1. The Forces of Interaction in DNA and Biochemical Mediators
To understand the pathology of the contemporary West, we must draw a sharp line of demarcation between what is a natural limit (written in our biology and in physics) and what is an artificial limit (created by law for dominion).
The rules of human interaction with the world are not only learned in school: they are strictly encoded in our DNA and governed by physics. In the Environmental Domain, our actions are constantly mediated by physical “forces.” For example, if we decide to climb a flight of stairs, the force of gravity acts as an inescapable mediator: it forces us to exert an equal and opposite muscular thrust in order to advance. We cannot ignore it. On a biological level, if we touch a hot stove, we get burned. Pain acts as an instantaneous biochemical mediator: it forces us to withdraw our hand. Subsequently, to avoid further damage, fear takes over. Fear becomes the new element that mediates our interaction with fire, saving our lives. We submit to the unmodifiable dogma of physics so as not to die.
In the Social Domain, our DNA encodes equally ironclad rules. Even in relationships with our peers, there are forces that mediate our interactions, and the primary one among them is coercive force. Within a healthy human ecosystem, punishment is part of this natural coercive force: it serves to maintain boundaries and prevent entropy (destructive behavior) from collapsing the system. Since there is no “physical gravity” that automatically crushes those who steal, coercive interaction is mediated by our emotions, which are not poetic abstractions, but physical reactions generated by precise cocktails of hormones and neurotransmitters. Anger, resentment, and the fear of isolation, as well as joy, comfort, and love, are the chemical mediators between us, our peers, and the community.
Because an isolated human in nature is destined to perish, our genetic code inexorably drives us toward sociality. And it drives us, by nature, to fiercely protect the community to which we belong whenever one of its members (or the network itself) is threatened, activating the group’s coercive force against the transgressor.
1.1 The Scientific Literature: Oxytocin, Amygdala, and Group Defense
That the defense of the community is a biological imperative and not a cultural construct is amply demonstrated by contemporary neuroscience and endocrinology. Take the case of oxytocin, long trivialized by pop culture as the “cuddle hormone” or the “love neurotransmitter.” The fundamental studies of neuroscientist Carsten De Dreu (2011) have shown that oxytocin is, in reality, the hormone of the in-group. De Dreu proved that oxytocin triggers trust among members of one’s own community, but when the group perceives an external threat, the same hormone promotes defensive aggression toward the outside (out-group). In short, biochemistry orders us to close ranks around our peers and to use coercive force to repel the pathogen.
This mechanism is confirmed by the studies of renowned neuroendocrinologist Robert Sapolsky (Behave, 2017). Sapolsky illustrates how our amygdala is pre-wired to make a split-second distinction between Us and Them. When our community is attacked, our brain does not process philosophical and guaranteeist responses: it floods the body with neurotransmitters aimed at neutralizing the threat to ensure the network’s survival.
In light of exact science, we arrive at an inescapable corollary: protecting the single human person who is not part of the community, or who actively threatens and vandalizes it, is a literally “inhuman” act (contrary to human physiology). Restraining the white blood cells that try to use coercive force to defend the organism is an abuse against our own nervous system.
2. The Distorted Use of Force: The State against the Community
In a natural ecosystem, a single pathogen (a criminal, a predator) is structurally weak compared to a cohesive community. If the individual attacks the network, the group’s coercive force would neutralize them in an instant, restoring order. But at this point in the history of the West, the Empty Machine (the hyper-bureaucratized State) intervenes and carries out the most colossal operation of engineering piracy ever attempted.
Through the ideology of positive human rights and the drafting of modern Constitutions, the oligarchy has artificially elevated the value of the single human person, placing it above the value of the network. This artificial elevation is inexorably followed by a lethal mechanical inversion: the State makes the single human person (the pathogen) strong and makes the community weak.
How does this reversal physically happen? The State intervenes with its own immense coercive force (laws, police, courts), but it uses it in the wrong direction. Instead of crushing the pathogen—who alone would be powerless against the Horizontal Vector—the State uses its coercive force to block the community’s reaction, disarming it, punishing the antibody, and forcing the social group into an unnatural submission in the face of the anomaly.
Explanatory Example: The subway micro-community. Let us imagine the temporary ecosystem inside a subway car: the community consists of dozens of travelers and the driver. An organized group of pickpockets boards the train. In nature, this handful of criminals (the pathogen) is structurally extremely weak compared to the community. Out of pure survival instinct, they should act in hiding, terrified of being discovered and physically neutralized by the crowd. Instead, the group of muggers acts in broad daylight, with arrogance and total tranquility. Why are they so sure of their impunity? Because they know that the community is defenseless, paralyzed by guaranteeist laws written precisely to make it timid and submissive. The criminal knows perfectly well that if the travelers united to stop them by force, the State would intervene immediately with its courts to punish the “violent” citizens to protect the safety of the pickpocket. The State’s coercive force thus acts as a steel shield for the predator.
The Academic Comparison: Mary Ann Glendon and Rights Talk Harvard jurist Mary Ann Glendon (Rights Talk, 1991) acutely analyzed this phenomenon, denouncing how Western political discourse has been impoverished by an obsession with absolute individual rights, which have erased the vocabulary of civic responsibility and duties. The analogy: We both diagnose that the hyper-guaranteeism of the single person is destroying the social fabric. The difference: Glendon frames it as an “impoverishment of moral discourse.” We demonstrate that it is a bio-mechanical abuse. Constitutions force us, under threat of State penal action, to repress our neurotransmitter-mediated defenses, forcing us to endure abuses against our very nature.
3. The Engineering of Fragmentation: The Imposition of A-sociality
What is the clinical effect of this coercive castration on the masses? By imposing the cult of the Absolute Individual and using the law to forbid the group from protecting itself, the State literally forces us into a-sociality.
As we have seen, if a student watches helplessly while a bully dominates the classroom because they know the State protects the deviant’s safety by punishing those who react, that student is forced to behave in an a-social manner. They pathologically adapt to mind their own business. Constitutional Charters—sold by the media as the triumph of human solidarity—reveal themselves in practice to be the most powerful engine of fragmentation ever conceived. By disabling the Principle of Relational Reality (the group’s biological right to expel those who do wrong via coercive force), mutual trust is destroyed. No one feels part of a “Whole” anymore, because the force to defend that Whole has been made illegal.
The Academic Comparison: Zygmunt Bauman and Liquid Modernity The renowned sociologist Zygmunt Bauman (Liquid Modernity, 2000) masterfully described this fragmentation, coining the concept of “liquid society”: a world in which social bonds, institutions, and families have melted, leaving the individual lonely and anxious. The analogy: We fully share the clinical observation: intermediate bodies are dissolving into a multitude of isolated monads. The difference: Bauman attributes this “liquefaction” to unbridled consumerism. We reverse the paradigm: fragmentation is not an unfortunate cultural drift; it is the result of a chemical-legal solvent. Bonds did not melt on their own; they were systematically severed by State courts that use their coercive force to arm the individual against their own community.
4. The Ultimate Goal: Dissolving Bonds to Dominate the Void
Such a capillary architectural disaster cannot simply be the fruit of jurists’ naivety. Laws centered on the absolute individual were purposely forged to sever social bonds.
Why does the Empty Machine desire this? The motive is absolute control. Structures like a united family, a strict school, a proud municipality, or a Nation with firm borders represent very strong Horizontal Vectors. They are mega-organisms capable of protecting their members and, above all, rebelling against central power, pitting their own coercive force against that of the State. For an extractive Power, the existence of these organic communities is a lethal obstacle.
Explanatory Example: A man who has a cohesive family, a supportive neighborhood, and a strong sense of identity is not easily blackmailed. If the State issues an unjust law, he takes to the streets with his community. But an atomized, single individual, terrified by crime in his neighborhood, legally submitted to the pathogen, is the perfect prey. He depends entirely on the State for his security and on multinational corporations for his primary emotional needs. His relational Degrees of Freedom (NDoF) are equal to zero.
The Academic Comparison: Patrick Deneen and the Failure of Liberalism Political scientist Patrick Deneen (Why Liberalism Failed, 2018) denounced how modern liberalism has been too successful in achieving its occult goal: destroying local cultures to create a powerful centralized State that rules over a market of uprooted individuals. The analogy: We agree that extreme individualism and oppressive statism are two sides of the same coin: the State magnifies its own power by destroying intermediate communities. The difference: Deneen levels a philosophical critique. We apply a bio-engineering metric: the oligarchy intervenes with its coercive force to protect the pathogen because it is forced to do so to avoid thermodynamic collapse. By breaking communities through the Ideology of Human Rights, the Empty Machine lowers the potential for revolt (the Tensorial Heat, ΦHS) of organized groups.
Conclusion: Dominion over Dust
By replacing the Dogma of Nature (community coercive force based on neurotransmitters) with the Constitutional Dogma (the idolatry of the Individual in a vacuum), the elites have achieved their final goal.
Using the force of the State to forbid society from protecting itself, they have swept away every form of organic aggregation, leaving only dust on the battlefield: millions of lonely, a-social individuals, deprived of their community DNA and their natural defenders. And an isolated individual, deprived of the strength of his ecosystem, is not a “free and emancipated” man, as constitutional preambles boast. He is a fragile atom, infinitely blackmailable and totally submitted to the Empty Machine.
Recognizing the Ideology of Human Rights for what it is—a bio-engineering operation that uses the coercive force of the State to disarm the community for the benefit of the single pathogen—is the first and indispensable step to rebuilding the lost, granite-like solidity of our Nations.
Bibliography
- Bauman, Z. (2000). Liquid Modernity. Cambridge: Polity Press.
- De Dreu, C. K. W., et al. (2011). Oxytocin promotes human ethnocentrism. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 108(4), 1262-1266.
- Deneen, P. J. (2018). Why Liberalism Failed. New Haven: Yale University Press.
- Glendon, M. A. (1991). Rights Talk: The Impoverishment of Political Discourse. New York: Free Press.
- Sapolsky, R. M. (2017). Behave: The Biology of Humans at Our Best and Worst. New York: Penguin Press.