The current reality construct that most of us simply call ‘life’ is itself
an overarching containment programme. One of the strategies used
to maintain this as a closed-loop programme is having to cut off, or
close down, peoples’ meta-receptors. In other words, if the human
biocomputer has its capacity to receive metaprogramming shut-off,
or deactivated, then these higher supraself metaprogrammes—from
transcendental sources—would not be picked up by us. How is such
deactivation implemented? It could be implemented through increas-
ing the ‘signal’ (i.e. noise) of the base subprogrammes that keep people
more in survival mode. These are the programmes of fear, panic, inse-
curity, financial dependence, etc. Using Maslow’s hierarchy of needs,
it can be said that the everyday person is kept at the lower, base needs
such as food, shelter, and home/family maintenance. This contain-
ment is further reinforced through debt and a financial system that
works to ensure that people cannot fulfil much beyond their basic
needs. The ‘higher programmes’ such as self-esteem, respect, and self-
actualisation—the attributes that assist a person to transcend their own
base programmes—are shut-out from the containment field of contin-
ual lower needs gratification. Therefore, a range of programmes that
operate within the human biocomputer become circular; that is, they
continually operate to maintain the person upon the treadmill (as the
mouse in the cage upon its wheel).
If we view this from the perspective of the consensus reality con-
struct, then the human biocomputer operates in such a way as to make
signals out of noise. The human biocomputer is the wetware that inter-
mediates between a hardware environment and the software program-
ming within this environment. The programming serves to increase
reliance upon the sense-perceptible world (materiality) and to encour-
age a person to receive more and more of the sub-nature influences
(i.e. consumerism, commercial entertainment, media-programming,
propaganda, etc.). The suprasensible world that is the source of the
metaprogramming becomes a far memory that is all but forgotten; any
traces linger on through corrupted and stagnated forms, such as static
religious structures. The sub-nature programming of the consensus
reality creates mass-mindedness whereby people act as ‘mental peers’
for one another, and similarly act as defenders (or rather, attackers)
against any alternative thinking or ideas. In this way, everyday encoun-
ters with other persons in the external world are much more powerful
in terms of reinforcement of the dominant control programmes. Internal
elements within the Inversion work to maintain its continuance. Here,
we are back again to the simplistic reward versus punishment dichot-
omy that regulates human programming within the grander, global
machinic order. (p 90-91)
...
The Metaverse is a massively scaled and interoperable network
of real-time rendered 3D virtual worlds which can be experienced
synchronously and persistently by an effectively unlimited number
of users with an individual sense of presence, and with continuity
of data, such as identity, history, entitlements, objects, communica-
tions, and payments.
What this technical interpretation states is that the Metaverse is an
embodied world that is experienced at the same time (synchronously)
and continuously (persistently). In other words, it is attempting to pres-
ent itself as a substitute for life—a new reality for human experience.
However, it’s not as simple as that. Whilst many people will think of
the Metaverse as a 3D space, the greater truth is that rather than being
a graphical space, the Metaverse is essentially about the persistent
dematerialisation of physical space, body, and objects whilst retain-
ing a material paradigm. What it offers is a dematerialising reality that
reterritorialises our current social structure through the digitalisation
of people, machines, and objects. Yet this dematerialising reality is not
a shift away from materiality but rather a deepening immersion into a
new form of it. And this is the trick being offered to us—it is a subtle
yet more pervasive material entrapment, disguised as a transcendence
of physicality. The user’s experience of reality will be altered, perhaps
permanently, as what constitutes reality itself will be reconstructed and
transfigured into a new assemblage for the future human. What we are
witnessing is a new future reality in the making.
Commentators and supporters of the Metaverse are describing it as
a kind of ‘virtual expanse’ existing outside the confines of the everyday.
Whilst they say it has a level of permanence similar to the ‘real world’, it
also offers a universe beyond it. In other words, the Metaverse is being
touted as an extended universe, or extended reality, beyond the present
one. It is seen as another dimension added to physical reality. The tech
geeks are salivating over the idea that the individual’s physical persona
and their digital persona will mesh together into one unified identity.
The tech-vision is that in the Metaverse, people will live metalives
through an extension of their lifestyles; virtual possessions will bring
new meaning to ownership; and the offline crave for physical goods
will be converted into the hype for virtual commodities bought through
non-fungible tokens (NFTs), Zucker Bucks, and other forms of digital
exchange. The tech-hope is that the Metaspace will be the new vaca-
tion playground, as staycations (people remaining at home for the holi-
day period) become transfigured into metacations. Offline propaganda
will get a Madison Avenue makeover to be branded as gamevertising,
acknowledging the metalife as gameplay. Metamedical industries will
promote the new health regime of the connected well-being, where
disconnect brings on modernity’s new alienation and loss. Offline life
will still offer more sense-reality than life in the Metaverse, only that it
will be less affirming. For many, life in the Metaverse will seem more
immersive than the physical life experience; and ultimately, it will be
more covetous, more possessive, and more status conscious. Conform-
ing to a reality consensus will no longer be an issue since inhabitants in
the Meta will be able to conform to anything and to any reality.
The tech-intention for the Metaverse is for it to become an all-
encompassing immersive reality that offers an alternative to, and may
one day supersede, physical reality. It will provide an embodied envi-
ronment that will allow its precursor—the ‘Internet of Things’—to
evolve into the ‘Internet of Bodies’, the ‘Internet of Humans’, and the
‘Internet of Senses’.4 Since it will be a technological universe largely
designed by elite-sponsored techies, it seems obvious to those who
are observant that the Metaverse is part of the WEF’s Fourth Indus-
trial Revolution agenda to implement technocratic governance through
redefining the role of human identities and human society. The role of
existing society may soon become secondary as people grow up in a
world where metasocieties are the new social structuring and training
grounds. Whilst the meta-elites are scrambling for space flight and off-
world living, the rest of humanity will be left behind to wander within
the existential escapism of the Metaverse.5 A contained meta-reality will
be presented to people as a solution to and escape from their worldly
ills. A pseudo, monitored, and controlled environment will be dressed
up in the fashionable clothes of a new false freedom.
When the Metaverse inserts itself as an extension of our present
reality, we shall have suffered a breach—a transgression—in human
development. The trajectory of human evolvement will be almost irre-
versibly affected—a new path will have opened up. Connecting the
human being to a prolonged immersion within the digital realms is not
a ‘merging’ but a dissociation of the human being from their body and
hence from their vehicle of sacred receptivity and transmission: it is a
separation from Source. And this, as I have discussed throughout the
book, is the play of the Inversion—a state of dislocation. And within
this displacement, we shall be playing in the disenchanted underbelly
of dark Gnosticism. (p 101-2)
