the oppressed.
• The oppressors’ social system is unvirtuous.
• The oppressors must be fought.
• Oppression is the most unvirtuous act because it damages the natural nobility and equality of humanity.
• The individual oppressor can choose not to oppress and instead support the oppressed in their virtuous struggle.

 

Newthinkers see a continuous dynamic of ruthless subjugation by groups of oppressors against groups of oppressed. Antagonism between these groups is fired up by parinciters who pit the supposed oppressors against the supposedly oppressed and use their position to gain political power and champion status among their pseudoppressed flock.

Parinciters:
Demagogues who incite antagonism between the pseudoppressed and pseudoppressors and then feed off the conflict.

Omnimarxism leads to a new tribalism, a return to the default position of tribal identity which western civilization had suppressed. That’s why urban youth gangs have been hard to eliminate: they’re primal expressions of human nature emerging where civilization is weak. The gangs’ self-identity is strengthened by their sense of being oppressed because of ethnicity or poverty. Meanwhile, they’re given an ideological boost by newthink and its inevitable parinciters, which push them to create their own culture and values. This resurgent tribalism extends to all newthinkers in varying degrees, who see their pseudoppressed group as their tribe, exploited and oppressed by a hostile and hated pseudoppressor tribe.