The spectacle is not a collection of images, but a social relation among people, mediated by images
—Debord, G. 1967
Burroughs, and Gysin, both told me something that resonated with me for the rest of my life so far. They pointed out that alchemists always used the most modern equipment and mathematics, the most precise science of their day. Thus, in order to be an effective and practicing magician in contemporary times, one must utilize the most practical and cutting-edge technology and theories of the era. In our case, it meant cassette recorders, Dream Machines and flicker, Polaroid cameras, Xeroxes, E-prime and, at the moment of writing this text, laptops, psychedelics, videos, DVDs, and the World Wide Web.
—P-Orridge, Painful but Fabulous, cited in Egil Asprem and Kennet Granholm. Contemporary Esotericism. (Routledge, 2014) p. 129.
We see in this present dream, and the previous, a series of sequels to the hypnagogic managerialism of the last decade. One more island in the psyop archipelago, radiating netherward in a networked collection of ghettoized, self-configuring, immersive environments.
We all know, but stiff-necked we refuse to extrapolate, we fear at some point we’re going to run into our own delusions. In some Carpenter-esque moment of revelation, we will find our own location in the mass hallucination. Yes, Ukraine and the next thing function as a therapeutic cognitive overlay, a virtual substitute for a moral life. It is another mixed reality RPG where we can earn “internet points” and even LARP in player vs. player (PvP) zones. So what? What does that mean to me? There is an entire sphere of people that are consciously and unconsciously steering you away from such questions because they want you to address it tangentially, yet continue to believe that the greater protocological architecture is fundamentally authentic and a viable vector for producing meaning.
”Protocol is that machine, that massive control apparatus that guides distributed networks, creates cultural objects, and engenders life forms.”(Galloway) For example, infrastructural architecture implies a protocol of movement: walk here, run here, stop there. “The new grid of posthuman control is no longer disciplinary, but protocological.”(Rickert, 2010) Protocol is a management style that injects control into “fronts of disorder,” “anti-worlds”, “mafia networks,” and “crises, conflicts, and imbalances.” It is the ambient, fluid, and dynamic method of oppression in anarcho-tyranny, as in the managerial terrorism of the Global American Empire (GAE), to name the most relevant example.
The total protocological environment can be defined as the assemblage of protocols that together govern the implementation of technologies, mental objects, cognitive artifacts (such as maps), human life-as-information and artificial life forms. YouTube, Twitter, TikTok all function as proprietary systems of protocological control. Such platforms are inherently shaped by the operative intentions and not the stated goals of the platform controllers and agents that formed them (Galloway and Thacker, 2004, 2007; Kornberger et al., 2017; Srnicek, 2017). Stated goals are shaped by protocols, are of a contextual or tactical nature, but do not necessarily shape protocol. “Don’t be evil” was shaped by external theological protocols, but once Google attained its own theological/ontological function, the stated goal was dropped. Through opaque adjustment to algorithms, these platforms shape content, aesthetics, and the spread of ideas. In aggregate, this creates an environment which ultimately deforms the mind and body of the user. The generically deformed personality of the user is then fed back into certain circuits where it is specifically modified. The algorithmically deformed user then becomes a proprietary, speciated instrument of certain platforms.
Google Search is an example of a central nexus authorizing certain protocols, cognitive artifacts, and forms of life— it can be called a “meta-protocol”. Human collectives exist within “adaptive socio-cognitive systems” (Holland, 1992), and “adaptation need not involve biological reproduction and can be based on social transmission occurring on time scales from moments to many generations.”(Krakauer) It is possible that mass cognitive maladaptation can create chronic stress states that will have certain epigenetic effects. We have discussed the effect of electrostatic fields on gene expression—
Furthermore—
”The heart generates the largest electromagnetic field in the body. The electrical field as measured in an electrocardiogram (ECG) is about 60 times greater in amplitude than the brain waves recorded in an electroencephalogram (EEG). The magnetic component of the heart’s field, which is around 5000 times stronger than that produced by the brain, is not impeded by tissues and can be measured several feet away from the body with a superconducting quantum interference device (SQUID)-based magnetometers (1). We have also found that the clear rhythmic patterns in beat-to-beat heart rate variability are distinctly altered when different emotions are experienced. These changes in electromagnetic, sound pressure and blood pressure waves produced by cardiac rhythmic activity are “felt” by every cell in the body, further supporting the heart’s role as a global internal synchronizing signal.”
—The Energetic Heart: Biomagnetic Communication Within and Between People, Bioelectromagnetic Medicine
This opens the way to speculation: perhaps extreme changes in emotional expression can alter the heart’s electromagnetic field, leading to changes in gene expression (Ventura, 2000)(Manzella, 2015) (Zaporozhan, 2010). It is my belief that, if forced into prolonged peak emotional states through mass menticide campaigns, the resulting magnetogenetic fields could lead to rapid catastrophic mutation. The importance of emotional frames cannot be understated. (The application of biomagnetic communication through the generation of a concentrated EM field in order to “reset” golem is something worth exploring.)