Is The World Order About To Collapse?



Just now finishing up the video.

A) I’m so attracted to both these men. Lol.

B) I find, on the one hand, a great sense of gratitude for being in the United States.

C) On the other, I feel deeply compelled to remind ALL WHO MIGHT HEAR that this planet is truly our shared home. I hope that we remember a simple life could easily be provided for all beings if our collective priority was just that: to live a simple, comfortable life.

D) What is my role in building this new, integrated world? May it be. Millennials, save the day!


On the topic of leadership - when I was a boy there were essentially two varieties of leadership (I’ll randomly call them A and B), but now I see there is a third type that has always existed (I’ll randomly name X), but is more obvious with the increasing popularity in recent years of people like Elon Musk and Donald Trump (the two most obvious)

People tend to prefer either A or B. Moreover, the longer a person or community or nation or other group experience one, the more difficult or impossible it is to accept the other. As extremes, I will compare two militaries who have been responsible for training policies of the vast majority of the world’s militaries for the past 80 years.

Type A “Top - Down” Leadership has been the default leadership style for several thousands of years. It’s the style of dictators and autocrats, and was the model of the Soviet Union and now Russia. The key here is that this leadership style is imposed from the leader down to the lowest member. None of the leaders care what any opinion the lower members might have, and expression of any questions or dissent is brutally punished. In the US military, this style is used in Basic Training ONLY. “IF I the Army your opinion, maggot you would have been issued one” and other Despotic witticisms express this style of leadership. Note that during the last stages of American basic training this system starts to become unrealistic and American recruits start to rebel a bit during the last weeks of basic training against senseless authoritarianism without reason. As we see in the Ukraine / Russia conflict, this style of leadership is highly dependent on the leadership to make every single decision correctly. If the officer corps becomes corrupt or incompetent, we see the result every day now in the news.

Type B “Bottom - Up” Leadership instilled into US Military personnel. In this, the leader recognizes his purpose is to serve the greater group. For example, American Officers eat last after everyone of lower ranks is served - because the American Officer realizes the morale of his unit is more important than if he gets the last jelly donut or not. Every modern President up until Donald Trump followed this model. They served the people and nation first, not themselves first. Yes, probably most had some corruption going on, but overall they served the American people. Even Nixon resigned rather than allow the Nation to be embroiled in bitter internal political battle.

Now in the last 10 years we have seen a new Leadership style become more popular. I’ll call it “Chaos Leadership”. It’s become popular because people surely don’t want type A, but at the same time there is more and more lack of true Type B leaders. In a short phrase - our Leaders no longer have any principles whatsoever (or are deemed to not have). So what we see in both Elon Musk and Donald Trump are men without the backbone or strength to be actual Despots yet are too self centered to be capable of being type B either. They are too soft and weak and undisciplined for A and to van and egocentric to even comprehend B. Instead of being either A or B, they create chaos. In this chaos both Type A and B leaders have difficulty operating. Most people desperately want to follow any leader at all, as if it is some kind of human genetic predisposition. Much like dogs, if a good pack leader is not available they will settle for a bad pack leader. In the last 10 years we have seen other leader types step back, leaving a vacuum of true leaders and so people follow the only leaders left, even if they are poor leaders.

The primary similarity of Donald Trump and Elon Musk is that everywhere they “Lead” turns into some kind of shit show full of drama, and their followers also tend to be quite a mess. The people who followed Trump most devoutly are facing actual prison time or have served prison time, lol. I can’t think of any other leader in the United States in my lifetime (outside of the organized crime) where so many people have paid such a large price for following a leader. Even the Waco Branch Dravidian fiasco only resulted in 12 people being charged. For the Jan 6 Insurrection we are approaching a thousand people being charged (948 and rising). Those who followed Elon Musk’s financial advice did make a little bit of money at the beginning - then lost it all, lol. Hey - who struck it rich with Dogecoin, eh? Or with Trump - who’s still holding those sweet DWAC stocks?

Which leads to another trait followers of Leadership style X share - they are rubes. Always ready to forget the last thing they were tricked into and jump whole heartedly into the next. Watching them reminds me of The Flintstones when I was a kid - every episode Fred had some wild scheme, quit his job and then when it all came crashing down the episode ended with him asking Mr Slate for his job back at the quarry, lol. Then in the next episode he did the exact same thing.
The reason Fred Flintstone is funny is because this personality is somewhat believable. Even in the 1970’s, we all knew people like that. For sure if Fred Flintstone was real, he’d be following Elon Musk in every scam, never realizing why he wasn’t rich and that in fact Elon gives terrible advice, lol. Of course Fred would also have been arrested on Jan 6. Of course.


I certainly understand your A and B and X analogies. When you wander into politics you lose credibility with me, it’s called Trump Derangement Syndrome. There is no topic that doesn’t reveal your personal politics. You spin and twist every topic string into your hidden obsession with President Donald J. Trump.

I think the closed minded hatred and constricted control on power, like America since the Patriot Act was implemented and Twitter’s bullying of half the population, leads to the rise of X super-heros. Those crazy courageous people willing to lead the way out for those who feel trapped.

The fact that you label “rubes” those voting to support Trump reveals more about you than your 70 million neighbors across the country who voted for Trump.


When you wander into politics you lose credibility with me, it’s called Trump Derangement Syndrome.

Respectfully, I am not sure this is a fair characterization. It’s gotten to the point, I think, where “TDS” is becoming a reflexive response to be used against anyone who criticizes Trump’s moral, intellectual, and leadership failings, though I’m sure that is not what is happening here. But just to belabor the point:

People still talk about Nixon’s crimes, do they have “Nixon Derangement Syndrome”? If Twitter existed 90 years ago, would supporters of the Weimar Republic be accused of having “HDS”?

I think we need to acknowledge the fact that, every once in awhile, modern societies become susceptible to various personality cults and political strongmen who have the potential to lead those societies into very dark and regressive times. And when we have a recent President who, among other faults, deliberately stoked the first non-peaceful transfer of power in history, I think it’s critical that we actually take a careful look at how we got here, what kind of damage was inflicted, and how to move forward as a society.

(Plus, I always thought “Trump Derangement Syndrome” was always a bit of a odd deflection, and is much more descriptive of the derangement we saw on January 6th when Trump’s personality cult showed up to storm the capitol because they uncritically believed Trump’s unfounded lies about a stolen election, despite repeatedly failing to make the case in the courts.)

Way back in the late 90s, Ken wrote a book called Boomeritis, and it is unbelievable how prescient it was. Not only in its spot-on description of pathological Green, much of which has thoroughly infected the left (I am sure you would agree with me here) — but also in its prediction that, as soon as Green became the status quo, Red and Amber would quickly win the game. As Ken wrote it back then, it was due to the sorts of flatland relativism coming out of postmodernism academia, which essentially means that Green would get completely trapped in the “paradox of tolerance” that would make it impossible for the modern world to regulate pre-modern impulses.

What Ken didn’t see at the time, however, was that the “aperspetival madness” he described would actually come from our media technologies themselves. In the mid-2010s we fully made the transition into the postmodern age, and suddenly the majority of our discourse was taking place on postmodern platforms like Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, etc. Platforms where the loudest and most repeated narratives would become accepted as “truth”, with no way to ascertain the “truthfulness” of the narrator, and very few people caring as long as it fits their preexisting biases. Which makes these platforms exceptionally vulnerable to social engineering, disinformation, gaslighting, trolling, etc. These are all platforms that are built upon both broken Green principles (especially radical decentralization) as well as broken Orange principles (especially the emphasis on chasing quarterly profit at all costs) — and the broken Orange further exacerbates the broken Green.

And while we were making this transition from modern media platforms into postmodern media platforms in the mid 2010’s, there were a great many who had a very difficult time fending off these rising tides of disinformation and propaganda that were beginning to flood the system (which, let’s remember, was Steve Bannon’s explicitly-stated strategy.) In other words, a great many people were trying to figure out how to get out of the “paradox of tolerance” trap — how to enforce basic epistemic boundaries in this increasingly aperspectivally-mad world. And no one has really ever figured that out. Because when we are on postmodern platforms, everything slides frictionlessly — which is how these efforts to not tolerate intolerance quickly grew into accusations of censorship, authoritarianism, first amendment violations, etc. It was an effort to deal with the rising popularity of things like Qanon, Alex Jones, Plandemic, stolen elections, etc., which then became a narrative of “bullying half the population”. That narrative got repeated very loudly and very frequently, and it seems the Overton window shifted once again. Banning bullies becomes an act of bullying. Paradox of tolerance.

All of this, by the way, is why I have always so adamantly refused to characterize Twitter as anything resembling a “public commons”. It is nothing like a public commons, which by definition belongs to the people. It is a privately-owned, for-profit, algorithmically-driven, postmodern media platform that has proven to be easily disrupted by the whims of bored billionaire personas.

Which is why I have absolutely no problem whatsoever with Twitter banning Trump, considering he used that very same platform to radicalize people and erode their trust in our democratic processes, resulting in the violence of January 6th.

The internet, on the other hand, is the public commons, which is why I continue to see net neutrality as such a critical issue. I don’t think someone like Alex Jones (or Donald Trump for that matter) are in any way entitled to a platform like Twitter, and banning them from the platform is in no way a violation of their first amendment rights (I’d kick Alex Jones off of this forum too, if he was here).

However, they are entitled to having a presence somewhere on the internet, where people can seek them out if they want to.

When Green becomes the status quo, Red and Amber wins, because the discernment required to identify and contain them gets lost in the shattered mirror of aperspectival madness.

Which means that we, as integralists, have to be very careful. We need to remain rightfully critical of the sorts of green excesses that create problems like these in the first place, but also keeping an eye on our own allergies that would cause us to be overly permissive of destructive and accelerating Red and Amber excesses. Because again, they will win this game. In many ways they already are.

Which brings me to the part of your comment I very much agree with — we are absolutely ripe for these sorts of “x superhero” projections. We are now living in some weird postmodern Ayn Rand nightmare where people place their faith in billionaires and industrialists and real estate moguls to lead their grassroots populist revolution, while convincing themselves they are somehow being “anti-establishment”. But billionaires are definitionally not anti-establishment — they are the ones who are corrupting and undermining our trust in our institutions in the first place, while trying to capitalize on the very same mistrust they created.

Which is another thing we have to be careful about as integralists. As I like to say, one of the cool things about being integral, is you get to be pro-establishment and punk rock at the same time :wink:

And I definitely agree that perceptions (and a great many mis-perceptions) of power are driving the culture wars on both the left and the right. But I don’t think this is the sole cause of our current dystopia. I think these social media platforms are themselves the primary source — information now moves in a very different way, which irrevocably changes our perception of the world (and each other) as pockets of reality begin to splinter away from each other, and we lose any semblance of a shared epistemology among us. Which makes me pretty thoroughly aligned with Jonathan Haidt’s observations, actually.

Also, we’ve been priming ourselves culturally for this. As someone who loves comic books, and comic book movies, I have to admit that my favorite comic book writer (who himself hates comic books), Alan Moore, makes a damn good point that there is a fairly straight line leading from superhero fantasies to fascism.

I actually think the rise of these superhero movies was itself due to the rampant insecurities and anxieties of the post-9/11 world, an era where increasingly complex “wicked problems” began to present themselves that ordinary people can barely understand let alone begin to solve. It is very similar to the way Superman originally came into popularity: we dropped nuclear bombs on Nagasaki and Hiroshima, unleashing a new kind of terror into human consciousness, and the reaction of our collective unconscious was to lionize a character who could literally walk on the sun (while simultaneously reinforcing the “all-American values that would assuage us of any residual guilt we may be feeling about those mushroom clouds).

So in many ways, the rise of the 21st century superhero was a natural response to the existential threats of our time, just as it was in the mid 20th-century. However, Moore’s point is that the result of this newly dominant cultural gestalt is that we are essentially being programmed to accept this feeling of powerlessness, and therefore constantly looking for the next Tony Stark to come along and solve our problems (Stark, funny enough, was himself modeled on Ayn Rand’s beliefs, and was created by Stan Lee as a challenge to get his audience to love a character they would normally feel repulsed by.) And as it happens, this “Tony Stark” archetype is precisely what is now being projected onto Elon Musk.

So I 100% agree that we feel “trapped”, as you say, and powerless. And so much of our cultural output these days almost seems designed to reinforce those feelings. Which is a very dangerous place for a population to be, as it opens the door for all sorts of narcissists, con men, and snake oil charlatans to win over the masses and leave a trail of carnage in their wake.

Sorry for all the paragraphs — if you can’t tell, I love talking about this stuff! And it’s always a challenge, simultaneously holding an integral political “center”, and then seeing how far away from that center our actual lived politics are, and how integral centrism is quite different than “halfway between two parties, whatever they may be”. These threads get my brain all fired up :slight_smile: Happy thanksgiving guys! I am grateful for all of you.


It is good to hear from you again @corey-devos :slight_smile: … As always your confidence in understanding is always a refreshing read. Why the haters of Mr. Trump are determined to keep him front and center is beyond me. I guess the fanatics never seem to see their own obsessions?

I have deliberately tried to share other voices and ideas on posts I create here. I agree with you that the Trump references bring you to the conversations with passion. Assigning a connection to him certainly keeps him relevant.

It simultaneously pollutes every conversation, driving other voices out of the conversation or worse out of the community entirely. I wish there was room for the voices of all colors and that we could integrally collaborate on ideas rather than devolve into political debates that only serve to further our societal divides.


He keeps himself front and center, lol.
My question is - why is he such a sensitive topic for you?
He is the big pink elephant in the room and you think it’s derangement to discuss a bright orange elephant rampaging in a china shop? lol
I send your projection back towards you - YOU are closed minded - which is why you immediately shut down any discussion regarding the big orange elephant.
Why do you presume there is emotion on my part when I was just analyzing him side by side with Elon Musk? If you assign any negative intention on my part, at least be a little bit more insightful and accuse me of baiting. That might be a bit more accurate and what I ask myself.
I’m not concerned if I have credibility. That would be embracing Orange too much - the desire that I would have of credibility outside of the actual content of what I say.
The world is full of Rubes. It’s more than 70 million Trump followers - it’s the 90% that have 90% of the very foundation of their opinions formed for them and who daily consume poisons and toxins because of clever ad campaigns. Do I do this as well? Yes, of course. I mostly recognize it, though.Where the rube is different is he is completely oblivious to the fact that hs is daily manipulated. So no, I’m not a rube because I do recognize that I am being maipulated daily and it’s just a matter of degree.

This would make more sense if the “way out” did not lead to a complete financial fleecing while the X Super-heroes laugh to the bank, or if the way out did not lead to breaking the law ans criminal convictions.


Engaging with this topic puts one at risk of being banned from this platform. Just like you @raybennett, Mr. @fermentedagave could not break the obsession with the Trump topic, my guess is that’s what got him suspended? Since most of us here are in ideological agreement with your trolling spin you remain unsuspended.

It seems that you want to spin every topic and every idea into an attack on Trump and his followers. We are the enlightened woke canceling crowd of integral life. Your the head troll to unsuspecting site visitors who risk suspension should they dare to engage and share an opposing view to our ruling majority.

That’s why this is a sensitive topic that I am quick call out.


This fits with a poem I wrote about 10 years ago:


Fool them into anarchy
Let all things settle to power’s law
One is lost and one becomes
Structures fall and more are born.


No it absolutely does not, lol.
Now you are just making up Fake News.

Stop guessing and spreading falsehood, lol.
If you know something - say THAT. If you don’t have even the foggiest idea, then stop just making stuff up.

If you see every discussion as a personal attack - that is a problem YOU have. And also seems to be part of some kind of persecution complex.

Lol, more paranoid delusions aka more persecution complex.

It’s not the topic that is sensitive - it’s YOU who are sensitive.


I just did precisely that! …

Your words reveal exactly who you are … Your trolling of me,@fermentedagave and many others is written all over this community platform. Ironically your comment here is so typical, I just had to like it.

I love you @raybennett because someone here has to … I wish you all the best! ~ Peace :slight_smile:


I’m really not interested about your messed up and unhealthy passive aggressive behavior that you think is love.

Name calling followed by “I love you”. I’m going to call it for what it is - complete BS and symptomatic of passive aggressive behavior - which I don’t care about in the slightest except to call it out for what it is.

The fact is that Trump is a presidential candidate and intertwined in any discussion about Elon Musk in November 2022. If you talk about Elon Musk being a leader, then you should be prepared to discuss his poor leadership over Twitter - and that includes discussing Trump. You introduced a person for discussion as a leader who is deeply involved in cultural politics - but you try to act like you are not discussing politics, lol. Sorry - no dice. Anybody with any insight whatsoever can see that you DO want to discuss politics - but you do it “low key” and in an underhanded way, so you can back out of it. This impresses on me that you feel shame about your political ideas - you can only express them sideways into a discussion and when someone actually calls you out you do your passive aggressive gymnastics.

Anyway - someone today also mentioned Trump in a discussion - better run on over there and accuse them of TDS.




On the topic of fermentedagave - he was purely here to express a party line. Nothing else. He didn’t subscribe, so it’s obvious he never listened to the full audio of anything he was discussing. Ergo every discussion he was involved in was categorically off-topic. Because he wasn’t aware of what the topic was because he couldn’t listen to it, lol. I also doubt he purchased any of the courses sold on here, again begging the question why he was here. In contrast, Corey can see my purchases and also my subscription history. While I’m not subscribed every month - I do subscribe when I see a discussion that interests me. And I also discuss that topic as it was presented (which very few people do besides maybe 2 or 3 of us).


On the topic of love - In my belief there is only one kind of love, and that is everywhere. You can call it God if you choose or “Agape”. The others are mostly just our imagination and rationalizations. It’s our choice to either tap into “Agape” or not - but it has little to do with anyone else. When you observe a newborn infant most people choose to tap into “Agape” - but some people block it. The newborn is only a vestige, not the source of love.

Similarly, I cannot “give” love, and neither can you. Neither can you take it away. You are merely a vestige as well and have no power to either give or take away love. The world is full of unrequited love. One person thinks they love a person and expresses that love (filial, eros or storage) - but it may or may not be expressed back. When filial, eros or storage love is rejected, it often turns to anger, begging the question if it was actually love at all. I say it wasn’t.

The other three types of love mentioned in the Bible (filial, eros or storage) almost always have strings attached and conditions - which disqualifies them as love, and instead makes them transactions. The only true love is Agape (God - in whatever form we envision it).


Perhaps the X leader comes in to break the corrupt system down? Or shepherd the population through the corrupt system in unconventional ways kind of like the Gray Champion in Generation Theory? I tried working within politics, nonprofits, and academia for several years and was left severely disillusioned. I soon identified with “Counter” leaders, artists, and ideas. During periods of personal struggle, I may have gone too far into deconstruction or apathy but seem to make it back to moderation and transcendence eventually - by grace I guess. I always keep that anarchic tendency within me though and can’t help but empathize with the X leader and their followers at the very least.


Well, the X leader does break systems down. That is what they do. But I’d say there are a few things to look at here.

  • Can any system be non-corrupt? If not, what is the acceptable level of corruption? I personally believe humanity is nowhere near a level where it can create a non-corrupt system. Perhaps small groups, but nothing larger than a small congregation. Even then, there is always a high risk that one person will start to take advantage of a culture of trust.
  • Do the various leaders X offer a less corrupt system that the one being torn down? In 2022, my opinion is they offer to replace a corrupt system with a more corrupt system. In any revolution there is always the high risk of counterrevolution. Marx was the leader X whose movement was taken over by Lenin. Monarchy was corrupt but Socialism enabled multiple degrees more of corruption. Monarchy was inhumane but Socialism was hellish. The legacy of leader X in that case enabled a long line of psychopaths to take power from Stalin to Putin, with only a few drunkards like Yelstin every once in a while who were not so bad.

This is probably the key point. When I talk to people in this newly emerging X counter movement (anti-vac, antigovernment, anti-progressive, all I can hear them saying is they are dissatisfied with something - but I never hear a good solution for an alternative. They aren’t building anything to replace what they want to tear down.

Actually, maybe instead of X, we should call it Z. That would be a more fitting analogy. The Russian invasion of Ukraine and the symbol Z is the ending. Tear everything down until everyone allows us to be on top. I think we can see in Russia the consequences of allowing the least competent among us to tear our current system down.

This is common. Idealists are destined to experience disillusionment. They have an opinion and think that only their opinion is the correct one. Ironically when they start losing battles, they become morally agnostic and begin to think the end justifies the means. I never trust idealists because I know they can easily do a 180 and do something completely amoral for their cause.
But who even said they are right, lol? They just think they are. Conservatives think they are right and liberals think they are and of course neither should get their way just because they think they are right.

The “way out” as I see it is to trust that the struggle is what is necessary - that humanity should struggle one against another to negotiate or fight out the best way. The correct path should be a difficult one. If it’s an easy path, something has gone terribly wrong and it means some kind of single-minded fanaticism has taken hold of the group. The way out is to celebrate Democracy as a ongoing and continuous peaceful struggle where you do not always get what you want.


I think we’re seeing something like this happening right now all around the world.


Totally agree. But in some pockets more than others. Case in point:

Again, I believe social media is directly responsible for all of this. This kind of extremism could never have reached its inflection point back in the Orange media age, as opposed to this 100% postmodern media age we now find ourselves in with its emphasis on radical decentralization and red-stage standards of “freedom” (i.e. “I want freedom of speech AND freedom from consequences”, “no one tells me what to do”, etc.) And it’s hard to know where to go from here, because most of what passes for “centrism” in this culture is fully drenched in the paradox of tolerance.


Rhodes, who wears an eye patch after accidentally shooting himself in the face with his own gun, is one of the most prominent defendants of the roughly 900 charged so far in connection with the attack.

A prime example of a Type X / Z leader.
Who follows an ex soldier who shot himself in the face? That’s just basic muzzle awareness - it’s the soldier version of not tying your shoelaces together.


This is an example of what worries me.

The World Economic Forum (WEF) founder Klaus Schwab and other globalist leaders decide what’s right and wrong … they want to rule. Dictating control over everyone for “their own good” … who’s good exactly? Here’s some interesting information.

The G20, — including the U.S. and the European Union, declared that a digital vaccine passport, standardized by the World Health Organization, will be part of international pandemic prevention and response moving forward.

Despite White House COVID-19 Response Team leader Jeff Zients promises, to, "… be clear that the government is not now, nor will we be supporting a system that requires Americans to carry vaccination credentials”, Is it a concern to any of us that President Biden just signed on to the agreement?

This is the George Bush Senior "New World Order" group think. Who is the X or Z Leader ready to stand up to this tyranny? They will become more and more dangerous until we wake up or until we submit to their tyranny.

This is certainly “some kind of single-minded fanaticism; I hope concerns EVREYONE HERE”.

The following video confirms that the COVID shots do not prevent the spread of infection.

Vaccine Passports are not for the purpose of containing epidemics … it’s for controlling the people. We have already discussed these ideas here on the Digital Tyranny topic. COVID shots do not prevent the spread of infection … this video is the evidence shared by the ANTI-SCIENCE fear-monger’s that are being de-platformed and silenced, @fermentedagave is perhaps such an antagonist?

To anyone who is actually paying attention to both sides of the arguments these trends are worrisome. The next threat is Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC) November 15, 2022, several global banks announced a partnership with the New York Federal Reserve to pilot a digital dollar program.

Who do we trust? Who can we trust? World ruling governments have a bloody stained history that we need to be mindful of as we are, by design, being distracted by the political BS from great thinkers and a compliant media that spin, spin, spin. They are so dizzy they see none of this, let’s not let that happen to any of us here.

Are we seeing any of this in the integral space? Regardless of any personal ideologies and/or beliefs I suggest we all remain open-minded, diligent and alert so we’re not surprised or blind-sided with future unfoldment’s.