Historically, the only institution that had the capabilities of wielding massive levels of power that was also considered a potential threat was the government.
This has changed in the modern era. It has changed quite drastically.
Instead, governments are not the only important societal actors in free societies. There exists other entities that hold just as much, if not more, power than the government.
We nicknamed these “sensitive cultural markers” or SCMs, for short.
These SCMs are any type of cultural institution that holds sway over the attitudes, values, thoughts, or beliefs of any nation.
Consider the followings SCMs in America:
- Social media companies like Facebook or Twitter.
- Information distribution platforms like Google or Reddit.
- Media distribution oligarchs like Hollywood or Netflix.
- Sensitive cultural institutions such as education, academia, or the mainstream media.
- Monopolized industries such as Amazon and credit card servicing providers.
- The financial elite such as Rothschild family, Gates legacy, Bezos, Soros, or related.
These institutions all represent a type of “cultural elite”. A group that is oddly reminiscent of the totalitarian governments of the past.
Then consider this: Who do you think holds more power?
Do you think the broken, disfigured government in the US holds more power than these agencies? The government that is still, due to its republic nature, at least slightly accountable to the citizenry?
Or do you think a group of centralized SCMs are more powerful than the government?
I’d argue in favor of the second.
The government is limited. It is limited by the constitution. It is limited by the voters. The government is held accountable, at least in some manner, through many checks and balances.
SCMs are accountable to no one. If the SCMs are powerful enough, they can practically own the government. They can buy the politicians, they can finance the campaigns, and they can pervert the culture to get the people to believe whatever they want. They can then use that to influence the political response of a society.
It was not always like this. Historically, the government had far more power.
But the more I consider it, the more I realize in the modern era that balance has shifted for democratic societies. SCMs hold far more power. The globalization of the world has given them far-reaching power that supersedes national governance.
On top of it all, the SCMs are accountable to no one. They do not get elected or voted on. They are not restrained by the desire for a healthy culture or value system. The SCMs present a far higher threat to the voter because the voter has no right or representation over them.
They can indoctrinate your kids, subvert your culture, mess with your news, pervert your search engine results, censor your beliefs, and you can’t do a damn thing to stop them.
The government, on the other hand, doesn’t even have that level of power.
If the government attempted the same, we would at least know who the threat is. It is easy to target a government. It is not easy to target the entirety of the subverted SCMs. When these faceless groups centralize power behind the scenes, we can’t even pinpoint the enemy. Who are we to fight?
The culture war has subverted so many of them, there is not a clear target. Take down one and the other 500 will just fill its void. They have centralized the power so effectively that it is a problem just trying to create an alternative source.
Through the culture, they can also seize control of the government. It is almost as if it is the opposite of a socialist takeover.
Historically, the government has seized the means of production. This time around, it seems the means of production is attempting to seize the government.
Regretfully, the end result will be no different than the historical version.
Our government is weak in comparison to their reach.
And it makes you wonder: who is really the threat here? Your elected, accountable politician or the faceless billionaires that control the means of production, the means of information distribution, and the means of your livelihood?
Related Articles:
On Universities and Foreign “Donations”
Direct Democracy is Terrible: Protecting Representative Democracy
If you enjoyed this article, give us a bookmark and check back often for new content. New articles every weekday.
You can also keep up with us on social media.
Otherwise, you can join our monthly newsletter for the occasional update.
If you’d like to buy us a cup of tea, click here.