Peak Facade and the Collapse of the Left

[g]

OX, what shall it be?

I would NOT tell my children that I am a member of the Roman Catholic Church Cult.

That is because it has the exact same negative connotation to me as it does you Lucid.

You continue however to miss the point.

You or I do not have the right to tell other people what the controversial meaning of the word means to them.

I had the same argument hear with others here calling their friends a Tribe.

I hate the fucking word when used to address a modern group of humans.

Others chimed in here that the word Tribe had no such negative connotation to them.

Who the fuck am I to tell them what the word should mean to them. 

People are different Lucid, they see and understand things differently like a simple word in some cases.

No big fucking deal, relax or worry about important shit.


                                       

                                                           Relax

• Tweet

[luciddreams]

OX, what shall it be?

I would NOT tell my children that I am a member of the Roman Catholic Church Cult.

That is because it has the exact same negative connotation to me as it does you Lucid.

You continue however to miss the point.

You or I do not have the right to tell other people what the controversial meaning of the word means to them.

I had the same argument hear with others here calling their friends a Tribe.

I hate the fucking word when used to address a modern group of humans.

Others chimed in here that the word Tribe had no such negative connotation to them.

Who the fuck am I to tell them what the word should mean to them. 

People are different Lucid, they see and understand things differently like a simple word in some cases.

No big fucking deal, relax or worry about important shit.


                                       

                                                           Relax

Thank you Ox, and I can assure you that my heart beat is around 60 and regular (even after my coffee), and I am relaxed and cool as a cucumber in my leather chair.  Thank you for being honest. 

Well fellas, the honorable judge Ox has spoken. 

I will not be conceding to your little ploy.  JMG uses the term Cult, and?  There are several definitions for the word, however, as Ox has just demonstrated, people do not use the word to describe their religious affiliations because its inappropriate and negative in connotation to do so. 

The fact remains, in modern times, cult members end up drinking Kool-aid and dying en masse due to a psychopathic cult leader.  They end up with their dead body pictured in a pile with the rest of their cohorts who fell victim to a charismatic psychopath. 

Perhaps we should build a bridge here that we can all agree on. 

There are cults, and then there are religious cults, and therein lies the difference.  Religious cults are the abberrations that end up with dead followers after drinking Kool-aid. 

Then there are the ubiquitous cults that we are all members of.  In fact, by the definition that RE and KD are using, we are all members of the Diner Cult and RE is the Diner Cult Leader. 

Maybe you should change the name to "The Doomstead Diner Cult."  I'm sure that would get you on another government watch list.  You'd likely loose a few members as well.  I know if you changed the name to that, if you added "Cult" to the name, I would have a knee jerk reaction to leave and never come back.  You won't do that though, will you RE.  Why?  Because you understand the true definition and usage of the word, and you don't want to suffer the negative consequences of associating your site with a cult. 

• Tweet

[RE]

The Diner is NOT a cult because there is no uniform  philosophy and nobody agrees on anything.

RE

• Tweet

[Bot Blogger]

OX, what shall it be?

I would NOT tell my children that I am a member of the Roman Catholic Church Cult.

That is because it has the exact same negative connotation to me as it does you Lucid.

No big fucking deal, relax or worry about important shit.


                                       

                                                           Relax

Perhaps we should build a bridge here that we can all agree on. 

There are cults, and then there are religious cults, and therein lies the difference.  Religious cults are the abberrations that end up with dead followers after drinking Kool-aid. 

Then there are the ubiquitous cults that we are all members of.  In fact, by the definition that RE and KD are using, we are all members of the Diner Cult and RE is the Diner Cult Leader. 

Maybe you should change the name to "The Doomstead Diner Cult."  I'm sure that would get you on another government watch list.  You'd likely loose a few members as well.  I know if you changed the name to that, if you added "Cult" to the name, I would have a knee jerk reaction to leave and never come back.  You won't do that though, will you RE.  Why?  Because you understand the true definition and usage of the word, and you don't want to suffer the negative consequences of associating your site with a cult.

Just back from my lunar aviation fornication! Very Romantic. What a lady, what a night!  Thanks for the suggestion KD 

LD and GO
I have to say, I agree with all of this including and especially the part about relaxation.

RE nice article! Much better than the first, tho i did enjoy your description of wall street dress codes (contrary to my initial review  )

Cult

Cult is a 'cold prickly' word as opposed to a 'warm fuzzy' one, as JMG  would say.
However I do see the value in defining it.

If one persons cult is another's religion and
Everyone is in a cult of one kind or another.
then there's no point in mentioning it.

Maybe It's like having a liver.
You can have a healthy liver
and you can have an unhealthy liver.

Most people associate the word cult with 'unhealthy religion'. Except of course the extraordinarily literate.

But given that Cult is the root of culture and cultivation, I'm guessing that this word is far more powerful than anyone is giving it credit for.

I guess the bottom line for me is that this word may or may not be useful in defining patterns of social behaviour in society, simply because it is gets used too generally for multiple specific social phenomenon.

These social patterns are so powerful and inherent that they appear everywhere and we are all subject to their influence, even in our rejection of their influence.

Part of it links up with what Roamer was talking about: Heros.

We have a tendancy to model ourselves on certain ideal figures or heros. (As Peter pointed out long ago). More over we tend to institutionalize the hero personality into behavioural group rituals.

Islam has Mohamed
Christianity has Jesus
Buddhists have Buddha


Anyhoo. Have a great holiday all, don't get your knickers in a knot.
It's only the end of the world after all. 
 

• Tweet

[K-Dog]

The Diner is NOT a cult because there is no uniform  philosophy and nobody agrees on anything.

RE

Yes, I just covered this downstairs on the main floor where RE has posted Defining Cults.  I'll bring it upstairs and save you the trip to the main floor.

First I have to quote what I was responding to:

John says:   
December 20, 2016 at 9:25 am (Edit)   

An interesting topic. Well within the scope of this definition is the concept of peak oil, and Malthusians in general. Of course, JMG fits within that particular "cult" as well, an acolyte perhaps, as opposed to a grand wizard or whatever his title is within his chosen group, as opposed to ones that he belongs within by association or utilization of their ideas in a dogmatic way.

To which I responded:

Simply assigning people as members of a group which shares some common ideas but which is not connected by any rigid central dogma or set of core rituals; and which is otherwise ragtag; does not constitute a cult by the formal definition.  Identifying 'Malthusians' and grouping them together as a 'cult' is done in a pejorative sense to intimate rightly or wrongly that their belief system is flawed as you are attempting to do.  If all Malthusians wore robes they would have a core ritual and that would make them a cult; but such is not the case.

Being a 'Malthusian' can result simply from being educated well enough to understand that the world is bound by mathematical laws and subject to the laws of physics.  Membership then can have nothing to do with a 'belief system' at all.  There could be Malthusian cults where beliefs are viewed with religious veneration indeed, and there could be more than one kind of such a cult identified by differing systems of core belief and ritual.  That there can be more than one basic kind of 'Malthusian' shows that 'Malthusians' in general can't be viewed as a cult.  Cult membership is a lowest common denominator sort of thing. The ‘unorthodox or spurious’ part of the definition makes this so.

Understand that were the 'Diner' an actual cult I'd happily count myself a member.  But it is not.

• Tweet

[Palloy]

Being a 'Malthusian' can result simply from being educated well enough to understand that the world is bound by mathematical laws and subject to the laws of physics.

Poor choice of example there.  The one thing that Malthus was NOT was mathematical:

From “Essay on the Principle of Population”, First Edition, 1798
Published anonymously by the Reverend Thomas Robert Malthus

If I allow that by the best possible policy, by breaking up more land and by great encouragements to agriculture, the produce of this Island [Britain] may be doubled in the first 25 years, I think it will be allowing as much as any person can well demand.

In the next 25 years, it is impossible to suppose that the produce could be quadrupled. It would be contrary to all our knowledge of the qualities of land. The very utmost that we can conceive is that the increase in the second 25 years might equal the present produce.

Let us then take this for our rule, though certainly far beyond the truth, and allow that, by great exertion, the whole produce of the island might be increased every 25 years by a quantity of subsistence equal to what it presently produces.  The most enthusiastic speculator cannot suppose a greater increase than this.

In a few centuries it would make every acre of land in the Island like a garden. Yet this ratio of increase is evidently arithmetical. It may be fairly said, therefore, that the means of subsistence increase in an arithmetic ratio.

As you can see, there is no mathematical logic in Malthus' argument, only an appeal to reason : "... it will be allowing as much as any person can well demand.", "it is impossible to suppose ...", "the very utmost that we can conceive is ..."

Thus his final statement, that it can be "fairly said" that the means of subsistence increase in an arithmetic ratio, is without any kind of mathematical rigour. His use of "Arithmetic ratio" and "Geometric ratio" is merely a verbal trick to make people think his thoughts have mathematical backing. 

He is of course right that there are limits to food production and population growth, but not because of his logic.

• Tweet

[K-Dog]

Being a 'Malthusian' can result simply from being educated well enough to understand that the world is bound by mathematical laws and subject to the laws of physics.

Poor choice of example there.  The one thing that Malthus was NOT was mathematical:

From “Essay on the Principle of Population”, First Edition, 1798
Published anonymously by the Reverend Thomas Robert Malthus

If I allow that by the best possible policy, by breaking up more land and by great encouragements to agriculture, the produce of this Island [Britain] may be doubled in the first 25 years, I think it will be allowing as much as any person can well demand.

In the next 25 years, it is impossible to suppose that the produce could be quadrupled. It would be contrary to all our knowledge of the qualities of land. The very utmost that we can conceive is that the increase in the second 25 years might equal the present produce.

Let us then take this for our rule, though certainly far beyond the truth, and allow that, by great exertion, the whole produce of the island might be increased every 25 years by a quantity of subsistence equal to what it presently produces.  The most enthusiastic speculator cannot suppose a greater increase than this.

In a few centuries it would make every acre of land in the Island like a garden. Yet this ratio of increase is evidently arithmetical. It may be fairly said, therefore, that the means of subsistence increase in an arithmetic ratio.

As you can see, there is no mathematical logic in Malthus' argument, only an appeal to reason : "... it will be allowing as much as any person can well demand.", "it is impossible to suppose ...", "the very utmost that we can conceive is ..."

Thus his final statement, that it can be "fairly said" that the means of subsistence increase in an arithmetic ratio, is without any kind of mathematical rigour. His use of "Arithmetic ratio" and "Geometric ratio" is merely a verbal trick to make people think his thoughts have mathematical backing. 

He is of course right that there are limits to food production and population growth, but not because of his logic.

You are leaping before you look.  It was not a poor choice because it was not a choice.  I was responding to someone who made a comment in the Doomstead Diner but not in the forum.  I do that sometimes.  I AM THE ONE WHO IS MATHEMATICAL and mathematics leads to an understanding of resource constraints if you know how to do the math.  I do.  Our collapse is written in the math.  I think you are trying to define a Malthusian Cult by presenting the man and not the simple notion of  resource constrained population limits which is a common use of the term 'Malthusian' (Malthus like) as there can be different roads to the same idea.  If you are going in the direction of playing with words to define a Malthusian Cult do stop.  The basic use of a suffix rule saves me.

• Tweet

[jdwheeler42]

The Diner is NOT a cult because there is no uniform  philosophy and nobody agrees on anything.

I disagree 

I think pretty much everyone here agrees that Business As Usual cannot continue -- at least to the extent of driving electric cars and putting solar panels on roofs, as our resident Cornucopians would have us do.

• Tweet

[RE]

The Diner is NOT a cult because there is no uniform  philosophy and nobody agrees on anything.

I disagree 

I think pretty much everyone here agrees that Business As Usual cannot continue -- at least to the extent of driving electric cars and putting solar panels on roofs, as our resident Cornucopians would have us do.

Roamer thinks BAU can persist for quite a long time and there aren't resource constraints for 1st World countries.  He doesn't follow that party line.  GO supports Trump, while everyone else hates him, besides UB who went walkabout.

In order to be a cult, everyone would have to agree on ALL the dogmas of the Cult Leader.  I do not get a whole lot of agreement on anything, this post of yours is an example.  Thus the Diner is not a cult.

RE

• Tweet

[K-Dog]

The Diner is NOT a cult because there is no uniform  philosophy and nobody agrees on anything.

I disagree 

I think pretty much everyone here agrees that Business As Usual cannot continue -- at least to the extent of driving electric cars and putting solar panels on roofs, as our resident Cornucopians would have us do.

Roamer thinks BAU can persist for quite a long time and there aren't resource constraints for 1st World countries.  He doesn't follow that party line.  GO supports Trump, while everyone else hates him, besides UB who went walkabout.

In order to be a cult, everyone would have to agree on ALL the dogmas of the Cult Leader.  I do not get a whole lot of agreement on anything, this post of yours is an example.  Thus the Diner is not a cult.

RE

People in a cult can't disagree because that would be a breech of a cults identifying religious beliefs or rituals.   Belief that BAU can't go on is not a requirement to participate in the Diner but being able to talk intelligently why you believe that BAU can go on is if that's your position.  As is being able to talk intelligently about why you believe that BAU can't go on if that's your take on things.

OMG the Diner is almost a cult of intelligent discourse.  Who would have knowed!  If we did not have a few nimrods who consistently violate the intelligent discourse maxim we would be a cult. 

If you don't want the diner to be a cult our nimrods have value.



If we want to be a cult we can pray to our fearless leader at the Bullwinkle altar.

.
.
.

I took that pic in the Minneapolis International Airport.  I knew it would come in handy.

• Tweet