Pathocracy Rising: How Economic Systems Breed Deviants

Khazin's economics and spreading liberalism, one coup at a time

Ilya Khotimsky was kind enough to send me summary of a book he translated: Russian economist Mikhail Khazin’s Recollections of the Future: Modern Economic Ideas. (Khotimsky’s summary is published here on SOTT.) I’m no economist, but a few of Khazin’s ideas stood out to me. First, his book focuses on what Khazin calls “crises of capital effectiveness” (CCEs), examples of which include “the 1900s crisis of banking liquidity, the Great Depression of the 1930s, and the stagflation of the 1970s.” The last one erupted in 2008, and these crises only end “when access to new markets [is] achieved.”

Khazin argues that the current crisis cannot be resolved from within the existing economic model. The only two solutions are to retain the dollar-based system at the expense of losing the American industrial base, and recovering domestic manufacturing but dissolving the current global system.

Between the two … scenarios of the future, the one that calls for saving America by recovering domestic manufacturing, obviously, looks very appealing to US patriots (or we can even call some of them “nationalists”). What does this scenario mean to them? It means making the US dollar serve its primary purpose: support American industries. Ultimately, this will allow the patriots to reclaim their country. However, the same scenario also requires dissolution of the global financial system, as a result of which, according to the author, the financial sector will shrink by 10 times or more; therefore, for the transnational bankers or, as Khazin calls them, the “Western Global Project elite,” this future looks bleak. Ideally, the bankers’ goal is to make sure the scenario of America’s national economy resurgence is never enacted, or is at least delayed for as long as possible. This explains why liberalism — the ideology of financiers — is so hostile to patriotism and nationalism. The Western education system and the media have been working hard to paint patriotism as “racist,” replace national pride with guilt and undermine citizens’ unity with “identity politics.” Above all, love for one’s nation, respect for its past, present and future come from traditional family upbringing …

The current system developed as financial capitalism replaced manufacturing, elevating the banking sector over the productive economy. Wealth is now increasingly built by the multiplication of “purely financial assets,” essentially creating an unsustainably inflated market based largely on energy derivatives. Additionally, economic models transform a society’s values according to the goals of the model. For Khazin, this explains “the alarmingly fast pace at which liberal ideology has been imposed on us.” And “financiers have been the main proponents of completely abolishing the values of traditional conservative society and replacing them with the ideas of modern liberalism.”

What we are seeing is the conflict between two incompatible worldviews and practices. On the one hand there is financial capitalism and usury. On the other: traditional Western conservatism based on productive labor.

Therefore, for the financiers to keep their wealth and power, traditional society has to be deconstructed. To achieve this goal, the proponents of liberalism push their agenda forward on many fronts, yet the main attack has been launched against the society’s most fundamental institution — the family. Traditional family has always been founded on conservative principles because children are expected to obey their parents, learn what is right and what is wrong, respect the elderly, etc. Additionally, Christian morals remind them that “you shall not charge interest to your brother.” That is why, as Khazin wisely observed, “juvenile courts, gay-pride events, same-sex marriages and other initiatives have been deployed to weaken family structures and other conservative institutions. These actions have a conceptual goal: to create a society in which dominance of the financial elite and their wealth-generating methods would face no opposition.” Last, but not least, as the author pointed out, “the technology known as Overton windows became instrumental in shaking the foundations of social norms, and then step-by-step altering the public perception of what’s right and wrong.”

This is the Overton window hacking I discussed last year in relation to “worldview warfare.”

Overton Window Hacking

The Long Road of Degeneration

As I stated above, I’m not an economist so I’m not suited to judge the merits of Khazin’s work. I’ll just add that as a ponerology enthusiast, I think that economics, like all human systems, cannot be abstracted or disconnected from psychology. Values are somewhat mutable, but certain tendencies are rooted strongly in our biology. As such, it is not just economic systems that shape values. Economic systems will also select for people with certain attributes in a mutually reinforcing process. The system attracts a certain type, and that type reinforces and defines the system. In order for an economic system to shape values, it needs individuals who hold those new values, with the skills to promote them and enforce them. As Lobaczewski points out repeatedly, there is only ever a minority of people who will adopt values counter to human nature—and these individuals for the most part have a defect in their human nature allowing them to do so.

In this sense financial capitalism is very similar to communism. As the system gains supremacy, those running the system will become progressively more saturated with those for whom the system works on a fundamental level, value-wise. Some people—a minority—have no natural affinity for traditional (i.e. normal) human values, and thus have no problem completely abolishing them. In fact, some people have a basic inborn disdain for such values, because they have completely different hardware. These are the people for whom normal society is “oppression,” like the pedophile who just wants to be “free” to “love” whomever he wants, but is oppressed by a bigoted, moralistic society.

Naturally, if an economic system develops that shares his goal of “completely abolishing the values of traditional conservative society,” that system will have gained a supporter. And since the issue is existential for him, he will be a fanatical supporter. This at least partly (and I would argue largely) explains why communism developed the way it did, and why its ideology has always vociferously attacked “society’s most fundamental institution,” the family. It’s because its greatest advocates were psychological/social/sexual misfits and deviants. It seems that the same goes for financial capitalism and the type of liberalism undergirding it.

Communism and financial capitalism attract psychopaths of all descriptions. And recall what I said in “The Long Road of Degeneration.” Psychopaths are natural experts at psychological warfare and thus at Overton window hacking: “shaking the foundations of social norms, and then step-by-step altering the public perception of what’s right and wrong.” This is instrumentalized paromorality introduced and enforced through controlled pathological egotism or “coercive control.”

In that same article, I wrote:

If you adopt the psychological techniques of a pathocracy, you’ll probably end up adopting the psychology (and psychological demographics) of a pathocracy. The risk isn’t becoming “literal Nazis”; it is becoming progressively more pathocratic. All pathocracies are fundamentally compatible with each other despite whatever seeming incompatibilities their ideologies might possess. And the Western world is becoming progressively more pathocratic.

The recent revelations about USAID demonstrate this perfectly. The CIA, after adopting political/psychological warfare strategies, weaponized this playbook worldwide to spread “democracy” and “liberalism.” Three years ago I interviewed Polish Member of the European Parliament Ryszard Legutko about just this. It’s what he described in his book: The Demon in Democracy: Totalitarian Temptations in Free Societies.

Mike Benz describes the playbook in detail, which involves “judicial reform” (i.e., corrupting a nation’s judiciary to attack threats to the new values), sparking and directing protest movements to topple governments unfriendly to the agenda, funding “liberal” causes to weaken conservative institutions (like promoting “women’s empowerment” and gender-identity programs to mobilize the female vote), “fortifying” election procedures to ensure popular candidates lose and preferred candidates win, promoting “independent” journalism to parrot foreign liberal propaganda (and censor domestic dissent), shaping education policies to reinforce the liberal worldview, and arresting dissident politicians to ensure they don’t gain or regain power.

This is what Lobaczewski described as pathocracy via “artificial infection”—worldview warfare, revolutionary warfare, political warfare, or as we’ve come to call it, “soft power” and “democracy promotion.” It’s why USAID was funding “a cohort of Cambodian youth with enterprise driven skills,” “strengthening independent voices in Cambodia,” “gender equality and women empowerment hubs,” “improving public procurement” in Serbia, voter turnout in India, the “Consortium for Elections and Political Process Strengthening,” “voter confidence” in Liberia, “social cohesion” in Mali, “inclusive democracies” in Southern Africa, and “sustainable recycling models” to “increase socio-economic cohesion among marginalized communities of Kosovo Roma, Ashkali, and Egypt.

The goal is not to make the world a better place; it is to homogenize the world in a manner which suits the goals of financial capital and the values of global pathocrats, which are in alignment.