Machination of Ruin

Government mandated girlfriends, a Philosophy: “The only recognized purpose of marriage was to beget children for the service of the Party.”, wrote Orwell in 1984. 
Our “Party” is not a government but rather the efficiency of technological expansion. Technological progress functions as our de facto god. It requires worship through sacrifice by consent. 
To manufacture consent, it encourages sex for two purposes: 1. Lull the population into an artificial sleep 2. Procreation for the purpose of host generation Easy access to sex is facilitated through the organizational principle of the app — Tinder, Bumble, Hinge, government service, etc.

The goal of abundant access is to provide distraction from an otherwise miserable life within the anti civilization. Like the adventures of Odysseus, we actively seek a return to home of "tradition". Yet too often do we gorge ourselves on the lotus flowers of distraction, become lulled into an adamant pacifism, and begin to lose all desire for greatness beyond the technological system's illusion. Whilst deep within the throws of artificial comfort, we are content to sacrifice the virtues of our civilization to the false god. We soon agree to sacrifice our children to Moloch in pursuit of the promise of further comfort. Without constant pacification in the form of sex, video games, and consumerism, man might otherwise “wake up” and seek rebellion against his technological prison. The technological system must, therefore, continue to manufacture new distractions to continue man’s sleep. Worse, man will rationalize the distractions as his “holy yes to life”. 

Sex is no longer used for the intention to create a family and develop localized clan power. No, any expression of authentic power must be crushed. Rather, sex becomes about access an infinitely expansive wonderland of experience open to all. Thanks to the gratification of such pleasurable quantity, we incorrectly herald sex as a bastion of “progress”.

Jaques Ellul suggests that technology “does not have man’s welfare as its end. It is designed just as well for his exploitation. In today’s world, psychological collectivization is the sine qua non of technical action.”
 … “the yield is greater when man acts from consent, rather than constraint. The problem then is to get the individual’s consent artificially through depth psychology, since he will not give it of his own free will. But the decision to give consent must appear to be spontaneous.”

 The religion of technological expansion is founded upon the tenet of consent. There is no more powerful consenting mechanism than the organization of free sex. Once offered, even the greatest of us will succumb to the call. The opportunity is too profoundly pleasurable to ignore. Once accepted, we agree, through deed, that the technological system is indeed a miracle. We welcome the vampire into our home with full embrace as a friend. We allow it to drink our blood and sap our energy. Years of consistent heartbreak and opportunity cost may be lost before the man begins to question the virtue of his rampant promiscuity. By the time he begins to question, the damage is already done. The family he should have otherwise had has been removed from him.

 “It is remarkable that mass participation distracts the individual from his miseries and even dispels them. After all, the process of massification was itself the origin of man’s psychic difficulties!”, writes Jaques Ellul. 

The alternative pathway is for technology to simply demand you receive the gift of a romantic partner. The danger is to perceive this as a triumph rather than another manufactured pitfall. Ted K asserts that “the system does satisfy many human needs, but generally speaking it does this only to the extent that it is to the advantage of the system to do it”. Orwell makes the advantage clear: “So long as they continued to work and breed, their other activities were without importance.” Perhaps a partner can act, just like access to abundant sex, a mechanism to dull one’s senses. Man can smother themselves within the cosmic ooze of routine and cut themselves off forever to any greater reality. Carl Jung urges caution: “unearned gifts may seem a special favour of the moment, but in the long run there is a danger of the gift becoming a loss, since human nature has a weak habit of taking gifts for granted; in times of necessity we demand them as a right instead of making the effort to obtain them ourselves.” 
Ease of access can condition us to merely accept what is given as a divine opportunity, rather than delay gratification and engage in a heroic rite of passage. Like a mouse, you’re lured into the maze. Soon, you are whittled down, confused, lost within the confines of a vast abyss beyond your comprehension. Rather than take the proverbial bait, man must dare to be heroic. Heroism can easy be born from pursuit of improved social dynamics. "The call to adventure" of the hero needn't be so profound as to come through some extraordinary circumstance. Heroism begins at the moment man voluntarily confronts the unknown, or, in this context, the obstacles the technological system promises to remove on his behalf. An app may promise to banish forever the fear of one's perpetual loneliness. However, when the difficulty of obtainment is removed, one loses the personal development opportunity to achieve it through one's own personal power. There is no greater fear of man than women, especially when the barrier is a few words of introduction. See a beautiful woman on the street, in class, or online? Go talk to her. It's that simple. Do this between ten and ten thousand times, and the divine skill of oratory will gradually make itself known to you. When I ask my nomads how they expect their tradition to be maintained into the future, their response is that nomadicism must simply be practiced. There is no philosophy. It can only be lived. The same can be said of "talking to women". You must simply do it. Technology may aide in your survival of the elements, but it cannot gift you with the skills of endurance and fortitude necessary to commit to the practice. When I lived in America, I maintained an average quota of 3 - 5 new girls per week on rotation for roughly three years. How? Talking. There was never once a competitor other than my own incompetence and inadequacy. Constant rejection and success honed my ability into a blade that was used to carve a new destiny for my future. I was so devoutly consistent in this practice, I recall once being horribly ill to the point of near collapse. I joked to myself as I stumbled into a trash can on the way to my apartment, "The only way I would talk to someone right now is if I saw a Korean model with knee high leather boots." Sure enough, a locally famous Korean model materialized from the ether and walked in front of me in that exact moment. I summoned the courage to walk her back to her place and successfully get her number just in time to projectile vomit into the nearest bush. The number itself was irrelevant. Years of practice allowed me to capitalize on an opportunity and turn it into an advantage that I otherwise would have been to weak to advance One of my fondest memories was in New York city when I met the most gorgeous woman I had ever seen modeling Kimonos on a photo shoot. Even better, she was on the pathway to earning her PHD as a scholar of Nietzsche. My literal dream woman materialized in physical form. No algorithm could have been so efficient as to select her for me. In fact, none was needed. Thanks to my years of devotion to the craft of oratory, I had the strength to capitalize on the moment myself. What began as the simple practice of conversation with strangers eventually led me to become a paid professional speaker. I have spent my professional life overseas as a Philosophy and Literature educator. The same skill later allowed me to negotiate with remote tribal communities, build a personal brand, and establish an international extreme-adventure expedition company. Each achievements resulted from the same skill — talking. They were manifestations of a capacity originally developed by repeatedly confronting an obstacle I could have easily chosen avoid. Had I merely accepted a "state mandated girlfriend" — some easy access to women  — I would have remained inadequate, closed off forever from a higher destiny. You too have latent, heroic qualities locked away within. Rather than outsource your obstacles to the machine, carve a new destiny through deed.