Absolutism and the Alchemy of Poison

Why Total Power Must First Redefine the Past as Toxic

By Bodhangkur

1. The Structural Problem Every Absolutism Faces

Every absolutist system—religious, political, ideological, or technocratic—faces the same foundational obstacle:

Pre-existing meaning.

Human societies never begin as blank slates. They are always already structured by:

· inherited customs,

· distributed authority,

· plural truth-systems,

· layered loyalties,

· local survival heuristics.

An absolutist system, however, makes a non-negotiable claim:

There is one final truth, one legitimate authority, one correct procedure.

This creates an irreducible contradiction. Absolutism cannot simply compete with inherited systems. Competition implies parity. Parity implies negotiability. Negotiability destroys absoluteness.

Therefore, absolutism must perform a more radical operation:

It must chemically reclassify the old order itself as poison.

Not merely wrong.
Not merely outdated.
But actively dangerous.

This is the moment where power crosses from persuasion into purification.

2. Why “False” Is Not Enough — Only “Toxic” Justifies Erasure

If an older tradition is merely declared false:

· it can be debated,

· tolerated,

· remembered,

· quietly continued,

· blended with the new.

But if it is declared toxic:

· memory becomes exposure,

· curiosity becomes contamination,

· critique becomes infection.

Once that shift occurs, destruction becomes hygiene, not violence.

This is why absolutist systems universally moralise their opponents as:

· poisonous,

· corrupting,

· subversive,

· radicalising,

· unsafe.

The language changes with history.
The logic does not.

3. The Purification Algorithm: The Hidden Operating System of Absolutism

Once the old is toxicised, absolutism deploys a remarkably stable six-stage control sequence. This sequence appears in medieval theology, revolutionary politics, totalitarian states, and modern platform governance with minimal structural variation.

Stage 1 — Declare a Total Truth

A final authority is established:

· God

· Party

· Nation

· Race

· Science

· The Algorithm

This truth is not framed as provisional or revisable, but as foundational and non-negotiable.

Example:
The medieval Church claims exclusive custody of salvific truth.
The revolutionary Party claims exclusive custody of historical necessity.
Modern technocracy claims exclusive custody of “the data.”

Stage 2 — Reclassify Dissent as Toxic

Opposition is no longer framed as disagreement but as danger.

Thus:

· Heresy becomes spiritual poison.

· Counter-revolution becomes social infection.

· “Misinformation” becomes cognitive contamination.

Example:
Witches are not wrong; they are dangerous to the cosmic order.
Political dissidents are not mistaken; they are enemies of the people.
Unapproved speech is not false; it is unsafe.

At this point, debate is structurally terminated.

Stage 3 — Rebrand Obedience as Safety

Once danger is declared, obedience is no longer submission. It becomes:

· protection,

· responsibility,

· care,

· virtue.

This is the deepest psychological inversion absolutism performs:

Freedom becomes risk.
Obedience becomes health.

Example:
Salvation requires obedience to Church doctrine.
Security requires obedience to State ideology.
Safety requires obedience to platform moderation.

Stage 4 — Pathologise Independent Thought

Independent reasoning itself is now reframed as:

· pride (or hubris),

· conspiracy,

· extremism,

· radicalisation,

· irresponsible cognition.

Doubt becomes a symptom.

Example:
The medieval sceptic is suspected of demonic influence.
The Soviet non-conformist is labelled mentally ill.
The modern dissident is flagged as algorithmically “high-risk.”

At this stage, thinking itself is medicalised.

Stage 5 — Outsource Violence to “Procedure”

Direct coercion is now sanitised by transferring responsibility to:

· canon law,

· revolutionary tribunals,

· legal bureaucracy,

· moderation systems,

· AI enforcement.

Power now says:

“We did not punish you.
The system did.”

This renders domination impersonal, automatic, and morally anesthetised.

Example:
Excommunication replaces execution but produces social death.
Administrative purges replace gulags but erase livelihoods.
Deplatforming replaces censorship but erases public existence.

Stage 6 — Rename Domination as Protection

The final linguistic seal is placed:

· Censorship becomes “safety.”

· Surveillance becomes “care.”

· Purge becomes “community standards.”

· Silence becomes “well-being.”

At this point, resistance itself appears immoral.

4. Why Toxicisation Is Not Optional for Absolutism

The entire algorithm collapses if the old order is allowed to remain merely “different.”

Absolutism survives only if:

· memory becomes contamination,

· inheritance becomes threat,

· plurality becomes hazard,

· independence becomes pathology.

This is why:

· paganism had to become demonic,

· rival parties had to become traitorous,

· unsanctioned speech must become unsafe.

Toxicisation is not propaganda excess.
It is an engineering necessity of total power.

5. Historical Example: From Serpents to Heretics to Extremists

The serpent in Christian mythology is the prototype toxin symbol:

· It does not debate.

· It infects.

· It corrupts invisibly.

· It must be eliminated.

This symbolic structure survives intact:

Era	“Toxin”	“Cure”
Medieval	Heresy, Witchcraft	Exorcism, Burning
Revolutionary	Bourgeois Thought	Re-education, Purge
Totalitarian	Counter-revolution	Imprisonment
Technocratic	Misinformation (fake news)	Deplatforming

Different costumes. Same skeleton.

6. The Psychological Payoff: Why Populations Accept the Algorithm

The purification framework succeeds because it offers three powerful emotional rewards:

1. Moral Superiority — “We are the clean.”

2. Fear Relief — “Danger is being handled.”

3. Belonging — “We are on the right side.”

Thus, populations do not merely submit. They participate.

They begin:

· hunting symbolic snakes,

· competing in purity displays,

· pre-emptively censoring themselves,

· demanding stronger enforcement.

At this point, absolutism becomes self-sustaining.

7. Finn’s Procedural Diagnosis

Under Finn’s procedural lens, absolutism does not fight rival beliefs. It fights:

Rival self-generating truth engines.

The “old” is not dangerous because it is false.
It is dangerous because it can generate reality without permission.

So it must be:

· classified as toxic,

· isolated from reproduction,

· prevented from iteration.

Once unsanctioned generation is defined as poison,
control becomes medicine by definition.

Conclusion

Absolutism does not rise by proving itself true.
It rises by reclassifying everything else as biologically, cognitively, or morally dangerous.

The toxicisation of the old is therefore not incidental rhetoric. It is the load-bearing mechanism that allows:

· erasure to masquerade as hygiene,

· obedience to masquerade as safety,

· domination to masquerade as care.

From serpents to heretics to extremists to “unsafe speech,”
the purification algorithm has never stopped running.

Only the interface has changed.

Home