The Necessity of the “Butlerian Jihad” ⇒ James article on West coast reactionaries blog

robot traffic

Read this controversial article of blogger James in the West Coast Reactionaries blog. This blogging platform and the authors seems to me quite different to their objective and philosophies of article writing. The little introduction in “about” page help to realize the inner space of the blog:

“West Coast Reactionaries is a regularly updated nexus of criminal thinking, esoteric garble and extensive complaining. Current affairs, ideology, philosophy, theology, history and more are among the topics explored here by an ever-expanding rabble of nobodies who aim to make sense of a senseless world.

Although the founder of WCR lives on the western coast of the United States, other writers reside all over the world and come from a diverse range of backgrounds. Due to this diversity, there is no single consensus; the views of each article reflect the views of the author alone.”

James post on The Necessity of the “Butlerian Jihad” reflects the controversy, rebuttal of the common perception and lot other conflicting ideas and actions we’re now bound to carry in the machine-oriented age of homogeneous humanity. James advance further to rebutting the conflict of “machine and the societal fencing” in the modern era we have to living now. He’s not historically analytical to the points he raise on the article but try to clarify the opinions by theological ground includes some preferred nous, which maybe has great lacking in modern age of thinking.

Let read his paragraphs for further opinion and debate. I quoted just some noticing paragraphs from the article for further reading…


“It’s not unfair to say that modern man has an obsession with machines. This fixation is many times both celebrated as the “progress” of humanity forward and sometimes lampooned as the “Instagram generation.” There are plenty of individuals who praise the connectivity of social media while there are those who decry how dehumanizing and reductive it can be. Indeed, it is this new, intimate connection between “society” and “technology” that has given rise to these emergent properties as “social media” and “technocracy” just to name a few.”

“Conversation” has often been identified by even modern people as a “lost art” in the burgeoning world of the “digital age.”ii But what is this “art of conversation”? In my own experience, it seems as if most modern people, when thinking of conversation, refer only to the kind of entertainment that they receive from various “points of interest” with other individuals.”

“Social media is definitely a facet of the “world of the serpent” iv where sheer mass and digital sentimentality is treated, unsurprisingly, like the fiat currency of the modern world. “It has meaning because we all believe it does.” v Again, this is the “cunning” of the serpent which deals in artificiality.” 

“There is a real connection between superficiality and sterility. The arcanum of the sexual act, for example, demonstrates this reality by homology. In order to achieve conception, “depth” in physical terms, must be accomplished through the marriage of man and wife. It is only then that a new life takes hold and the human organism perpetuates. However, in the mode of modern conversation, there is a refusal to achieve any kind of spiritual or emotional depth.”

“Conversation, in the modern context, is only meant to satisfy what we already know — our own essence. We ejaculate our own incomplete (read: haploid) essence without achieving any depth and we do so with the aid of other individuals who merely stroke our egos. This sterility, mutual pleasuring, and lack of any new change in the person — or elevation of their consciousness — is the hallmark of modern conversations as masturbatory. It is no wonder, then, that the usage of the internet for pornography as an enabling factor for this habit is also the preferred mode by which the conversational orgy is perpetuated on social media. It is also no wonder that the modern world, which so woefully misunderstands and misuses the art of the sexual act, treats conversation with such selfish objectivization.”

“This promiscuity of modern technological “connection” is also indicative of the other current of modernity which was inherited from the “world of the serpent”: the confusing of quantity for quality. … The number and weight is given priority and it is this world of quantity that the techno-economic machine is obsessed with. It is this “paradise” of bourgeois life that is so often sought after through the use of the “technological miracle.” Thus, social media — the online society — is like a real society, but it can never be one. The modern technologically miraculous bourgeois society achieves something like peace and justice, but it has neither in reality.”

But is it totally the fault of the machine? Just as I mentioned in my previous post that the gun is morally neutral, so is the computer. This is why Frank Herbert — the mystical Saint John of Science Fiction — once wrote through the words of Leto II Atreides:

“The target of the Jihad was a machine-attitude as much as the machines,” Leto said. “Humans had set those machines to usurp our sense of beauty, our necessary serfdom out of which we make living judgments. Naturally, the machines were destroyed.”


“The sin of artificial intelligence is not that it will happen through elevating machines to our consciousness, but through creating a society and individual so mechanized and materialistic that he is indistinguishable from machine. The sin is not that we are trying to teach machines how to create art and music, but that humans do stupid and inane things such as assign notes to digits of pi and pretend it is “beautiful” to listen to. The sin is not that we are trying to teach machines emotions, but that we scroll through videos of clickbait on our feeds looking for our next emotional fix.

The Turing Test for the modern age indicates, horrifically, not how far machines have advanced, but how shallow and empty humanity is becoming. The almost Lovecraftian horror of artificial intelligence is not when we have created other beings, but that we are already in a process of lowering the bar to the level of amoral unconsciousness.”

“Artificial Intelligence is the pinnacle of “cunning” since it once again represents the “miming” of wisdom, the “elimination of the essential” humanity or the “light,” and the “use of it for one’s own ends” which reminds us of the cult of utilitarianism which is often invoked when speaking of synthetic organisms.”

“So where does this leave the contemplative man? He is alienated from the world of quantity and artificiality and, at the same time, if he is born in this age — unless he becomes a hermit — he is not afforded the extreme asceticism of being detached from the world. The solution, therefore, is the same in which Moses dealt with the serpents in the desert: crucifixion.”

“It is interesting to note that the Reverend Mother Mohiam believes that the line should have been written as “thou shalt not make a machine to counterfeit a human mind,” which only further indicates Herbert’s own understanding that such a thing as artificial intelligence is of “the world of the serpent”; the world of “cunning.” We ourselves should never forget that our consciousness has a greater dimension than that of quantity, materiality, and utility — and it often requires a great interior struggle — a jihad — to realize this truth.”

To read more click: The Necessity of the “Butlerian Jihad” on the West Coast Reactionaries blog.



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s