The other day I wrote a piece for this site on the Post Office scandal and what it has to tell us about the prospect of digital mayhem when the entire scandal derived from an over-reliance on technology that wasn’t understood by anyone involved and which was defective.
Peter Cardwell of TalkTV picked up the article and interviewed me yesterday. You can watch the interview here. He’s an excellent interviewer who asks very perceptive questions and listens to the answers. I much enjoyed the experience but of course we barely scraped the surface of the subject, and I was also left thinking about what he’d said.
One of his questions was: why have we ended up placing so much trust in all this tech and what do we do about it? That left me thinking.
Human beings have always looked to a higher and infallible authority for reassurance, to seek help in an uncertain future, to provide coherence and structure to life, and to legitimate or validate our actions, among which are some of the most terrible conflicts in human history. Cult is also used for coercion and control and so often it works because coercion and control masquerade as security and stability. As soon as literacy came into being around 5,000 years ago, it’s religion that became one of the first aspects of human culture recorded, and from the start it was integral to the state.
A proliferation of gods appeared in antiquity as well as evidence for cult, and most of all the performance of ritual in which human beings seek to propitiate the gods and seek their support. Colossal quantities of resources were poured into the performance of cult and temples in antiquity, not least because the regimes depended for their entitlement to rule on the ‘approval’ of the deities.
Let’s take a single example. Egyptian Pharaohs routinely claimed that they had been sired by the god Amun who had appeared in guise of their fathers and impregnated their mothers. Not surprisingly then, the Pharaoh handed over vast amounts of booty and slaves into the Amun cult which became a state within a state. The remains of the cult centre at Karnak, just outside Luxor in Egypt, bear witness to this: despite being ruinous, it’s still one of the largest religious complexes in the world. Amun was constantly depicted as the god in whose name the Pharaoh did everything, from appearing in a temple procession or brutal wars of conquest that destroyed cities and enslaved thousands. The cult of Amun was a machine which managed resources, owned vast tracts of land and goods and controlled labour.
In our highly secularised state it seems to me that perhaps we’ve transferred our need for reassurance to a new form of cult: technology. Instead of rain dances and sacrifices we look to weather forecasters, satellites and modelling to tell us the weather future. Instead of expecting gods to protect us, we have turned to computers and electronics and all their attendant systems to run the world around us. They are increasingly treated as if they were infallible, as if they were a pantheon of gods, mainly because we want them to be. In our uncertain world we are desperate for certainty. This thread ran throughout Covid, but that kind of belief in what mathematics and technology and the will to believe we can control our environment runs through almost every part of our society now.
The Post Office scandal exhibits this perfectly. Even when it had become manifestly obvious that the Horizon system was flawed, no one involved in enforcing its operation was prepared to admit that. The possibility was simply too agonising and terrifying to contemplate. It meant, quite literally, admitting that the god of Horizon was not infallible, that the liturgy of the software might be incapable of delivering the promised control and order. The implications went way beyond the tragedy inflicted on sub-postmasters.
I’m not some kind of Luddite, pleading for a return to the old world of religion and to obliterate the science and technology of our era. Not for one minute would I like to live in the Middle Ages or in some fanciful post-apocalyptic rural idyll. Religion has led mankind into some of its most terrible places, peddled outrageous lies, and in some parts of the world it is still doing so. At the time of writing, it has the potential to act as catalyst to a new era of conflict.
But we do need to try and understand ourselves. There is a prevailing sense that science is somehow different, that it represents our leap into a whole new type of human existence. To some extent that is true but human beings have not changed fundamentally. That is why technology has become a new kind of cult, even if we do not appreciate it on an everyday basis.
We are all now being drawn deeper into the systems and protocols of technology. We have to interact with the Government and banks through machines, following new types of rituals which (as everyone knows) can leave us reeling with frustration and despair when confronted with some new digital dead end. We have become ever more infantilised because technology is capable of performing far more actual tasks than conventional religion; moreover, it is also beginning to take on a life of its own. That means everything from a satnav (which annihilates the native ability to develop a sense of direction) to calculators that have reduced our ability to perform basic arithmetic, diminished our capacity to remember things, and made us reliant on machines we not only are unable to repair but which are also designed to be unrepairable. And every moment of our lives is being recorded by these machines.
Alongside the machines, we are invited time and time again, like the omens of old, to treat scientific modelling as a form of fact. No real scientist would ever pretend it was so, but some do, and more to the point, many of us want it to be – everything from weather forecasting to predicting school results, Covid deaths and election results. They are all laid out before us, all ‘validated’ by their scientific credentials as a reliable depiction of the future. The evidence that none of this is truly reliable, that the future is only certain when it’s in the past, doesn’t stop us sliding ever further into this new form of religion.
It cuts both ways of course. Technology is also breeding new forms of doomsday saviour cults that are wholly anti-technology, or at least profess to be. These cults promise redemption if all of us bow down before their dogmas and liturgies and unquestioningly obey their precepts and demands. And like all such cults they are veering ever closer to ruthless enforcement and suppression of any diversity of thought. The great paradox of course is that the theology of these cults is founded on forms of scientific modelling, mathematical prophecies of the end of the world, rather than punitive thunderbolts hurled down by Zeus, which are trotted out with ever more frantic and zealous hysteria.
None of this should occasion any surprise to anyone. ‘Know thyself’ has always been one of the best pieces of advice, or in this case, know ourselves. Human beings have not changed. The Post Office Horizon catastrophe might serve as a timely warning, but I’m not holding my breath. Cult, whatever form it takes and everything it involves or leads to, is a facet of the human experience, a product of ourselves. We could start by understanding that.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
That was reported on GBN a day or two ago. Others made the point that it looks a lot like the old “Poll Tax” (“Community Charge”) that came and went, a few decades ago. The GBN also broadcast part of an interview of Rishi Sunak to the effect that he is criticising the ULEZ extension.
I can reconcile being “happy” that the law is being broken and at the same time not condoning law-breaking. At least … I think I can…
…but using IDS’s argument that “we have been lied to” would justify a huge amount of law-breaking…
Hmm … I’m trying to resolve the cognative dissonance…
Argh … sorry, that should be cognitive dissonance
The fact that the actions could or can be determined as unlawful by some, it will be deemed inevitable by others, Read some Solzhenitsyn, his words of warning have never been more important to read than today. Here is one to start with.
Someone that you have deprived of everything, is no longer in your power, he is once again entirely free.
The Tories are up to their necks in their commitment to net zero, UN2030, ID2021, CBDC, digital identity, building back better, the Marrakesh agreement, the new international health regulations (in his time as Health Sec, Javid was busy boasting about his lead role in drafting the new ‘health treaty’ as he referred to it then), LTNs, EDI, ESG, KYC and any other supranational collectivist project you care to name. They may well choose to make some cynical, short term capital by pretending to be unconvinced about certain developments, or go all wide eyed and claim “we didn’t know…’; but after 13 years, does anyone still believe they actually oppose any of this stuff? We may pay their wages, but it isn’t us they answer to. “Oh, look who I’ve bumped into who’s here to help us achieve net zero…” as our former Energy Secretary helpfully told us, acting surprised.
Doesn’t Duncan Smith saying that rebellion against these restricted zones is ok sort of give away that his party isn’t actually going to do anything to stop them?
If they were, he would be telling us to vote for his party because they’ll put an end to it. But he obviously isn’t saying that.
No one from the Conservative Party has come out saying that the party is against this policy of discriminating against owners of older cars and that they will oppose ot and roll it back the moment they get a chance.
Seems to me like IDS is rebelling against his own party and his own government.
Absolutely, and look how quickly he was forced to water down his comments: the party can judder into action quickly enough when they want it to. Tories’ only function now is to make themselves unelectable (going well), so that Starmer can be installed on “wave of popular support” to implement the full range of Sustainable Development Goals in his first term (conveniently ending just before 2030).
They’re getting themselves into position for post politics jobs in the corporations and supranational organisations calling the shots.
They get brownie points by pushing their agenda while keeping the population pacified.
All political parties do and across all free and open societies.
They even stuck one outside a crematorium! Citizens have a moral duty to disobey unjust laws and fight back against micro, power-mad Dicktator Khant and his unscientific authoritarianism. These Blade Runners are making a meaningful difference by taking action like this and it signals to TPTB that people won’t tolerate being persecuted or walked all over any longer. It also proves to the rest of the bovine masses that they do actually have power, if only they’d get off their backsides and use it. I’d be knighting every last one of them if I could. I’m well impressed with their gumption. Just a shame they’ll have to remain ever-anonymous because they are owed a debt of gratitude by those who don’t wish to be bullied and pushed around for the rest of their lives, as far as I’m concerned. You screw around with people’s lives pushback is inevitable.
https://twitter.com/MartinDaubney/status/1697158168168599951
Agreed, no longer enough to “sit on your ass in the bus of survivors”, as the gentleman sang.
Fantastic post Mogs, I wish I could agree even more. Not possible to.
Ta Ian 🙂
Breaking the cameras might well be illegal. But the law is immoral and wrong. So f**k it, I certainly won’t be paying any LEZ charges or related fines. They can stick it. And three cheers to the Blade Runners.
Breaking government-operated gas chambers was also illegal.
Rosa Parks broke the law, Gandhi broke the law, Martin Luther King broke the law. There is certainly a case to be made for breaking the law for a good reason when it doesn’t harm anyone else.
If the alternative is that families cannot afford heating and food, then who can blame these people for breaking the law?
Absolutely spot on. I hope the groundswell of public opinion grows to the point where it can no longer be ignored.
If 94% of cars in London are compliant then only 6% are responsible for potentially killing a claimed 4 million people.
There are an estimated 2.5M cars in the capital, so there are 150,000 polluters which occupy 1,600 square km, so there are less than 100 polluting cars per sq km, even assuming they are all working at the same time.
They must have pretty lethal exhaust fumes.
Applying logic will get you into trouble, fafor…
Maths is so anti-science.
Luvvit!
Bravo! Your clear logic shows that you do not need to be a scientist to reason, just to have some common sense. This clearly shows there is a separate agenda at work and that pollution, like climate change, is fraudulently being used to achieve it.
Khan claims that he expects that this will stop making money years from now (in a few years worded with a non-mayoral slant) because he expects the number of non-compliant cars to decrease. In other words, Khan stated that it does make money right now and will make money for years to come but this may eventually cease if people update their old used cars to newer used cars as they usually do.
Case close, methinks.
The Khant’s little racket will only cease to make money when he switches to the more ruinous – for all motorists – ‘pay per mile’ scheme.
Emission regulations are also very likely to get tighter over time. In a few years, the cars which are compliant with the most-recent regulations now won’t be compliant with the most-recent regulations then anymore. And ULEZ requirements will almost certainly be updated in line with emission regulations.
The Khan-shaped Bonus Hole will adjust the “compliance” requirements to ensure that his Tax Grab will continue by targeting more and more drivers.
It would take 24 hours for the Government to draft, check, sign and bring into force a Statutory Instrument to amend the Greater London Authority Act …. and stop Khan’s Tax Grab.
It doesn’t even need to go through Parliament, so there would be no opposition.
They’ve chosen not to do it.
Clearly this is not just about money but about Khan’s much wider ambitions under the C40 mayors’ openly declared objectives.
I would not personally sabotage a camera but I have great admiration for those who are breaking the law to register their opposition.
I believe there are many people like me who are naturally law abiding but terrified about the consequences of an unelected globalist cabal imposing measures that are against the public interest.
The science behind climate change is still unsettled and THE SCIENCE, based only on flawed data and questionable computer modelling produced by those with a very clear vested interest in a green agenda, is disputed by many authoritative figures with sophisticated real world evidence to back up their opposition.
We the many are being dictated to by the unelected few seeking to enhance their personal power and finances whilst impoverishing the rest of the world.
This can only end in the tears of poverty and it’s inevitable consequences for the millions and unimaginable power and wealth for a very tiny minority.
Utterly shameful!
Most of Khan’s voting base are ethnics so they’ll be hardest hit. You get what you vote for.
I don’t understand how giving Khan money reduces air pollution. This is simply a Catholic kind of indulgence, a payment to continue to sin. All very strange.
Tory ministers claim that they are powerless to stop Khan’s money grab. How about reducing Central Government grant’s to TfL and /or GLA by the amounts raised by UKEZ expansions? That will establish if it’s all about air quality.
Here we have a sitting MP of the fake Conservative Party raking in nearly £100,000 a year accusing others of lying to the public.