Not caring is submission to the Current Regime
Simon : Captain, why did you come back for us?
Mal : You're on my crew.
Simon : Yeah, but you don't even like me. Why'd you come back?
Mal : You're on my crew. Why we still talking about this?
Have you ever stopped caring about something or someone you wanted to care about, because caring came with a cost or sacrifice attached? Whether you held out for a while or gave up immediately, did you just say or decide “I don’t care.”
Or, you claimed to care about something you really don’t out of an unspoken apprehension that there would be consequences if you didn’t?
Depending on what it was, you may have just been submitting to the Current Regime.
You’re probably confused.
First, I must make a point of clarity. I’m not talking about a situation where you genuinely don’t care about something. What I’m referring to are things that people naturally would care about, but they’ve repressed those sentiments out of fear of consequences. Not only that, they’re dishonest with others and themselves about whether they actually care or not.
Now let’s talk about Mal Reynolds (once more).
After the war of independence was lost, he stopped caring about the ideological conflict because there was nothing to care about. The Alliance won, and his side surrendered. It was over. He had no ties left keeping him in place. What he cared about was freedom, and as the title song lyrics put it:
Take my love, take my land.
Take where I cannot stand.
I don’t care, I’m still free.
You can’t take the sky from me.
Mal stopped caring about something because what made it was it was no longer existed. The Alliance could take everything else from him, but they didn’t take his freedom or force him to stop caring about it. The Alliance was also powerful enough to where one man flying a beat up transport ship wasn’t much of a threat.
But…he also cared about his crew.
Simon and River Tam are a brother and sister on his crew, and both on the run from the Alliance. Mal wasn’t looking for a fight, but because he cared about them it served as an ongoing source of conflict with the prevailing regime. Had he not cared, they would have been handed over and the issue resolved. There’s also one episode where the brother and sister have been kidnapped on one planet by an impoverished town and, after mistaken for witches, about to burned at the stake. Despite the risks, Reynolds takes his ship to rescue them, because he cared about his crew.
There’s also the duel Mal gets himself into in one episode defending Inara, a “companion,” who is insulted by one of her clients. The only reason he wins the duel is through her intervention, but the only reason he put himself in that predicament is that, like with the others, he cares about his crewmembers.
Another good example of his caring costing him is when he takes a severely wounded Derrial Book (a religious preacher) on his crew to an Alliance ship where he can receive treatment. The risk was more to Mal’s pride than anything, but seeking help from those who destroyed the future you hoped for require a powerful level of humility that, in the end, stemmed from the fact that he cared about his crew.
The Current Regime
The Current Regime ruling us (insert whatever term you’d prefer to name it) is very different from prior empires or authoritarian regimes. Genghis Khan, for example, was actually fairly lenient by comparison. Yes, he’d raze your cities to the ground and slaughter everyone if you refused to open your gates to him. But if you did comply, he left you alone. As long as you paid tribute in a financial form and submitted to his distant imperial rule, he didn’t care what you did or didn’t care about.
Same in a lot of ways with the Romans. They didn’t meddle too incessantly with peoples they absorbed into their empire. They could keep their customs, traditions, religion, what have you. Just as long as you submitted to Roman rule and worshipped Roman gods.
It’s not even the same with regimes like the Third Reich or France’s First Republic, which were paternalistic in nature. Everyone was expected to participate in the society (especially in war time), and those who didn’t were suspect. Apathy or indifference was subversive. To be a good citizen was to care very deeply about the regime’s ideology.
The same could even be said for the Soviet Union, where as they put it in the film Dr. Zhivago “the private life is dead for any man with any manhood.”
The Current Regime is utterly different from all of these - apart from one (we’ll get to that in a minute).
It’s not interested in building anything. Even the Aztecs, which sucked resources from other nations around it, built stuff. The Current Regime is primarily concerned with destroying what it didn’t build or create but controls.
More importantly, it not only cares about what you care about, it cares about you not caring. Put differently, indifference and apathy are acts of submission or compliance.
Leaders, Citizens, and Subjects
But here’s where the Current Regime is similar to other empires - and bears some similarity to citizen-civilian dynamic found in Starship Troopers.
In the Roman Empire you had two types of people: subjects and citizens. Subjects had no rights, but citizens did. You couldn’t flog them without trial. They had a right to a trial. There was a difference between an actual Roman, a Roman citizen, and a Roman subject.
In East Germany, you had to be a member of the Communist Party to get certain types of jobs, and it wasn’t just signing a piece of paper. You had to convince the Party you were one of them, that you were loyal to the communist ideology. At the very least, you had to prove you would comply.
Likewise, in the West we have the Regime leaders, Regime citizens, and Regime subjects. But unlike the Roman Empire, it’s not official. Unlike U.S. citizenship, there’s no piece of paper. Your Regime status can be one type on one day and change the next. Regime leaders can rise and fall without warning.
By the way, if you’re looking for all this on the surface, don’t bother. You have to look at deeper things, which I’ll go into.
The Current Thing
The difference between Regime citizens and Regime subjects is that the former must explicitly demonstrate they share and care about the Regime’s ideology, i.e. The Current Thing. The Current Thing isn’t tied specifically to any political system, religion, or culture. Anyone can incorporate the Current Thing into their own beliefs.
The Current Thing changes constantly to ensure people must actively go out of their way to display they’re still a party member in good standing, rather than reiterate the same thing again and again. To be a Regime citizen you have to embrace all Current Things, past, present, and future.
Regime citizens have rights. They get access to things subjects don’t, and are able to get away with stuff subjects can’t.
Regime subjects don’t have rights, but they’re more or less left alone. They don’t have to avoid the wrath of the Regime by going out of their way to prove why they shouldn’t. You don’t have to attend the parades or festivals or participate in activism or marches. You don’t have express belief in the Current Thing. You don’t have to really care about the empire’s ideology.
But it is absolutely vital to them that you not care about anything it wants to destroy.
What It Means To Care
Some of you may balk at my argument, but you’re not looking at things below the surface. Look around you and ask yourself “is this the result of people caring?”
The word “care” sounds soft and feminine, but that’s a misunderstanding brought about by living in a female-centric order. The 300 Spartans died at Thermopylae and slaughtered thousands of Persian troops in a last stand, rather than flee, because they cared what their people thought of them.
When people care, they make sacrifices and take action. Moreover, caring about something means you seek to protect it. It carries with it a sense of duty.
Decades ago British politician Enoch Powell gave a famous speech protesting the mass immigration of British subjects from overseas to England itself. He recounted during the speech conversation with a constituent remarking the country wouldn’t be worth living in due to demographic changes.
After quoting the man’s racially-charged prediction, he said the following:
I can already hear the chorus of execration. How dare I say such a horrible thing? How dare I stir up trouble and inflame feelings by repeating such a conversation? The answer is that I do not have the right not to do so. Here is a decent, ordinary fellow Englishman, who in broad daylight in my own town says to me, his Member of Parliament, that his country will not be worth living in for his children. I simply do not have the right to shrug my shoulders and think about something else.
In other words, Powell cared too much about his country and the people he represented to remain silent, even though there was inevitable opposition to his speech.
People don’t want anyone to care about something they’re trying to destroy, and one way they ward of would-be protectors is to convince them they shouldn’t care. When that doesn’t work, they punish you for caring.
The Current Regime doesn’t want you to care about your community, your neighborhood, your family, your relatives, or your nation. And they don’t want any of them to care about you. You can care about your professional sports team or something harmless.
This is why the FBI targeted parents protesting grooming activity in the public education. People were appalled that the feds would do this, but they shouldn’t be. By showing up to those school board meetings and protesting, the parents showed they cared about something the Current Regime wants to destroy, and that cannot be tolerated.
The Current Regime and Religion
Personally, this in my opinion is the root cause of church attendance decline in the West. Centuries prior the Current Regimes had to contend with the Catholic Church, which had the power to combat the Current Thing if it violated Church teachings. Most people don’t know this, but much of what the Current Regime controls and manages now was done by the Church, which also had its own ecclesiastical courts. At the same time, the Current Regimes had armies and resources so it could check the Church from meddling in secular affairs. The power shifted back and forth, but both were powerful enough to be an even fight.
Put differently, the Church held its own values independent from the Current Regimes and was willing to assert itself when the Regimes threatened issues the Church cared about. People can argue about the theological beliefs, but that’s a separate topic.
That is not the case today. Churches are treated like community centers and country clubs, because that’s what they’ve become. Ignore the words, watch the actions. Church leaders know instinctively they exist in a corporate sense by the will of the Current Regime. The power imbalance is immense. Churches may not be interested in becoming Regime citizens, but to maintain Regime subject status means they can’t genuinely care about things that Christians are obligated to care about which the Current Regime has vowed to destroy.
And while Current Regime allows some opposition, there are certain Current Things the churches cannot oppose. For church leaders whose financial wellbeing is dependent on remaining a corporate entity, a priority is to avoid anything that would draw intense wrath and retribution.
This, in my opinion, is why modern piety consists of atomized self-help or innocuous activities like prayer, Bible reading, and small groups. It’s why the Regime doesn’t care if a Christian says “Jesus is Lord.” They do care if you “Jesus is Lord and according to Him we have to protect certain things the Current Regime is trying to destroy, and we reject all the Current Things because they’re lies.”
If the churches did that they’d be doing what they should do, but they’d also spark a wave of persecution not seen before in America.
The problem for churches in the long run is people don’t have to go to church to not care about meaningful religious convictions. They can be a good party member without being a church member.
The Current Regime and Society
The Current Regime doesn’t want people marrying who care about marriage or raising a family, two institutions its slatted for destruction, and people seeking to participate in them who don’t care instinctively sense those that do and avoid them. The Regime wants people marrying and having kids who do so from a “it’s a thing you just do” mindset, rather than from a purpose-driven attitude rooted in a real concern.
This applies to any institution slatted for ruin. You can participate in them or even have leadership roles, as long as you demonstrate your will destroy it, or you won’t get in the way with its destruction.
What makes the Regime’s rule so effective is that it’s not explicit. It’s not written down. It’s not a formal part of the ideology. It’s not said aloud. It’s made clear by action and consequences.
The Current Thing and Kyle Rittenhouse
In my opinion, this explains so much of the Kyle Rittenhouse hysteria. Notice the 2020 rioters didn’t really go into suburbia. They didn’t burn down homes or attack regular people. They went after businesses, who owners compose a small percentage of the population. There was little risk for most people who stayed home.
Ordinary didn’t have to partake in the riots to be a good Regime subject. They just had to not care about what was taking place in their communities.
Whatever the wisdom there was in his going, Rittenhouse violated that unspoken command. He and others opposed rioters wreaking havoc in Kenosha, then killed several rioters trying to murder him. Unknowing, he stuck a finger in the Regime’s face. So they had to make an example of him as a sign to others: if you care about something we’re trying to destroy, we’ll destroy you too.
That’s why a lot of ordinary people acted irrational and frothed at the mouth insisting he be thrown in jail, despite video evidence proving he was acting in self-defense. It’s why people simply made up lies that he had targeted black people (both the men he shot were white).
They had to come up with some pretense or rationalization as to why because, frankly, most Regime subjects and citizens are too unaware to say the quiet part out loud: you’re not supposed to care about that stuff because the Regime has decreed it destroyed. And the Regime must be obeyed.
They don’t call themselves “Regime citizens” or think themselves as ones in a literal sense, but they’ve internalized all the things I’m describing. A man doesn’t have to call himself an alcoholic to be one.
Some may balk “but Rittenhouse got vindicated!” Go look up the ordeal he endured to get to that point and ask yourself is that’s a normal.
Also, it goes without being said that the COVID-19 vaccine mandates were absolutely efforts to make visible the difference between Regime citizens and Regime subjects.
Notice all those famous people and leaders who tweeted out the same thing: I’ve tested positive for COVID, I’m quarantining, and I’m thankful for the vaccine.
What do you think that was?
That was them reaffirming the latest Current Thing in order to remain a Current Regime leader. In effect, an oath of loyalty. To be a Regime leader in good standing you don’t have to take the jab (or at least pretend you did). You have to publicly confess you got sick and still praise the jab.
Don’t take such statements literally. It’s like when preacher Eli Sunday in There Will Be Blood proclaims “I am a false prophet God is a superstition!” He’s not being literal. He’s saying just so Daniel Plainview will buy a property from him. Translated, he’s saying “I am submitting to your will in exchange for something I want.”
What Caring Costs You
But what makes the Regime’s strategy so effective is that you can refuse to take one oath of loyalty (the jab), reject one Current Thing, and still embrace another. That’s how someone seemingly in good standing with the party becomes a pariah; everything was fine until a Current Thing emerged they wouldn’t embrace (see JK Rowling).
In the film Dr. Zhivago, the titular character isn’t political by nature, but what he cares about and believes is deemed political by the Party. Also, his mere existence in a metaphysical sense is a direct challenge to the Party teachings. As I mentioned in a prior essay, apolitical aesthetics can be a threat to an authoritarian regime.
People may not consciously know this, but they intuitively grasp that caring about certain things brings them inexplicable hardships. Or, it would require them to take action that results in conflict of some sort. A quiet indifference or apathy completely inundates our society. Caring seems to instinctively activate predatorial or hostile behavior from others, who treat it as a threat for no logical reason. The sleeper cell agent-like brainwashing among many means they will actively oppose the Regime’s enemies without realizing it.
So at a certain point people either say or decide “I don’t care.”
Of course, the reward is that they are left alone, at least on that issue.
But like with Genghis Khan sparing a surrendering city, it is a reward for compliance not resistance. It a sign that you are a harmless subject, not a rebel as many try to deceive themselves into believing.
They don’t care if you don’t care, but they absolutely care if you do.
If you doubt me, then ask yourself why there’s an instant, instinctive negative reaction to anyone who expresses sincere passion or concern for certain things, especially stuff that has been degraded or destroyed. There’s always a “well actuallllllllly” response that effectively can be summarized by “it wasn’t that great.”
They don’t want to acknowledge something profound has been lost or destroyed, because it’s something we’re innately supposed to care about. And they know that caring about something inspires action, and actions have consequences.
But it goes against our most basic instincts to not care about fundamental stuff. You have to actively repress those emotions and lash out at anyone who, unsuspectingly, evokes them by their words or actions.
In this way the Current Regime could be compared to A Brave New World or Fahrenheit 451. Unlike Orwell’s 1984, these regimes are very much concerned with suppressing emotions as a way to ensure conformity and prevent opposition to their efforts of breaking down any meaningful relationships beyond their control. And unlike Big Brother’s monitoring of every facial expression to determine loyalty, the those governments really don’t care if you care. You don’t have to love Big Brother. They only care if you do care about the wrong things.
In Fahrenheit 451 Montag reads an old poem from a book he salvaged from a censorship burn, to which his wife and her friends react with violent anger. The poetry evoked emotions they’ve long learned to repress, because they’re good citizens of the empire. He’s revealed that the books they’ve been taught to despise have value, which means they should care about their destruction. But that would go contrary to the government.
The Current Thing as an emotional relief outlet
Another tactic by the Current Regime is to give people a Current Thing where they can channel those emotions. You can’t care about your family, but here’s a family we’ll make the Current Thing so you can project your familial emotions onto. You can’t care about your country or nation, so here’s a nation we’ll make the Current Thing where you can express your repressed patriotic, nationalistic sentiment. In many ways, the Current Thing serves as both a sign of loyalty as well as an emotional pressure relief valve, but to express those emotions you have to embrace the Current Thing.
A Brave New World perhaps offers an explanation as to why many people don’t care: their fear of despair due to a sense of helplessness. In the deepest recesses of their souls they also fear what path caring will take them.
John the Savage has been raised outside of modern society. He reads old books, quotes Shakespeare, and doesn’t consume “soma,” the drug everyone regularly takes to suppress certain emotions, because they’re good citizens of the empire.
In his efforts to fight the prevailing regime, he increasingly despairs at the deadened state of the people around him and hangs himself.
So what’s the point of all this?
The struggle with finding Serenity is that, unlike Mal Reynolds, you can let go of a future that will never be, accept there’s no going back, let go of things that you need to put behind you, yet still have challenges.
What you really want reveals what you care about, and if it’s something the Current Regime is trying to destroy, you’ll have more problems than figuring out how to still care about it. A lot of people will instinctively oppose you, for seemingly no reason at all, and you’ll be confused as to why. In some cases, there will be no finding Serenity because what you want is beyond your control and in the hands of those bent on ruining it.
Finding Serenity for you might bring you the same challenges Reynold’s care for his crew brought him - including being hunted one way or another by the regime.
Tread lightly.