This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Caught In The Act: Government Hackers
»
- 33793 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
Contact Information:
Tips: tips [ at ] zerohedge.com
General: info [ at ] zerohedge.com
Legal: legal [ at ] zerohedge.com
Advertising: ads [ at ] zerohedge.com
Abuse/Complaints: abuse [ at ] zerohedge.com
Suggested Reading:
Make sure to read our "How To [Read/Tip Off] Zero Hedge Without Attracting The Interest Of [Human Resources/The Treasury/Black Helicopters]" Guide
It would be very wise of you to study our disclaimer, our privacy policy and our (non)policy on conflicts / full disclosure. Here's our Cookie Policy.
Republicans 2016
/end rant
lol.
How about "none of the above" instead.
Red = Shit.
Blue = Shit.
Opt out.
Enforce the constitution and the laws derived from it. Think original intent (Blackstone) fuck derivative law.
grrrrrllllll power!
You go, grrrrrl!
(insert your favorite feminist closed-minded stupidity here)
If you look at those two broads in real life it looks as if someone already took an ax to their faces.
You're too kind to them.
When one thinks of the number of people who the Clinton's knew, and died by whatever cause (something like 42 people), then you will come to realize that this is really really small potatoes and nothing will come of it. Sorry.
Why do you all really need to know about our hair appointments? Seriously?!?!?!?
Yeah, she deleted 30,000 emails concerning hair appointments.
I think "you all" really need to know some things like, um, Anthony Rodham and his private equity, who directed millions in EB-5 visa "investments" to Bill/Hill BFF Terry McAuliffe, approved by Hillary's state department, and walla! BFF McAuliffe suddenly has a war chest to run for gov. And about that electric car company he was forming, very ambitious for a guy who can't drive and knows jack squat about electricity.
Yeah, I think "we all" really need to know about things like that.
Must I really put a "/sarc" after sarcastic, cynical commentary?
If they're too stupid to get it then that is THEIR problem.
Get a good laugh at the junks and understand their stupidity.
I don't normally make posts like this, however, your response is just the classic dumb American comment, and I'm tired of reading such trash.
How can you possibly take the 30,000 post seriously? Look up the definition of irony, and no I'm not being ironic.
Was the "um" your own pathetic attempt at irony? Don't use it you don't understand it.
What the fuck is "walla"? Did you mean "voila" which is French for look there.
Please don't start a sentence with the conjunction "and", it exists so that you can concatenate two clauses without starting a new sentence.
Given that English is an international language it should not be possible to know that your an American, however, I'm sad to say its all too apparent.
"Bah, verbogeny is one of many pleasurettes afforded a creatific thinkerizer!"
If you like your email you can keep your email.
Well, maybe not.
ONLY if it is to hate men! (In pic above insert bill c instead of Hillary server {because that is what being born lesbian is all about and we all got to hate men because Hillary represents all women against men as her husband represents all men}).
IF u DONT vote Hillary u'r a woman hater!
UNLESS u"r a woman who knows enough to hate men thus u should vote Hillary!
please. Either the current government is following the Constitution, or the American Constitution is powerless to stop evil people from taking power. Those are your only 2 non-contradictory answers.
It's time to try something new.
Lysander Spooner worked that out 150 years ago.
It was all over with the Sedition Act.Play acting ever since.
Purple = shit
What we need is a Turd Party Candidate.
A Turd is the only candidate I would vote for.
Turd Party Campaign Promises:
No salary or benefits
No need for supporting staff
No new laws
No new taxes
No lobbyists
No new wars
No more spending/pork barrel bills.
It's a straight up "Turd ticket" for me:
Turd for President
Turd for VP
Turd for Senate
Turd for Congress
Turd for Governor
Turd for Mayor
The Turd Party = the Winning Ticket.
What is the turd's stance on immigration? Kind of a dealbreaker for me.
Turds don't authorize anything.
They don't authorize NAFTA
They don't authorize TPP
They don't authorize Porous borders
Because they're TURDS.
TURDS don't authorize ANYTHING.
Turds keep all their campaign promises.
Turds connect across racial barriers:
Turds are born brown.
Turds age white.
The only lying Turds do is as they lay there and disintegrate.
Turds are better than every politician of modern times.
Vote the Turd Ticket.
Turd Party Campaign Promises:
- Creative Destruction of Big Government Security Apparatus, Big Banking Apparatus, Big Corporations, Big Foundations... but He-man Women hating clubs okay, Feminist Orgs Okay, Unions Still okay while recognizing that they negotiated themselves out of power in the 1970s-80s and led to Crisis in Chicago and other cities in the 2010s.
- Anti-Trust Implementation to Breakup and Reorganize big Organizations and consider National Needs for Organic Capabilities for Energy, Gas & Diesel, Commodities, National Food Crops, Water Resources, Infrastructure for National Transportation in Crisis whether Air, Rail, Water, or Roadways, Iron, Steel, Metals, Rare Earth, National Chemicals Capability, National Capability for Shoes, Textiles, Rubber, Plastics, Lumber & Forest, Farmland and Produce, Ranching & Meat, Fisheries, Mining, and Recycling.
Far as I can tell, voting for just about anybody is voting turd.
"Republicans 2016"
Yeah, that'll fix everthing...
/sarc
What would happen if they gave a party and nobody came? Boycott 2016
Of course, given the realities regarding the FUNDING of politics, nothing is going to work ... Idealized lists of what "we" should do will continue to be the opposite of what happens.
Burn the Bitch!
They prolly got paid overtime for it too.
some people are not fit for
public service, talk among yourselves
and figure it out.
You want the White Lady?? Oh man I can see it in your eyes. You really want her don't you. Aw, man! You love the White Lady.
Come with me man, I will give her to you.
You have Cash? How much you got, man. This lady she is expensive, you know. She is the Best. Top Quality. She hasn't be touched. She is in perfect condition for you.
Criminals......
No, treasonous scum.
Vengful RIght Wing Media Conspiracy
Someone's sarcasm detector is on the Fritz;)
Ah, methinks it's a badge of honor, because most my postings now almost immediately get a reddie. I've gotten inside somebody's head real good for them to spend the time doing that, poor sick fuck... Maybe next time they're taking a good dump they'll think of me (now that I've so gently suggested such, which is truly evil) squeeze the opioid set log so hard they'll bust a gut and die of sepsis. tee hee heh
Opiod Set, whoa is that their ass cheeks, Bollocks, Dong, or Governor?
-
Knuks, you know what I am saying here don't you. I didn't want to create a simile or metaphor for which I was Arrested or put on a list.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-05-14/caught-act-government-hackers#c...
People don't expect humor from me I guess.
nixon was a choirboy compared with those hag bitchez. he only had 18 minutes missing.
Slavespeak:
All Slavespeak is based on the premise that there exists external authority and that the individual must subordinate himself to that higher power. Since reality shows us quite clearly that those claiming “authority” over others are just human beings—the same as those over whom they claim to have power—then any such claim can be identified as being merely an inadequate attempt to justify a master/slave relationship. But once this concept of external authority has been accepted, then an avalanche of supporting words and terms can follow: Government, tax, war, citizen, democracy, Constitution, legislator. All rely on the premise that authority justly resides outside of individuals and must be obeyed. Slavespeak is dedicated to utilizing, while at the same time disguising or explaining away, this invalid concept of external authority. It hides the widespread master/slave relationship that exists in today’s societies by calling it a government/citizen relationship. The Slavespeak definitions for “government” and “citizen” make this perfectly acceptable to the citizens/slaves, many of whom actually take great pride in their citizenship.
Thank you! Nice to know someone else really gets it, and is willing to say so in precise terms. Kudos.
The #1 response I get when I discuss this with people is...
"How insensitive are you to compare yourself to the black slaves..."
No matter that all races of humans have been enslaved by others through history, or that that we are all still literally being enslaved today. Fucking pre-programmed douche bags are rampant in this world.
A wise person once wrote that once a controlling class convinces one generation of the general population that the natural order of things is that the controlling class should rule and the general population should follow the rules, the controlling class has it made. From then on, the general population will train their children, who will train their children, that it is natural and beneficial for everyone if the ruling class makes the rules and runs the country.
This strategy has been used for centuries. Kings and Emperors also recruited religious leaders to tell the general population that the Kings and Emperors ruled because God appointed them to do so. A perfect set-up until the general population is so abused that they get rebellious.
The Royals of England had it made until they acted so stupidly that their own privileged class of Nobles took away Royal power and gave it to Parliament, where the upper classes held power, until they made such a mess of running WW1 that the working class took power away.
In the USA, the powerful overthrew the British Empire and set in place a Constitution that gave power to the electorate. The electorate have been trained to believe that their elected representatives act in the best interests of the citizens, and that Americans live in the greatest freedom loving nation on Earth, protected by the Constitution. But the Constitution is being badly eroded and ignored by the powerful.
Persistence of Large Organizations and Large Budgets is always Ripe for both Plunder and "Capture" by Evil Actors
** Vote Turd Party ** ** Vote Turd Party **
- And Brother do we have Plunder
- Investors are being Dissed, Disrespected, by high cost of Private Executives
- Investors are being Dissed, by high costs for Admin, Fancy Offices, Remodeling, Conference Centers, Video Conference Centers, Limos, Private Airplanes, Parties, Conferences in Special Exclusive Locations, Conferences off Shore, Paid for Homes, Rentals, In City Apartments, Entertainment & Parties,... We have no Idea the Premium Expenses for the Rich or Royal Lifestyle... But Investors in Stock Lose... And other Investors Lose
** Vote Turd Party ** ** Vote Turd Party ** ** Vote Turd Party **
- What no Financial Ratings Agencies are Catching the High Admin Costs of your favorite Corporation or Even Charity?
- Financial Ratings Agencies are as Valuable as Lawyers
- Independent Audit Firms are as Valuable as Lawyers
- Current Accounting Practices are as Valuable as Lawyers
- Current Financial Regulations are as Valuable as Lawyers
** Vote Turd Party ** ** Vote Turd Party ** ** Vote Turd Party **
"Slavespeak" was derived from the history of slavery, based upon: "Do what I say, or I will kill you."
"Slavespeak" is the result of thousands of years of decisions made by the surviving slaves to do what they were told, rather than be killed. Governments developed as military organizations, while military organizations were larger and larger scales of the manifestations of the principles and methods of organized crime.
However, the chronic political problems still exist, and the struggle for survival continues to select for the best organized gangs of criminals to prevail over less well organized gangs of criminals. While the American government has more obviously become the biggest form of organized crime, controlled by the best organized gangs of criminals, most of the few that perceive that then propose impossible ideals as the "solutions" to those problems.
The development of weapons of mass destruction has made warfare become psychotically insane. Similarly, the social pyramid systems that developed through the history of Neolithic Civilizations for thousands of years have also become psychotically insane, due to the basic problems that being able to back up lies with violence no longer has any way to work through its contradictions after the development of weapons of mass destruction.
The chronic political problems inherent in the nature of life will alway exist, as long as life exists. The currently established sociopolitical systems developed as the most expedient ways to resolve those problems, in ways that favoured the biggest and best organized gangs of criminals.
In principle, the only realistic resolutions to the real problems would require the development of better organized gangs of criminals, in order to provide better government. However, the tragic trajectory we are on is towards the established systems causing their own insane self-destruction, because they are too psychotic to do anything better, while their automatic default is to continue to back up deceits with destruction, and enforce frauds, REGARDLESS OF THE TECHNOLOGIES BEING EMPLOYED TO DO THAT BECOMING TRILLIONS OF TIMES MORE CAPABLE AND POWERFUL.
By and large, it is politically impossible for enough people to understand enough the basic facts of life, and agree upon those facts, in ways whereby they could negotiate better resolutons of their real problems. Instead, the existing systems are based on the history of socially success based on backing up lies with violence, or deceits with destruction, or enforcing frauds.
Most of those few who do tend to face those facts tend to still only superficially do so, because they then tend to promote superficial "solutions" which do not address the deeper causes. Human beings are "slaves" of the laws of nature. Human beings can not create air, water, food, or shelter, etc., out of nothing ... Therefore, each of those needs can control human beings.
Some human beings can control other human beings by controlling access to resources. In the modern world, money controls food, then food controls people. That has become hyper-complicated by the sophisticates slavery systems of DEBT SLAVERY, backed by WARS BASED ON DECEITS, developing to be what actually exists NOW.
It was possible for the commands to "Do what I say, or I will kill you!" to have worked throughout human history, which, generation after generation developed more elaborate forms of "slavespeak," as the biggest bullies' bullshit social stories, which the vast majority of people were brainwashed to believe in, by the continuing patterns that agreeing with that bullshit was rewarded by the bullies, while disagreeing with that bullshit was punished by those bullies.
However, the few who more fully recognize that still tend to not come up with any better "solutions" than to recommend not believing in the bullies' bullshit, and attempting to not cooperate or participate in the sociopolitical systems built by those bullies, operating on the basis of their bullshit, by the best available professional liars and immaculate hypocrites. By and large, there is almost no geninue opposition that is possible to exist, that is able and willing to respond to the ways that the biggest bullies continue to be able to kill those who resist their bullshit systems from dominating almost everyone, and controlling civilization.
Of course, that makes sense. It is fairly easy to stop believing in the biggest bullies' bullshit. However, it is practically impossible to overcome them still being the biggest bullies, who are able and willing to use violence to back up their lies, in ways that they always did ... EXCEPT THAT NOW THERE ARE WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION, WHICE MADE THE BIGGEST BULLIES BECOME PSYCHOTIC AND CRIMINALLY INSANE ...
The deeper levels of the real problems are that human beings are still necessarily "slaves" of the laws of nature. There are still natural selection pressures, and therefore, there still have to be some kind of death control systems. Theoretically, doing that better would require better organized crime, to become better government. However, the current systems are almost nothing but a core of organized crime, which does its actual death controls through the maximum possible deceits, while that is surrounded by controlled opposition groups that promote the impossible ideals of bogus "solutions" that there should not be any death control systems, or, at least, none that human beings are consciously aware of operating.
The cartoon above was an amusing way to demonstrate how the government has become the biggest form of organized crime, which enabled its leading criminals to routinely get away with their crimes, without prosecution. Instead, the more common pattern is that they continue to get promoted. Meanwhile, that government continues to use it power to persecute those who may challenge the power of governments, such as whistleblowers. Hence, senior government officials tend to get away with keeping their secrets, while those who might reveal some of the government's secrets end up being severely punished for doing that.
However, despite that kind of cartoon being an amusing illustration of the situatoin, by and large, there continues to be no genuine opposition. There tends to only be controlled opposition, for good reasons of course! Genuine opposition would have to be better organized crime, which operated better death control systems, sufficiently to become a new government that replaced the previous government. HOWEVER, after the development of weapons of mass destruction, there are no longer any sane and coherent ways to do anything like that anymore!
Just as there are no sane ways to fight wars anymore, because everyone would lose, there are no sane ways to fight revolutions, or have civil wars, anymore, because everyone would lose. However, at the same time, the vast majority of people manage to not face those facts, but rather continue to pretend that things have not really been changed by technologies becoming trillions of times more powerful and capable than ever before in human history.
The vast majority of people are quite content to not try to understand the physical science that enabled those technologies to be developed. The vast majority of people continue to believe in the biggest bullies' bullshit social stories, and that includes almost everyone in the various controlled opposition groups, which are almost the only publicly significant groups.
The source of human slavery systems was that human beings are "slaves" of the laws of nature. The natural selection pressures were channeled through human beings to become artificial selection systems. Natural selection was internalized as human intelligence, and then human intelligence was applied to the most important selection pressure, which was other human beings. Therefore, the history of warfare developed social slavery systems, which were explained through the "slavespeak," which was promoted by the slave masters, and accepted and adopted by the surviving slaves.
However, the few who more fully recognize that continue to stay inside of the bullshit frame of reference of that "slavespeak" ... even while the identify it and denounce it, because they tend to never propose or promote better death control systems. Indeed, that is the standard operating proceedure throughout most Zero Hedge articles, and the comments posted under those.
The deeper issues with respect to the problems presented by "slavespeak," due to the real history of slavery, are far more profound than any of the typical articles republished on Zero Hedge, or the typical kinds of comments made upon those articles. Ironically, even those who begin to "get it" still do not "get it." The degree to which "slavespeak" dominates public spaces means that it is politically impossible to discuss death control systems in any more rational ways, or to develop better death control systems. The social pyramid systems work by the pyrmidion people being the masters, who use their ability to back up lies with violence to control those who are lower down in those systems, who are the slaves. However, those pyramidion people speak "slavespeak" in public, while their controlled opposition also speaks the same "slavespeak" languages.
Metaphorically speaking, the original slave societies were run by groups of people who were the predatory parasites, controlling other groups of people who were the productive prey. However, all of that has become runaway psychoses, or social insanities, due to the progress in physical science enabling technologies which have become trillions of times more powerful than ever before in human history, as demonstrated by the existence of globalized eletronic monkey money frauds, backed by the threat of force from apes with atomic bombs.
Most of the people who used to be the productive prey have degenerated into mostly being parasites, and similarly, most of the people who used to be the top predators have simultaneously degenerated into being parasites. The almost total dominance of "slavespeak" throughout the established systems operating through the core of organized crime, surrounded by layers of controlled oppostion, has made it practically impossible for most human beings to understand and address their real problems in deeper ways, which would take series of intellectual scientific revolutions in order to adequate do.
Rather, what we actually observe while the mass media do nothing but promote the biggest bullies' bullshit, as if that were true, Web sites like Zero Hedge are places where some of the controlled opposition groups publish their views, which tend to provide some better analysis of the degree to which the current biggest bullies, the banksters, are spouting bullshit ... BUT, then tend to collapse back to the same bullshit when promoting "solutions" to those problems.
At the present time, it appears that there are no genuine solutions which are politically possible. Any realistic solutions would necessarily have to be based on radically different death control systems. However, the existing systems are operated through the maximum possible deceits about themselves, through the combinations of both the core organized crime gangs, and their controlled opposition groups, staying within the same frame of reference of totally bullshit-based "slavespeak" regarding what is happening, and even more so about what "should" happen instead.
In that context, the comments above by Chupacabra, and honestann, illustrated how the controlled opposition still thinks. There IS "external authority" in the form of the laws of nature, that human beings are necessarily "slaves" of, while that basic "slavery" was what made it possible for all other forms of slavery to be built on that basis, due to human beings being able to resolve conflicts by fighting, and human slavery becoming based on the REALITIES of being able to assert: "Do what I say, or I will kill you!"
Of course, "slavespeak" developed, as generation after generation of the relationships between masters and slaves developed. But nevetheless, underneath that was always the natural selection pressures, that were being channeled through the human artificial selection systems. The profound paradoxes of successful warfare being based on backing up deceits with destruction, and being as treacherous as possible, enabled the successful "slavespeak" to become as entangled with absurdities and backwardness as humanly possible. That "slavespeak" was built into the structure of the dominate natural languases, as well as the philosophy of science, to the degree that most people can not think in any ways outside of presuming that their "slavespeak" presumptions are correct, as well as there being almost no other generally understood languages to communicate through that are not based on the long history of the biggest bullies' bullshit being the dominant "slavespeaking" language that almost everyone uses, almost all the time.
The "external authority" presumed upon by the slave masters, and imposed upon the slaves, was due to the realities of natural selection pressures, due to the existence of natural laws. The history of human conflicts had natural laws as allies, as weapons developed based upon natural laws, to be used to cause destruction, to assist with the triumphs of deceits, which gradually morphed into the current sociopolitical situation, where the political economy is base upon enforced frauds, where the government is the biggest form of organized crime, which enforces the frauds of the best organized gangs of criminals, the best organized gangsters, which are currently the banksters.
While some of the controlled opposition groups reveal some of the superficial ways that the banksters operate through bullshit, which bullshit is backed by the government's bullies, that controlled opposition tends to still stay within the "slavespeak" world view, which may be regarded as being paradoxically ironic, due to how they pretend that they are against that.
The deeper issues were always the chronic political problems inherent in the nature of life. Natural selection always existed, and made the human artificial selection systems which exist now, namely systems of lies backed by violence, or deceits backed by destruction, or enforced frauds, which pretty well control human civilization totally at the present time, through the widespread acceptance and taking for granted of the "slavespeak" languages.
Therefore, it is totally typical for the articles and comments published on Zero Hedge to never propose nor promote better death controls systems, to back up better debt control systems. There are usually never any realistically superior solutions to the chronic political problems that are present due to there being chronic political problems inherent in the nature of life, which have manifested throughout time as natural selection processes, due to the operation of natural laws.
By and large, the level of discussions found on Zero Hedge are way, way better than in the mass media. The mass media tend to do nothing but promote the biggest bullies' bullshit in uncritical ways, and barely ever express any doubts about the "slavespeak" language that they are spouting. However, at the same time, Zero Hedge typically also presents nothing but "slavespeak" too, because of the failures to address the deeper reasons how and why natural selection drove the kinds of artificial selection systems that exist now.
Overall, I REPEAT, there are some genuinely existing "external authorities" manifesting in the form of natural laws. It was those laws that found their expression through physical conflicts, in the form of violence. The realities of being able to be violent was what enabled backing up the "slavespeak" languages, and still does so now ... However, progress in physical sciences has made the standard "slavespeaking" societies become runaway criminal insanities, due to the growing degrees of psychotic disassocations of the "slavespeak" world view compared to the relatively more objective facts.
From a relative more objective perspective regarding the facts, there must necessarily be some human death control systems, and there are ... BUT, the existing systems operate through the maximum possible dishonesty about themselves, i.e., are expressed through the "slavespeak" languages. However, so much is that the case that the typical discussions found on Zero Hedge deliberately ignore that money must necessarily be based on measurements backed by murders. Hence, those discussions are almost never about how to operate better death control systems, in order to back up better debt control systems, but rather, tend to promote bogus "solutions" based on the impossible ideals that there should be no such systems, or none that human beings are consciously aware of operating.
Hence, overall, the human species is deteriorating into a parasite that is killing its host. The top predators are degenerating into become parasite, while their productive prey are also degenerating into also becoming parasites. The whole social pyramid system, operating through "slavespeak" is becoming more and more criminally insane, while the degree to which that "slavespeak" is so totally dominate makes any better politics practically impossible.
Theoretically, human beings could and should understand themselves better. However, the established social systems are almost totally based upon "slavespeak," which paradoxically does not want to understand "external authorities" because of the ways that its history has internalized the realities regarding "external authority" into the form of "slavespeak," since the biggest bullies ability to be violent enabled their bullshit social stories to become almost totally dominant, and able to control civilization, depsite that kind of control becoming ruanway madness and criminal insanities!
When one looks at the American political landscape, one sees things like what the cartoon above poked fun at, namely that senior government official are far worse criminals, who are getting away with their crimes, than the other lower level criminals. However, those levels of recognition of the social facts then still tend to not recognize any "external authorities" in more authentic ways, due to the degree that the "slavespeak" languages continue to almost totally dominante how almost everyone thinks and communcates.
At the present time, it appears that there are no genuine solutions which are politically possible. Any realistic solutions would necessarily have to be based on radically different death control systems.
The first sentence is correct, the second is not. The first sentence is correct because RM inserted the word "politically". If RM had inserted "socially" or "collectively" instead, this sentence would still be correct. However, the RM formulation makes the same crucial mistake that many of us including RM point out repeatedly. That is, limiting the context or domain to that which the predator-class wants us to limit ourselves (via deceit).
But replace the term "politically" with "individually" and... a great many new options and approaches appear that do not exist (or are wildly impractical wishful thinking) on larger scales like "state" or "social" or "nation" or "society" or "collective".
RM claims I am one of the "controlled opposition", and propose "unworkable solutions". Clearly RM wants to pretend he hasn't read "humans are a failed species" and "humans are finished" in hundreds of my messages here in ZH. Quite obviously, if I thought viable solutions existed for humans as a species or collective, I would not have written "humans are finished" a zillions times.
Nonetheless, RM is correct about endless advocates of individualism and liberty who do indeed imagine they propose viable "social" or "nation" or "society" or "collective" solutions. That is indeed true... for the reason I mentioned above --- they are large-scale solutions, none of which have a prayer to work. They never have in history, and almost certainly they never will in the future.
-----
To equate "the nature of reality" with "human predators" is utterly disingenuous! To claim humans are "slaves of nature" is to attempt an even more transparently silly fraud than the predators [usually] attempt. What's the alternative? Answer: wishing one of the insane philosophies that advocate "primacy of consciousness" was true, so we could simply make wishes and reality would reform into the objects of our arbitrary whims and desires. But those philosophies are silly, childish and blatantly wrong. Nonetheless, the fact that "the nature of reality" exists does not make humans slaves. Or frogs, or princes, or princesses, or RM, or me, or you. Just imagine a universe without a nature! Total chaos! No way to have any idea what will happen next, because reality has no nature, and therefore anything goes every instant of every day --- LITERALLY. It is precisely the "nature of reality" that makes us capable of being effective... to the extent we correctly identify the nature of reality.
-----
I will discuss "my solution" in a moment. But first, let's remember the solution RM proposes --- even more efficient forms of deceit and death controls to replace the existing ones. Under the control of RM no doubt... a classic "philosopher king" approach, straight from Plato if I recall correctly.
However, as usual, the professional human predators are way ahead of RM. That shouldn't be surprising, since they've been honing their skills and approaches for thousands of years! Apparently RM has not noticed that they already recognized and implemented precisely what RM proposes... except in a much more efficient manner!
Rather than create a new and improved methods of deceit and death controls to fight the existing version, they correctly understood it is much easier to "join them than defeat them". This is very much like what happened to the USSA since its founding. How was a complete inversion of the principles of "individual liberty" implemented in the USSA? Did some outside invader come in with better deceit and death control and unseat the slightly less egregious "founding fathers"?
No! Instead, they simply "joined the gang" (the predators-DBA-USSA), then proceeded to tweak the existing methods of deceit and death controls into vastly more predatory and destructive methods of deceit and death controls! No need for predators to fight each other... and maybe loose. Better to combine forces. And so they did.
And so, if RM wants to implement his own "more effective" methods of deceit and death controls, he might as well "join the party", then go ahead and tweak the existing methods into his own. If his are indeed more effective methods of deceit and death controls, then he will be welcome with open arms by his fellow predators. That's how smarter, more effective predators get ahead. Do you think Barack Obomber or Hitlery Clintun would be able to defeat and replace the federal government and replace it with their own scam? Almost infinitely unlikely. But they sure as hell can work within the system to achieve some of their most cherished goals. Maybe not in such a wholesale and unilateral fashion as they might fantasize, but they are a trillion times more likely to succeed. They noticed that. And now RM knows too!
-----
In the past month, I posted a few messages that explicitly point out the fundamental [near] contradiction in the individual liberty movement. I'm almost certain RM read at least one or two of these messages, since he obviously reads a great many messages under ZH articles. But in case he didn't, I'll repeat the essence of what I pointed out.
The problem is, the "individual liberty" movement, including almost every single one of its advocates, propose "actions" or "solutions" that are by their very nature attempts at "collectivist individualism". What do I mean by "collectivist individualism". I refer to the semi-contradictory... and at least "screwball" notion... that "individualism must be implemented in collectivist fashion, by collectivist means, methods and mechanisms".
Essentially, the premise behind all of them is similar to "get more than half the [voting] population to vote for candidates who support individualism and liberty". Do you recognize the peculiarities of this premise and approach? First of all, why would an "individualist" chose an inherently blatant "collectivist" method like "voting"? Or "majority" (of the collective)? Or the premise that "individuals need the approval or permission of the majority to deserve their individualism or liberty"?
Frankly, that's just crazy. Not just because it is screwy, but because this has never happened once in the history of the world. Why attempt the impossible? Why waste your life on a hopeless and increasingly risky approach?
Perhaps a great many self-described individualists don't realize they are actually collectivists at a more fundamental level. That's precisely what one must believe (implicitly or subconsciously) if one actually believes individualists need the approval of a collective to deserve or enjoy individualism or liberty!
And so, this approach is both faulty and impractical (to the point of being essentially impossible). Which is why I do not advocate "political means to achieve individualism".
-----
What I do advocate is... individuals take actions to put them in a situation where they (and possibly a few like-minded family and friends) can enjoy [much more] individualism and liberty.
THIS IS PRACTICAL.
Furthermore, this is "individualist individualism", not "collectivist individualism" (to the extent that approach makes sense).
And so, when RM derides the "political solutions" of the "captured opposition"... he is correct. He only errs in dumping me into that category with the endless "collectivist individualists" who are indeed "captured" by their failure to recognize they've adopted primarily collectivist methods and mechanisms to support individualism.
That indeed is doomed to failure.
-----
Unfortunately, so is the approach advocated by RM... to become the biggest, baddest deceiver and mass-murderer. Because that too is a collectivist approach.
-----
In summary, I almost completely agree with RM. ALL collectivist approaches will fail to result in the implementation of individualism or liberty or honesty or ethics or benevolence.
Which is why... humans are a failed species.
Which is why... humans are finished.
-----
However, "humans" is a collective term. So to be complete, I must say here again, like I've said before, that a few individual humans can evade and largely-to-entirely escape the predatory system. This will likely remain [largely] possible for a few more decades (but not in the USSA). However, this will almost certainly NOT remain possible more than a few more decades on earth.
The primary reason is... earth is just too limited an environment to evade and escape effectively once technology becomes another factor of a million or billion or trillion more advanced and pervasive. Whether any loopholes remain or not isn't a certainty, but it is unlikely.
However, outer space is another matter. The nature of reality that RM claims is our ultimate slave-master is actually the ultimate friend of individualists and liberty-lovers. The reason is a bit complicated, but I'll explain the essentials without getting into every subtle detail and reason. Essentially, space is enormous beyond the imagination of most human beings. I've been studying the universe and its nature since I was about 4 years old, and that has given me (and some others of course) a much better grasp of the scales involved, as well as the physics involved in living and traveling in space.
The bottom line is... due to the nature of reality (the nature of outer space), the difficulty, energy and cost to predators to find individuals in even the solar system, much less make believable threats, much less execute threats... is vastly, vastly, vastly greater than anything those predators could collect from others living in outer space.
And believe me! Anyone who lives in outer space is a freaking individualist! They live solitude. They live self-sufficiency. And if they don't do so... thoroughly, realistically and consistently... they are DEAD. They are evolved out of existence. They are removed from the gene-pool of "spacers" (for lack of a better term).
For the same inherent and practical reasons the predators can't impose their will in outer space, the "spacers" will be much more self-sufficient than 99.999% of humans on earth. And they will be 100.000000% independent of earth, which has a vastly too deep "gravity well" to bother doing business with.
Either of these two factors is sufficient to assure "spacers" are sure to enjoy individualism and liberty. Together (and reinforced by a couple less obvious aspects of the nature of reality), sentient entities in outer spaced will be free and remain free.
-----
Incidentally, the above approach is also the only way successful individualism and liberty has occurred on earth. Those we tend to call "the best, bravest and brightest" individuals left their native slave-farms and moved to whatever seemed to be the most promising "frontier". This worked for thousands of years, while every attempt to change tyranny into freedom FAILED. You'd think most individualists and liberty-advocates would have notice this fundamentally individualist approach, but vanishingly few have. That's because the brainwashing that many of us, including RM, have identified is overwhelmingly effective.
-----
So the bad news is, RM and I are both correct to conclude that "collectivist individualism/liberty" will not work. For practical purposes, the predators now hold virtually all the cards, and within a few years (or decades at most), they will have every card. In fact, the predators already have more than enough winning cards to utterly dominate human sheep. What they do not have yet is enough winning cards to utterly dominate the most extremely dedicated and insightful individualists who practice "individualist individualism" and leave the rest of "collective" as fodder for the predators.
It is difficult to know how much effort the predators-that-be will invest to control the most extreme outliers in the short term or medium term. Without a doubt, they get vastly more bang for the buck and effort invested in corrals for human sheep than for extreme outliers who play the "evade and escape" card most wisely and effectively. Practiced wisely, "out of sight, out of mind" is very effective, and will remain at least modestly effective for another few decades. Beyond that is questionable... hence the eventual need to get the hell outta dodge (into outer space).
-----
The reason most people can only offer "superficial solutions" is... because there are no collectivist solutions. The predators-that-be have already won that game.
Unfortunately, while a few people have read my messages about this topic ("collectivist individualism" versus "individualist individualism") and responded positively, the message appears to go over or under or around or through the vast majority. The predators have habituated the brains of almost everyone to the notion that all solutions to every issue must be collectivist solutions. This bogus notion has even captured the brains of most individualists and liberty-advocates... even after I clearly identify this issue and its importance.
And so, the bottom line is this. Don't waste your time with collectives... ANY collectives. Go make plans to get yourself some real, living individualism and liberty... and then go take the actions necessary to implement those plans.
At least you know there is hope now. But only for you. Forget the rest of the sheeple... they're not your concern. And if you make them your concern... you will eventually spiral down the toilet with them.
The "death controls" are, BY DEFINITION, what directs evolutionary ecologies to develop in the ways that they do. "Better death controls" AFTER the development of weapons of mass destruction, and all of the other consequences due to progress in physical sciences, is EXTREMELY PROBLEMATIC.
But nevertheless, by definition, that is what will happen. The human species will continue to muddle through its own MADNESSES ... IF any survive, and enough of scientific and technologically based civilization is what survives, then those survivors will have done so by developing a genuinely more scientific civilization that operates its death controls in ways which work better over the longer term.
The theory regarding that can be imagined. However, muddling through the MADNESSES that exist now, because the actual death control systems are based on the maximum possible deceits, while those are being pumped up and UP by progress in physical science, makes that appear politically impossible, at the present time ... But then, we have not yet gone through the coming times of debt insanities provoking death insanities, and we are not yet the survivors of those events.
I like to day dream of the opportunities in the Solar System as a whole, and beyond. However, all of that only intensifies the political problems that we already have on SpaceShip Earth. The same chronic political problems would replicate anywhere else, IF that new frontier was colonized by life in the future. Resolving the problems on SpaceShip Earth would be easier than in any other even more artificial environment, that would need even more artificial selection, that was more self-conscious systems of death controls.
Indeed, I have read many previous posts from honestann, and they are all self-indulgent regarding what some tiny, tiny minority might be able to achieve, for a while, on the peripheral fringe of the established systems. I REPEAT: In fact, there are NO frontiers now ... Furthermore, any such frontiers would become extremely artificial environments, which would require even more extreme artificial selection systems.
The human species may be FINISHED, in the sense that its overall actions are going to commit collective suicide. At the present time, that appears to be the most probable future we are rushing towards: i.e., debt slavery, based upon government enforced frauds by privately controlled banks, which fundamentally fraudulent financial account systems are driving debt insanities towards provoking death insanities.
The kinds of "better death control systems" that I promote are ones that would make greater use of information, to enable higher consciousness, regarding the ways that the death controls are done. That is NOT discontinuous with what already actually exists, except in the ways that there would be paradigm shifts in how people perceived that, which eventually would enable changing behaviors, which might enable the human species to sufficient adapt to progress in physical science, enough to survive having done that.
What I promote is genuine progress in political science, which essentially must achieve better death controls. Nothing less is enough. Meanwhile, honestann's approach is indeed too individually individualist to be able to be organized into a superior military, that operates murder systems. There is nothing in honestann's approach that directly addresses the basic facts that there ARE and MUST BE some death control systems. What I am talking about is how the existing systems might evolve into better integrated human, industrial and natural ecologies, all of which necessarily have their own respective death control systems as central to everything else there.
I do NOT promote any false fundamental dichotomies between the current top predator people, versus everyone else, which is what honestann appears to like to do, because it enables an over-simplified morality, that suits the individually individualists' self-indulgent strategies to live out on the periphery of the established systems.
My own personal strategy, that I had decided upon decades ago, and continue to promote at the present time, is to work through the established systems, BUT, to promote radical paradigm shifts in those established systems, so that they would perceive themselves in radically different ways, and then that would apply throughout every aspect of the combined money/murder systems, where the debt controls are backed by the death controls. Primarily, that would be a genuinely more scientific society, that was more self-consciously scientific about itself, which would transform the current kind of crazy, self-contradictory, "scientific dictatorship" into something which was not so crazy.
Similarly, I promote more "military intelligence," which was not such an oxymoron, because it had to continue to be based on operating its death controls through the maximum possible deceits, but rather, could become more publicly honest about how and why it operated the death control systems. All of that is driven to become theoretically imperative by progress in physical sciences enabling weapons of mass destruction. That is why I promote paradigm shifts in political science which are consistent with the paradigm shifts already achieved in physical science.
That continues to appear politically impossible at the present time, due to the degree that real politics continues to be dominated by various old-fashioned religions and ideologies, including the current state religions in the form of the monetary system and national security system, both based on the maximum possible frauds and deceits. But nevertheless, there is no other theoretically possible way that a technological civilization could survive its technological progress than through surpassing that with political progress, which must mean more than anything else better death control systems.
... honestann provides nothing regarding that issue, other than perhaps how some few privileged individuals could partially escape from that, by going to whatever might be left of the disappearing frontiers, (and wishing there was some new frontier.) There is no admission of the basic chronic political problems inherent in the nature of life, having driven one evolutionary ecology to develop after another, throughout the history of life on this planet, that is presented in honestann's discussions.
For example:
That paragraph from honestann manages to simultaneously admit that there are laws of nature, without then admitting that those drove evolutionary ecologies, including the current human political systems, which are the kinds of social pyramid systems that exist now, with different groups of people filling different niches, such as the people who are the predatory parasites, versus people who are the productive prey. The views of honestann indeed do continue to be those of some typical reactionary revolutionaries, because of the deliberate refusal to look at the general energy systems operating through human civilizations a whole, but rather, to focus upon what some more individually individualists within that system might do to personally adapt to the existence and dominance of the predatory/parasite kinds of people.
The dominant top predatory people are NOT doing what I propose should be done. Rather, they are degenerating into worse and worse parasites, driven by their need to do what they do through being so deceitful that they also are deceiving themselves, as well as many others. I continue to regard militarism as the supreme ideology. The murder systems pumped up with weapons of mass destruction must go through radical paradigm shifts regarding the death control systems, IF those murder systems, with their ideology of militarism, are going to survive their growing contradictions.
At the present time, it continues to look way more probable that human beings are too stupid to do anything collectively other than commit collective suicide. That IS the path we are on NOW! But nevertheless, transforming the established systems, through a series of intellectual scientific revolutions, aided and abetted by the ways that the established systems are going through their MAD psychotic breakdowns (that MIGHT leave some survivors, who have learned a thing or two from those experiences), is what I am speculating about perhaps being possible ... Therefore, that is what I am attempting to discuss, as sets of realistic resolutions for the problems we face.
IF a technological civilization survives through the death insanity events that appear to be on the horizon of history, then that will, BY DEFINITION, change the death control systems, and MIGHT enable those to be developed to become better, in the senses of becoming more scientific. Human beings need to develop radically different artificial selection systems, which are made to become more consistent with a better understanding of natural selection systems, which is made both possible and necessary by progress in physical science. Although genuine progress in political science appears practically impossible at the present time, that continues to be what I promote.
Maybe somewhere down in the depths of RM brain, there is a massive complex interconnection that makes some sense out of "death controls" within the conscious mind of RM. However, after reading a great many RM messages that repeat this phrase endlessly, and associate "death controls" with all sorts of things, I can't find anything important or fundamental beyond the obvious fact that "death controls" are about "killing people". Well, "killing people" is the predator approach, the root of "obey or I will kill you" that RM mentioned previously.
I am here to state "the predator approach is not the only possible approach". Furthermore, I do believe it is more appropriate for the producer-prey RM mentions to have something more productive at its core than "the control of death and destruction".
So we can agree to disagree about that.
-----
RM is wrong to claim that the same chronic problems would replicate in outer space as exists on earth today. This is silly. While once in a great while some of the elements that are pervasive on earth will occur in outer space, they will be rare, and thus not be significant influences on the "intellectual ecosystem" so to speak. An example from earth might be an individual 500 years ago who moves into the extreme boonies of some remote frontier, and lives an independent self-sufficient life. While he MAY eventually see another human wander by from time to time, to claim his life will be significantly influenced by "the same chronic problems" as the remote city on a distant continent he once lived in... is just silly. And this fellow is still on earth!
To pretend that "independent, self-sufficient life in outer space" will significantly resemble the "chronic problems" that regular folks face today is so disingenuous as to be laughable. Even I, who type into my computer and post on ZH from the extreme boonies far, far away from RM and everyone else... even I live a life free of the "chronic problems" that regular folks face today. And I'm here now, in this day and age of the pinnacle of predatory perversion. Bottom line: clearly RM has no freaking idea what life in outer space will be like, and so he shouldn't pretend to.
The claim by RM that "solving the problems of spaceship earth will be easier than solving the problems in outer space" is ludicrous on the face of it. The problems of spaceship earth are mostly the human predators who threaten to kill us all in order to steal our production and make us obey their endless whims. To claim this problem is easier to solve on earth... where the predators already have rather effective technology to support their predatory behavior is simply nuts. To claim the predators can run roughshod over individuals they can't see, they can't find, and they can't effectively target if they could... is so obviously silly. Keep dreaming! But someday, please learn how huge a solar system is, and how many extremely effective ways to hide and evade. Bottom line: the nature of reality renders the predator approach unworkable in outer space (even just the solar-system), and nothing RM says can change that.
-----
I do NOT promote any false fundamental dichotomies between the current top predator people, versus everyone else, which is what honestann appears to like to do, because it enables an over-simplified morality, that suits the individually individualists' self-indulgent strategies to live out on the periphery of the established systems.
RM is still trying to pretend that "individualist individualism" doesn't exist, and no such approaches can exist or work. Rather than address the two scenarios, RM just throws out nonsense like the above. What does it mean, even? Let's take a wild shot at deconstructing the above.
Where do I claim false fundamental dichotomies exist between the current top human predators versus everyone else? They are the two sides of the same coin! They are both playing the insane global game of "Simon sez" that the predators created and honed over centuries. Simon (the predators) say what to do, and everyone else obeys (or finds themselves dead or living in a cage like a wild animal in a zoo). They are both part of ONE system, ONE approach. The human predators need the producer-prey to survive (since the predators do not produce the goods and goodies they need to survive, prosper and enjoy their nefarious lives). And the producer-prey feed them, sanction them, support them, fund them, honor them, praise them and obey them. And about half the population of so-called "advanced societies" today are human-parasites who receive free goods and goodies in exchange for votes, sanction and support.
This is one coherent system, where everyone has a very obvious role... all of which far-and-away benefits the predators the most, throws bread-crumbs to the parasites, and deludes and screws the producers to the walls. Where's the dichotomy? I don't see it.
Which is precisely WHY only a few individuals have a chance to live differently... those few who see through at least a significant portion of the BS and adopt an "individualist individualism" plans and actions. This is precisely why the vast majority of humans are finished, and will remain finished.
-----
My own personal strategy, that I had decided upon decades ago, and continue to promote at the present time, is to work through the established systems, BUT, to promote radical paradigm shifts in those established systems, so that they would perceive themselves in radically different ways, and then that would apply throughout every aspect of the combined money/murder systems, where the debt controls are backed by the death controls.
Okay. And after decades, how much better has your approach made human life, human society or the human environment?
That's right... all the effort RM has made has only made things worse. Okay, that's a joke. What I really mean is... if his 3 or 4 decades of effort have not been able to offset the nefarious plans and actions of the predators-that-be and predator-class, then maybe RM should start to wonder whether a new approach is called for. Either find a new approach that will work for "society"... or perhaps look a bit deeper into what might be possible with a paradigm shift --- perhaps even one corresponding with an "individualist individualism" approach. Or at least, "stop trying to change the world, because you're not gonna succeed".
My comment is this. Sadly, the very best efforts of RM and I and everyone else I know will NOT fix the existing system. Hell, it will not even move the existing system a tiny ways towards better. For the very reasons RM endlessly moans, that won't happen. So stop wasting your time. Or don't. Go down with the ship like [almost] everyone else.
By the way, in the decades RM has been trying to "a more scientific society", the standards of what is called "science" have degraded so vastly that real science is becoming nearly unknown. So again, all the evidence points at the RM approach being futile (absent a catastrophic collapse followed by some absolutely unbelievable luck of some unspecified kind).
Bottom line: Sorry RM. Neither you nor I (or anyone else we know) has even remotely enough power or influence to even slow the chaotic self-destruction of life in this petri-dish called "human culture". Not. Gonna. Happen. So stop having such over-the-top delusions of grandeur about your powers to cause change. You don't have that power. Neither do I.
But we DO have sufficient power to make enormous changes in our own lives. I have already done so, and a few others have too. To be sure, it isn't very impressive compared to any global scale! But compared to the nature of the single individual life I used to live, the change is enormous.
Put another way. Do what you can. Give up what you can't. Or go right ahead and waste the rest of your life. It is your life, after all.
-----
That paragraph from honestann manages to simultaneously admit that there are laws of nature, without then admitting that those drove evolutionary ecologies, including the current human political systems, which are the kinds of social pyramid systems that exist now, with different groups of people filling different niches, such as the people who are the predatory parasites, versus people who are the productive prey. The views of honestann indeed do continue to be those of some typical reactionary revolutionaries, because of the deliberate refusal to look at the general energy systems operating through human civilizations a whole, but rather, to focus upon what some more individually individualists within that system might do to personally adapt to the existence and dominance of the predatory/parasite kinds of people.
Complete blindness! Let step through the proof again. First a minor technical gripe. There are no "laws of nature" or "laws of physics". There are no "laws" somewhere (?up in heaven perhaps?) that reach out across the universe and "control" everything. That's typical backasswards platonic psychosis. Actually, I suspect RM doesn't even believe this nonsense, but I must deny that I ever advocated "laws of nature" much less "laws of anything else". All "laws" are fiction. However, "reality does have a nature". Which is to say (in pattern), "a hydrogen atom is a certain configuration of the fundamental field", and that configuration has a certain nature, which is to say, that configuration interacts with its surroundings the same way in Texas as in a galaxy 12 million light years away as in your nearby grocery market. But that's just picky language, so lets go on.
Obviously the current state of affairs on planet earth is "consistent with the nature of reality". If it was not consistent with the nature of reality, then the current state of affairs would not exist today, or yesterday, or tomorrow, or ever. So what? So it seems RM implies that "because the current state of affairs IS the current state of affairs" (?what else could it be?), that the nature of reality requires that ONLY the current state of affairs can exist.
Sorry. A great many configurations of the fundamental field (and of atoms, and of ecosystems, and of animal interactions, and of conscious processes... and so forth are possible. Just because one exists now doesn't mean others cannot exist, especially where intellectual and physical actors (humans) are removed from incessant immersion in a dominant "culture" and are thereby not strongly pushed towards adopting one uniform set of ideas, plans, values, agendas, beliefs and behaviors.
Which is another very important reason I see vastly more hope in many small independent diverse systems than attempts to push the deadweight of the existing system around.
RM accuses me of not paying attention to "energy systems"!!! Can you believe this?!!!!! It is precisely the nature of the "energy system" in outer space that makes outer space non-viable for domination by human predators! I said that many times, yet RM does not notice this is exactly an instance of paying attention to "energy systems". To blatantly state at least one aspect of this (so everyone can see one example of what I mean), consider the energy required to send rockets all over the solar system in an attempt to "locate potential prey (taxpayers)". If you have ANY idea about the nature of the solar-system and the energy systems called spacecraft, you will understand why RM is the one who ignores "energy systems", not honestann.
As another very different look at how I ignore "energy systems", I generate 100% of my own electric power. In other words, I control my energy system. How many humans do that? Does RM? Maybe (I have no idea). But how many do? And I pay no attention to "energy systems"?
What I pay most attention to are MY energy systems. I admit that I pay little attention to planetary energy systems. After all, I don't need them. Well, unless we include the sun... but... somehow I'm not too worried about that down here in the southern hemisphere.
Furthermore, almost every product I've ever designed consumes energy, and I had to design the energy system to provide energy in the required forms to make the components in my devices function. So again, in endless ways, I do pay attention to "energy systems"... where they are within my domain control. I do not claim responsibility to decide how others configure their energy systems.
However, I repeat again, I have the ability to control my energy systems, but not the global energy systems, and so I focus my attention where I can make a difference.
And what I did was NOT to "adapt to the predators and prey", but instead to "remove myself from the predators and prey". There IS a difference. A rather huge practical difference, in fact. Which is why my life is very different from those who do "adapt to the predators and prey" per the decades of plans and actions of RM. Funny that.
-----
The dominant top predatory people are NOT doing what I propose should be done.
Sure they are! They are implementing and controlling the "death controls" they way they want to. Which is precisely what you want to do. Yes, you want to manipulate those controls the way you want to manipulate them. And they want to manipulate those controls the way they want to manipulate them. And so the endless fight will continue, the fight that never ends, the fight to control who lives and who dies and who pays and who obeys.
Well, screw you all. Go ahead and control each other. And while you're busy pushing and shoving to push and pull on the controls, you will remain too busy to worry about the few "extreme outliers" who finish their projects, leave earth, and pay no attention to the planet that becomes largely lifeless again after over 1 billions years of hosting life.
-----
At the present time, it continues to look way more probable that human beings are too stupid to do anything collectively other than commit collective suicide. That IS the path we are on NOW! But nevertheless, transforming the established systems, through a series of intellectual scientific revolutions, aided and abetted by the ways that the established systems are going through their MAD psychotic breakdowns (that MIGHT leave some survivors, who have learned a thing or two from those experiences), is what I am speculating about perhaps being possible ... Therefore, that is what I am attempting to discuss, as sets of realistic resolutions for the problems we face.
Read the above paragraph from RM. Then read the last sentence. What is the connection? The entire world is completely insane, armed with weapons capable of exterminating all human life on earth, run by utterly insane chimps bouncing off the walls who control even more insane chimps (the masses), having endless mad psychotic breakdowns by the millions.
And you see realistic solutions? Where? You imagine you can influence this enormous mass and quantity of madness and psychosis and predatory free-for-all sufficiently to implement "realistic resolutions for the problems we face"? I have to say... on the face of it, this sounds even more insane than the over-the-top wacko predators and their endless lunatic chimps.
This gets right to the root of our key disagreement I guess... the same disagreement I have with the so-called "individual liberty" movement. Like the "individual liberty" movement, RM seriously entertains the notion he is some kind of super-super-super-duper-ultra-hyper-add-more-exaggerations-here super-hero who can find just the right lever somewhere to undo the utterly habituated brainwashing of an entire planet, and magically get them to totally change their ways. I mean, one really must think they have some very special abilities (especially after 30 or 40 years of abject failure) to imagine they can "change the world" by somehow magically getting their hands on "death controls"... and then what? Threaten everyone? Fundamentally change everyone? Give me a break! I've heard this story too many times already, from endless people. Not. Gonna. Happen.
-----
Human beings need to develop radically different artificial selection systems, which are made to become more consistent with a better understanding of natural selection systems, which is made both possible and necessary by progress in physical science.
RM has all the answers, and I have none. Yet again and again, he doesn't see what's right in front of his eyes... in my messages. Look again here, similar to his comments about energy systems. Read what he says above. Read it. Then think what it means.
Then think about the project my collaborators and I are involved in. We are creating smarter than human inorganic consciousness. And once that is done, we will transfer our consciousness into an inorganic consciousness in an inorganic being. Now think. Does this have anything to do with (as he says) "radically different artificial selection systems"? I mean, once we achieve this, we defeat mortality. The inorganic beings ARE immortal. They are modular (like most inorganic machines), and any worn or broken part can easily be replaced (with upgraded replacements). The consciousness can be backed up daily (or hourly or weekly), so if "the worst happens" we may forget the past day (or hour or week), but we will survive.
So what do you think? By developing utterly practical immortality, have we or RM developed "radically different artificial selection systems"? Nah, say it ain't so!
But wait, not done yet. RM also talks about "natural selection systems made possible by progress in physical science". Who is actually doing that (and has done major parts of that), and who is just talking? I'm not just making this stuff up, go read my 5 years of ZH messages. I've been working on the project all those years. And yet, RM ignores all this (that he knows), and pretends he has the answers, and people like us... well... we're just misguided delusional dweebs who don't understand what matters. Except repeatedly it seems it is us who is headed in the direction with a possible future, while others are clueless or just fantasize with no hope of any plan with a chance in one quadrillion.
But in the end, RM admits it...
Although genuine progress in political science appears practically impossible at the present time, that continues to be what I promote.
RM promotes the impossible.
We implement the possible.
But don't forget what RM says... it is he who knows what to do (the impossible), and those who actually have viable (if difficult) solutions are misguided morons. Why? When it comes down to it, I don't know. I suppose because RM claims that RM knows better. Or because we didn't bite off more than we can chew (or at least hopefully not), and thus we don't have a universal solution that works for everyone.
In the end, I'll stick by what RM and I seem to agree on. As a collective, humans are screwed. So we bite off a fairly big bite, but a bite we might actually be able to chew, and swallow, and digest, and one that can solve the problem for a few of us. We make no apologies for not trying to save the world. We say, "can't be done". And besides, most people prefer to remain stupid sheep, and we don't believe in imposing our will on others. We reject death controls. We continue to work on eternal life, immortality, and the end of death entirely. Well, our death I mean. The rest of you can go ahead and kill each other. We want no part.
If you want your death controls, you can keep your death controls.
Didn't Obama say that too?
"We" may well run out of time for political science paradigm shifts, before those could be made. After all, previous intellectual scientific paradigm shifts usually took generations, and those who opposed them had to die out, before some younger generation adopted those ideas.
I continue to hold on to the view that the ONLY way that human beings are going to survive the progress in physical science is by surprassing that with progress in political science. Futhermore, that is the ONLY thing that is worthwhile attempting to do, depsite the degree to which that looks practically impossible at the present time, due to real politics being dominated by various old-fashioned religions and ideologies.
As a typical theme of post-apocalypse science fiction, the survivors create some new government, which is usually the result of the local warlords emerging, given whatever are their local conditions. In that context, the last throw away line by honestann is typical facetiousness. There was never a time which one could deal with the local bullies other in any other ways that which respected that they were bullies. One may not have had to believe their bullshit, but one still had to respect their ability to be bullies.
GOVERNMENTS ARE DE FACTO, the same as organized crime is de facto. All of the social organizations that survived through the history of warfare that dominate us today are those which were based on the principles and methods of organized crime. That was the point of the original cartoon featured in this article above: some of the most senior government officials typically get away with being the biggest criminals, while only lower level criminals are punished.
There are no reasons to doubt that there will continue to be the same chronic political problems, which manifest through the operation of organized crime, on different levels, no matter what happens in the real future of humanity, (or, for that matter, through computer/machine entities, which could replicate all the same philosophical, psychological and political problems that human beings already have.) Metaphorically speaking, the introduction of electronics and atomic energy has nothing to compare it to in human history. The only thing that can be compared to the progress in physical science that human beings have made was the development of photosynthesis. We are talking about prodigious REVOLUTIONS for whatever survives through those processes (IF anything that can still do electronics or use atomic energy, etc., does survive.)
My view is that honestann continues to indulge in rationalizations which favour her/him continuing to do what he/she decided to do with her/his life. Meanwhile, I do the same thing, and, of course, I believe that my position is based on more genuine intellectual integrity than honestann presents.
My view is that honestann continues to indulge in rationalizations which favour her/him continuing to do what he/she decided to do with her/his life. Meanwhile, I do the same thing, and, of course, I believe that my position is based on more genuine intellectual integrity than honestann presents.
And therein lies your problem! You are playing the classic pretend "republican tyrants versus democrat tyrants" game. You don't want a way out of the mess, you want your way out of the mess.
Meanwhile, I just want out of the mess. If your way would work, I'd be all for it.
More than that. Like most advocates of individualism and liberty, I supported your way out of the mess for decades. The difference is, I was always a very real, practical individual who habituated the practice of not just formulating theories, but actually implementing them. That's what a scientist, engineer, inventor, product developer does, after all. Though I was perhaps even a bit more unique in that I also practiced that approach in non-scientific, non-work aspects of life too.
-----
So I don't think you notice that we agree about most everything... though I prefer formulations and expressions that I consider more "on-point" or practical, while you prefer formulations and expressions that you consider more "on-point" or practical.
So, in fact, for most of my life, I was taking a dual track... half your way, and half my way. But finally, rather recently (sadly), I've seen the light more clearly. Which is to say, I've more consciously realized, indentified and intellectually separated the two approaches to individualism, namely "the predator approach" (or "global approach") versus "the practical approach" ("or individual approach").
Like roughly 99% of advocates of liberty and individualism, your have adopted your own niche within the "predator approach" or "global approach". Essentially, you believe you will operate the "death controls" better than the current predators, but you intend to rule by "death controls" nonetheless.
So you focus on "global approaches", which means "not just for yourself, family and friends" (accepting that some other individuals, families and friends might follow your example in order to enjoy better lives)... but for everyone [in your state and/or nation], as well as the entire planet (either now or eventually).
In my case, I've been living "the practical approach" AKA "individual approach"... but discussing both approaches. When I say "living", I mean that literally, as you and others here in ZH know. I converted my stash of gold into my self-sufficient digs in the extreme boonies (plus a tiny, capable, inexpensive, super-efficient high-tech airplane). And for the past 3+ years now, I've lived alone in my personal paradise without ANY contact-with or influence-by human predators, "official" or otherwise.
Nonetheless, I have discussed theoretical aspects of individual liberty versus authoritarianism like you and everyone else. In fact, ZH is almost literally my only outlet for such discussion, because the vast majority of my time is spent implementing additional steps to 100% evade and escape the influences of human predators forever (literally forever).
Recently one aspect of my discussions that I have returned to often is exactly the difference between the two approaches to "individual liberty versus authoritarianism" that I described above.
Why? Because... rather belately I must admit in "shame" (sorta)... is that I noticed how relatively effective are the two approaches. For practical purposes, the first is just "talk" or "theorizing". To be sure, some folks try to practice these theories in action, by supporting "less egregious predators" in endless elections, or writing petitions to the predators for better treatment, or making really spiffy and impressive (no sarcasm) youtube presentations. But the net effect of all the efforts of the growing "liberty movement" is... NEGATIVE. The more the predators hear objections from their slaves, the more they spend on spying on their slaves, and the more they spend arming and training their paid-thug-predators to destroy any of their slaves that dare open their mouth (or keyboard) to object to their predator masters. This is simply FACT. I do NOT say this to disparage those individuals in the "individual liberty" movement who invest their time, effort and resources to take actions they consider worthwhile.
No. Instead, I say what I say to point out the facts of reality to these folks, so they can do what I did, namely consider more thoroughly the TWO approaches. When they do, they will find what I have.
#1: The standard, global approach is leading to more aggressive and egregeous authoritarianism (which would happen with or without their efforts, only at different speeds).
#2: The non-standard individualist approach leads to enjoying a life free of most or all aggression by human predators.
This is obvious. My life is just one example of #2. Not an easy example to follow for some folks, but practical for a significant size minority.
But even more, I have pointed out something else that may make advocates of approach #1 very nervous... or even angry and accusational! And what I have pointed out is the lesson on this topic provided by the history of mankind. As it turns out, humans have tried both approaches before, and the following is a summary of the results:
#1: The standard global approach: this has never worked. No "society" has ever been moved from tyranny to liberty.
#2: The non-standard individualist approach: this has worked millions of times. Which is to say, millions of individuals [plus a few family and friends] have moved from their "homelands" to whatever seems the best "frontier" on planet earth. And they've set up new independent lives [much closer-to] free of the massive interconnections with other indivdiuals --- including those in the human predator class. And in a great many cases, they are completely free of everyone in the human predator class for the rest of their lives, or perhaps only decades until the disease and mechanisms of the human predator class reach them (slowly and slightly at first, then gradually but exponentially more).
The above is fact. The above is history. We tend to call the folks who successfully adopted approach #2 "the best, bravest and brightest". Those who were destroyed by various dangerous aspects of the "frontier" are mostly forgotten by history and not discussed. Except by me and a few others who wish to convey the full story as accurately as possible.
The above are just facts. Consider them. Then invest your remaining time, effort, energy and resources accordingly.
-----
On much we agree. For example, valid science, engineering, technology and invention are almost certainly very major components of any success advocates of individual liberty will have. In my personal view and actions, the wise applications of valid new science, engineering, technology and invention are key. Nonetheless, I do believe other [low-tech or clever-tech] actions can work too, much like "guerrilla warfare" and "asymmetric warfare" have been reasonably successful against high-tech warfare in certain environments.
-----
There was never a time which one could deal with the local bullies other in any other ways that which respected that they were bullies. One may not have had to believe their bullshit, but one still had to respect their ability to be bullies.
True. But the unstated follow-on question is... what to do about this. The extremely easy but mistaken assumption to make is... we must find an effective way to fight the bullies. The problem with this assumption is... it ignores the lessons of history and observation that I mentioned above. That lesson is this. Once the "bullies" rise to a certain level of size, scale, scope where they've instituted certain kinds of systems... the bullies cannot be defeated this way.
To be complete, we can also observe from history that bullies do not thus "last forever". Because they don't. We can observe that their approach and processes can expand only to a certain point... that point where the "overhead" of their approach causes catastrophic collapse. Many others see this, to the point where some liberty advocates now advise people elect the WORST human predators to office in order to assure the collapse comes sooner (within their lifetimes) under the premise that "maybe we can salvage something after the collapse" or "at least the predators won't be as unified after the collapse" or "maybe the predators will move on to other locations where more healthy conditions exist" (to suck them dry).
However... ALL of this ignores the "individualist approach". Which I already laid out above and elsewhere, and won't repeat again here.
EVADE, ESCAPE, LEAVE. Get the hell outta dodge!
-----
I am tempted to ask the following question. So I will.
If you are a slave in one of the old southern states, would you consider escape?
My answer is this:
#1: most did not try (the standard approach).
#2: almost none tried to overthrow their masters.
#3: a minority tried and died in the attempt.
#4: a minority tried and succeeded.
That is a smaller scale (but rather equivalent) analogy two the approaches that can be applied on the larger scale of "nations".
#1: most just pay their taxes and obey.
#2: almost none try to literally overthrow government.
#3: a tiny minority try to escape and die at home or elsewhere.
#4: a tiny minority escape and enjoy life with much more liberty.
The reason #2 is not very popular is... virtually everyone understands the odds of success is essentially zero (once the predators become well entrenched). This is the reason the world has no more locations where someone can "become king by killing the king". That approach was tried, but kings wisely "moved on" to less risky approaches where succession did not go to the victor, but to family or predator allies.
The fact is, in the world of today, individuals can chose destinations wisely, in which case the probability of #3 is virtually zero. To be sure, a few countries exist where "escape is dangerous". And this will become true of the USSA sooner or later too. But for now, escape is almost risk-free. Also, one might not succeed financially in their chosen destination, or at least not as well. In which case their standard of living will fall (as their standard of liberty and opportunity rises). But they are quite unlikely to perish.
And so, #4 is relatively, statistically more effective today than most times in history. What constitutes the closest we can find to "a frontier" today is less "totally free", but also much less risky and dangerous. And so... overall... #4 is very attractive.
Nonetheless, humans today are so narrow-minded, relatively few choose door #4.
Of course, millions still do choose #4 every year.
-----
My view is that honestann continues to indulge in rationalizations which favour her/him continuing to do what he/she decided to do with her/his life. Meanwhile, I do the same thing, and, of course, I believe that my position is based on more genuine intellectual integrity than honestann presents.
Am I the only one who immediately recognizes the silliness of comments like the above? Seriously. To make the silliness more evident, let me rephrase the above words into an equivalent statement that says exactly the same thing:
My view is that honestann continues to notice that the decisions she made and the actions she took have vastly improved her life, liberty, happiness, environment, living conditions and peace of mind. Why would anyone do or want that? Meanwhile, I continue to propose an approach that has never worked, and admittedly seems incapable of working now or any time soon. Because failure and suffering is what constitutes "integrity".
The strange thing is, at least nominally, we want roughly the same thing. Well, except RM wants his hands on the "death controls", and honestann wants no part of "death controls". honestann also understands "self-defense is not an instance of death-control", for it is the predator-attacker who is both in control and takes initiative when he puts himself in situations where he may and should be killed).
Nonetheless, it seems strange that RM is so negative about "alternate approaches". Frankly, I don't know why a lover of liberty (or anything) would be so hostile to other approaches that lead to the desired result. Can you? Can RM?
Because that's what we see here. I just point out alternate approaches designed to achieve the same result (individual liberty). And I get dumped on... in what seems analogous to religious fervor because some of the ways I illustrate are not "approved" by the new religion of "RM-style death controls".
What is also strange is this. RM claims that new science, engineering and technology should be key to his approach to achieving success. And yet, nobody on this planet is more fully dedicated to achieving my goals via new and advanced science, engineering and technology than I am! After all, I intend to literally become an instance of our new technology (inorganic consciousness)... without giving up my identity. So it seems, as far as I can see, this claim from RM is false. What RM wants is NOT something new. What RM wants is HIS WAY OR THE HIGHWAY... or death.
That's what it seems to me. But of course, I must allow for the fact that perhaps the consciousness of RM contains some contradictions that maybe even RM has not yet noticed. I can't be sure what the real explanation of his bewildering combination of seemingly contradictory ideas are, because obviously nobody can see all the connections in the mind of another human being (on any non-trivial topic).
Personally, I don't care how individuals who desire individual liberty get their individual liberty... as long as they don't [intentionally] harm or slaughter benevolent sentient beings in the process. I don't care whether RM comes up with the best idea, or Jeff Berwick, or Tom Woods, or John Q. Nobody. Why should I care? I'm not interested in being famous. Just the opposite in fact, partly because I'm naturally a hermit and thus prefer [successful] strategies based upon hide, evade, escape, "out of sight, out of mind", and eventual vanishing into undisclosed far reaches of the solar-system, and eventually beyond.
All I can say, based upon observations of other personalities, "my way or the highway" attitudes seem rather fundamentally antithetical to "individual liberty". But it is not for me to perform psychological guesswork on anyone. That is for each individual to perform on themselves, by honestly and seriously considering every idea and fact before them, by drawing reasonable inferences from what they know and infer, and then explore whatever paths they recognize in their own neural-net, to see where they lead (valid, invalid, consistent, inconsistent, contradictory and otherwise). Then compare them to reality, and to practical possibility.
I guess my bottom line is this. RM is correct about many of his identifications. But he seems to genuinely love his own formulation so completely and thoroughly that the formulation itself has become necessary to his own identity and self-esteem (or is somehow of unlimited, religious-fanatic-like importance to him). And this seems to have made him incapable of any response that does not involve criticism of every idea that fails to directly support or adhere-to his formulation, and consider no alternatives. Might this be an instance of self-brainwashing? Everyone knows humans can be brainwashed via repetition. Does everyone realize humans can brainwash themselves the same way by repetition?
The question at hand has many possible answers and can be addressed via many possible approaches (with varying efficiencies and consequences). Yes, certain questions have only one correct answer. The question at hand is not one of those questions.
honestann, there is no realistic chance of not having to compromise with the biggest bullies, in one way or another, or one level or another. Furthermore, in my view there are reasons which are inherent in the nature of life, that generate chronic political problems, which must be resolved in some way, and which are being resolved by the people who became the best predatory parasites.
In my view, the bullies, or predatory parasites, MUST necessarily exist, due to the ways that there are chronic political problems inherent in the nature of life, which are the reasons why evolutionary ecologies have again and again developed different entities that fill those niches, because their roles are necessary in the overall systems. In my view, honestann, it is you who are being inconsistent and deliberately ignoring the nature of life, which generates chronic political problems.
Your responses are to individually move as much as possible in order to "EVADE, ESCAPE, LEAVE. Get the hell outta dodge!"
While I somewhat sympathize with that response, especially given the degree to which the established systems have their top predatory parasites degenerating into nothing much more than criminally insane parasites, and because of "that point where the "overhead" of their approach causes catastrophic collapse" ... that is ONLY a personal solution, not a political solution.
My opinion is that honestann does not have enough sympathy for the devil. I regard the perception of death control systems as inseparable from the existence of life. There MUST be some death control systems, and there are. Therefore, my approach is indeed to attempt to develop better death control systems, operated by better governments.
While I admit that appears to not be working, but rather, powering up globalized electronic monkey money frauds backed by apes with atomic bombs looks like a recipe for human extinction, rather than saner adaptations, within the foreseeable future (especially since politics continues to be almost totally dominated by old-fashioned religions and ideologies), ... nevertheless, there are no other genuine solutions to the problems than to develop better death control systems, which have to work through the paradoxical ways that the history of warfare has previously been based on success through deceits, which included all the controlled opposition groups staying within that frame of reference regarding attitudes of the maximum possible deceits towards the death control facts.
I regard it as NECESSARY that human beings develop better models of the ways that they operate their death control systems, which are the essential features of governments, as the de facto biggest forms of organized crime. Organized crime must necessarily exist, by definition, due to the basic ways that human beings live, and therefore, civilizations operate. I regard it as absolutely impossible to stop there being some death controls, as long as human being perceive the world by subtracting parts from the whole.
To avoid doing death controls as much as possible only insures that the actual ways that will be done will become worse in the end. As the registered leader of political party, I have legal rights to attempt to organize to try to take control over the sovereign powers of the government of Canada. To try to do that is the decision that I have made and remade for several decades. No matter how practically impossible that may appear to be at the present time, that is still the decision which appears to have the most intellectual integrity to me. Indeed, almost every decision that I have made for several decades can be traced back to worrying about the existence of weapons of mass detruction, having made the history of militarim developing for several thousand years previously become runaway criminal insanities.
Of course, the problems due to the development of weapons of mass destruction might not have any practical solutions, but rather the human species may commit collective suicide instead of adapting any better to the EXISTENCE of those weapons. I have been thinking more deeply about death control systems due to the existence of weapons of mass destruction. I believe that theoretically takes developing political science that goes through profound paradigm shifts, and that is what I am promoting, despite the apparent practical impossibility of enough people doing that ...
Meanwhile, honestann has been thinking of ways to try to "EVADE, ESCAPE, LEAVE. Get the hell outta dodge!"
there is no realistic chance of not having to compromise with the biggest bullies, in one way or another, or one level or another.
What you're saying is, nobody packed in a limited space with egregious, aggressive bullies can avoid substantial consequences due to living in these conditions. Who could possibly disagree with that? Not me. To be sure, very wise and clever approaches might reduce the consequences modestly, but escaping consequences of crazed, insane, aggressive predators (with enormous resources) is clearly impossible.
Which simply leads back to my approach yet again... move to an environment free of human predators (the "biggest bullies"). Or as close to free as you can manage.
I suppose one might say, "but the act of leaving IS a compromise", and I would not claim that is a false statement. However, that formulation does tend to obscure a very important fact... that it only requires ONE compromise ONE time. After that, further compromises are either absent or dramatically reduced.
-----
Furthermore, in my view there are reasons which are inherent in the nature of life, that generate chronic political problems, which must be resolved in some way, and which are being resolved by the people who became the best predatory parasites.
One could also reasonably say this... by pushing a fact to the limit, and ignoring the rest of the full context. But again, notice the term "political" above. I can assure you, I have no political problem with myself. And since I'm the only one here, there is no room for "politics" in my solution.
Of course, true enough, I took my approach to the literal ultimate extreme (well, short of leaving the solar-system alone, which would be even better). However, I find it a bit disingenuous to lump all "politics" together, because politics on different scales have very different natures and impacts and difficulties. For example, if I was to import a boyfriend into my little world, RM would rightly claim "now you have politics"... specifically the kind of "politics" that exists in human relationships. And that's true in the literal sense. But it totally ignores the fact that large scale "politics" on the scale of "states" and "nations" and "governments" is vastly more dangerous and problematic.
So while the point is correct, sweeping away all consideration of the nature of the "politics" in different human configurations/organizations is quite disingenuous.
BTW, I must also note that the degree of problematic consequences of "politics" on any scale are vastly less when the individuals involved all act like individualists. So, for example, one might expect unfortunate "politics" to exist within a "collective" of 100 dedicated individualists [living in a small 1km square settlement], one would expect the degree and scope of problems to be much less than the exact same configuration of 100 random humans, or 100 dedicated socialists, or 100 dedicated busy-bodies, or 100 dedicated predators-that-be.
All the above matters in practice. And so, the only thing the RM formulation really says is... humans don't agree with each other all the time, about every issue. No kidding!
-----
In my view, the bullies, or predatory parasites, MUST necessarily exist, due to the ways that there are chronic political problems inherent in the nature of life, which are the reasons why evolutionary ecologies have again and again developed different entities that fill those niches, because their roles are necessary in the overall systems. In my view, honestann, it is you who are being inconsistent and deliberately ignoring the nature of life, which generates chronic political problems.
I can easily prove the above is wrong. If a group of honest, ethical, productive, benevolent humans clearly understand the nature and consequences of predator-parasite-producer dynamic, they would immediately exterminate any human who started taking predator actions. They would not wait. They would not file a law suit (or have "authority" or "government" at all). They would do what sane humans throughout history did in rural environments (where non-human animal predators roamed). They would exterminate them as quickly as possible, in whatever way involved the least risk to the honest, ethical, productive, benevolent humans.
And in any such group, any brief occurrence of human predators (or animal predators who attempt to prey upon humans as opposed to non-sentient species) would be quickly eliminated. If all RM is saying is that "well, sure, but you can't ever be absolutely sure no human will ever take a predatory action", then sure enough, I agree. However, that is utterly insignificant.
I can easily prove the other RM assertion is blatantly false... the claim that "human predators are necessary for human beings to exist or function". That is so obviously insane, a refutation seems almost silly. But the claim was made, so here is the simple reason this is absurd.
Humans need goods to survive, and goodies to be secure and comfortable. Insufficient goods and goodies "grow on wild trees and bushes" or otherwise come to exist in sufficient quantities by natural processes of the environment.
Therefore, honest, ethical, productive, benevolent human beings take intentional actions that cause whatever goods and goodies they need+want to exist. The existence and/or consumption of these goods and goodies are what keep the human producers alive and relatively happy, secure and content.
These actions also create the goods and goodies required to keep human predators alive, happy, secure, content. But the human predators don't create these goods and goodies, the human producers do.
The relationships are thus quite obvious.
#1: The human predators depend upon the human producers for the goods and goodies that keep them alive, happy, secure, content and prosperous.
#2: The human producers do not depend upon the human predators. In fact, every additional human predator co-opts goods and goodies the human producers need to stay alive, happy, secure, content and prosperous.
The above is clear, trivial proof that human predators are not necessary, and only cause harm and overhead and destruction for human producers.
That smart people like RM don't know how to process abstract ideas in valid ways so obvious fallacies become recognized is a common sign the modern humans are intellectually greatly removed or detached from reality. And reality is what is... reality is what exists... reality is the total context and set of consequences.
-----
While I somewhat sympathize with that response, especially given the degree to which the established systems have their top predatory parasites degenerating into nothing much more than criminally insane parasites, and because of "that point where the "overhead" of their approach causes catastrophic collapse" ... that is ONLY a personal solution, not a political solution.
That is correct. However, I must add that while each instance of this solution is individual and personal, this approach can be (and constantly is) replicated a large number of times. And so, while your claim "this is not a political solution" is literally correct, it is important to note that the "individual approach" can become moderately large scale nonetheless.
The essential difference is this.
A "political approach" would apply to large numbers of individuals (everyone) within a specific region of the planet... presumably corresponding to some "nation". And as RM and I agree, that is not gonna happen [any time soon, and maybe ever].
My "non-political approach" by definition cannot apply to everyone within a single region or "nation" for many reasons. First, the entire population of no "nation" shares the same values and attitudes about this or any other topic. Second, if the entire nation was willing to "get the hell outta dodge" to escape the local human predators, they could also overthrow the local predators with even less effort. And so forth.
However, my "non-political approach" can still apply to large numbers of individuals. But the individuals involved will be from all over the planet, and thus tiny minorities from each individual "nation". As such, they will not be much noticed, and thus not likely to cause substantial responses from the local predators (unless the number leaving becomes much larger than I imagine is likely to happen).
When RM agrees that "political approaches are essentially futile at this point in history", I do not understand why he focuses so stubbornly on "political approaches". He seems to want to adopt an approach that is inherently futile. Why?
-----
My opinion is that honestann does not have enough sympathy for the devil. I regard the perception of death control systems as inseparable from the existence of life. There MUST be some death control systems, and there are. Therefore, my approach is indeed to attempt to develop better death control systems, operated by better governments.
By their very nature, a "government" is necessarily just a word, a name that means and refers-to the most powerful and egregious human predators in a given area of the planet. No matter what "death controls" (or other schemes) RM or others develop, the predators-that-be will only adopt those that keep them in power, and allow them to be more egregiously nasty and destructive. Which means, the above scenario is inherently impossible. The only way RM or others could implement their new and improved "death controls" is... to overthrow the existing predators-that-be. To that I simply repeat what I said before. RM (or anyone else) is not a real-life version of the most amazing super-duper-hero ever to grace the pages of a comic book. Thus... not gonna happen. Not that way, at least.
One problem that RM does recognize is... the predators have created a massively interconnected system that tends to hold itself together even when that system is utterly insane, corrupt and destructive. I don't mean it holds its productive systems together, I mean it keeps the power in the hands of the same predators-that-be with only slow and cosmetic changes, but without fundamental (paradigm) changes. The system is purposely designed that way... to achieve their #1 goal, which is "stay in power".
-----
Organized crime must necessarily exist...
WRONG. And a dangerous, self-defeating premise to adopt. I thoroughly refuted this premise above.
-----
As the registered leader of political party, I have legal rights to attempt to organize to try to take control over the sovereign powers of the government of Canada.
Endless fictions being manipulated in a thought process is sure to lead to garbage output. Look at the above for a perfect example!
registered == written down somewhere, nothing more
leader == fiction and pure predatory assertion.
political party == wannabe predators.
legal == pure fiction. all "law" is pure fiction.
rights == pure fiction. "wrongs" do exist (predatory actions).
take control == overt admission of intentional predatory intent
sovereign powers == pure fiction and ditto previous
government == pure fiction.
Canada == pure fiction.
Your brain, and thus your life, is utterly controlled by... FICTIONS. That is to say, your brain and your life are controlled by real mental-units in your real brain, but your brain pretends those mental-units mean and refer-to something real in the external world when in fact they do not. Which is to say, you like almost every human on this planet, suffers from the fatal-flaw in human consciousness. In effect, you are pretending something analogous to... you live in the world of "Lord of the Rings". You can pretend that, but you don't live in that world, so your actions will not have the consequences you want or expect.
-----
...almost every decision that I have made for several decades can be traced back to worrying about the existence of weapons of mass destruction, having made the history of militarism developing for several thousand years previously become runaway criminal insanities.
Then you should consider other alternative approaches from time to time. Maybe you'll find something more likely to work. Given the practical impossibility that any political solution can be found or implemented in your lifetime, perhaps you should consider helping move a tiny number of individuals off the planet and into self-sufficient digs in space. Then when the predators-that-be destroy mankind, your favorite species can survive. To be sure, it might take a while to overpopulate the solar-system the way humans overpopulated earth, but... at least you help prevent the "game over" scenario, which is still quite possible if not likely.
PS: sticking to less efficient approaches when you later notice potentially better alternatives is not virtue, and not integrity. In fact, it is the opposite of integrity, because you've ignored your values and will thus see them destroyed eventually.
-----
Meanwhile, honestann has been thinking of ways to try to "EVADE, ESCAPE, LEAVE. Get the hell outta dodge!"
Yes, because it works! Yes, because it achieves my values. Yes, because it is practical in the short-run, and a permanent solution in the long-run. What a concept!
honestann, I do not think you respect the degree to which there is necessarily a paradox in any "rule of law" that only those who are the best at being dishonest and violent can enforce their "rule of law." Of course, in that context, nobody guards the guardians, other than the longer term selection pressures.
You are deliberately ignoring that, and other basic facts of life here:
Any productive human being could ONLY resist predatory human beings by being able to be MORE PREDATORY. If any group of productive human beings were to develop to resist the predatory parasites, they would have to also specialize to become even better predatory parasites, in order to effectively respond to others who where threats because those others were predatory parasites. That was always the history of War Lords. The only real choices that people had were to support their own local War Lords, or else be conquered by some other War Lords.
honestann, you continue to indulge in grossly over-simplified false fundamental dichotomies, and therefore, promote bogus solutions based on the impossible ideals derived from those false fundamental dichotomies. On a more profoundly philosophical level, you refuse to recognize that all living beings necessarily operate as entropic pumpbs of energy. Therefore, human beings and civilizations necessarily must operate as organized lies operating robberies.
There is NO "group of honest, ethical, productive, benevolent humans." There are only people who take resources in ways which result in there being more waste, but which nevertheless prime their pumps in order to take more resources, to keep feeding their fires of life, and perahps the new lives that spark off of them, as reproductions. It is basic to the nature of life that it can reproduce, and the reproductions can reproduce, which means there is always the pressure for all the fuel to get burned up.
By definition, the only thing that stops the fires of life from becoming bigger bonfire conflagrations, that burn themselves out, are some other death control systems, that limit that happening in one way or another, sooner or later. It does not take long before reproduction generates big and bigger problems. Different cultures developed different ways to resolve those problems.
Our civilization is based on resolving those problems through the history of warfare, selecting for the surviving War Kings, that made the sovereign states, whose powers have been captured by the Fraud Kings, the bankers. Those predatary parasites did NOT create the chronic political problems inherent in the nature of life, they only developed a set of expedient problems that benefited them in the short-term.
More basically speaking, human animals are NOT productive. Ironically, honestann, you have adopted the biggest bullies' bullshit world view, that there is some fundamental dichotomy between productive people versus predatory people. You are deliberately ignoring the empirical observations regarding the Second Law of Thermodynamics, as well as presuming that your views are not totally BACKWARDS.
Human beings NEVER "produce" anything! They only transform energy from their environment, in ways which increase the overall entropy. All human beings are FUNDAMENTALLY PREDATORY. As soon as one perceives human beings as separated from their environment, then across the boundaries defined by that SUBTRACTION, they necessarily live as ROBBERS.
Therefore, honestann, you promote goofy, absurd and backwards views regarding the basic facts of life. You took what you could from being able to operate as a legalized robber within the civilization that you were born into, and moved that out to the periphery, where you could enjoy what to you seemed like a better quality of life. Personally, I have nothing against those who do that. There is plenty of real history to support your notions regarding relative individual freedoms for those on the frontiers or hinterland, away from the more populated places. However, doing that does NOT change the local laws of thermodynamics around you. You are still consuming food and excreting wastes. You are still living like a Robber, to the degree that you are defined as separated from your environment.
I stand by the view that human beings are political animals. Pecking orders have been around for a very long time, before those were developed into the forms that human cultures manifest now. Similarly ecologies with trophic layers were around for a long time, before human beings developed civilizations in which different groups of people specialized in being more like predatory parasites versus productive prey. However, the fundamental facts are that all human beings are basically animals, whose niches are primarily being predatory parasites. You do not get that, because you want to promote your own bullshit world view, which is ironically a lot like the bullshit that the bullies promoted for their own ulterior purposes. In well-established stable ecologies, one will typically find at about half of the things living there are predatory parasites, upon the other half, which are more life the productive prey. However, if one look more at the bigger picture, that all depends upon there being the Sun Earth Space system, to make there be a flow of energy exist, in order that entropic pumps can live by channeling that flow.
I continue to think that you are indulging in perfectly backwards ways to understand the world. You refuse to think through the paradoxes presented by your own impossible solutions, which are based on mistakenly presuming upon the absolute validity of false fundamental dichotomies.
I am doing my best to develop a political science that is consistent with physical science. You are not even trying to do that. Rather, you are indulging in bullshit that reqards your distinctions between predators versus productive as being correct. In fact, you are wrong, and you have it completely backwards. There is nothing but the dynamic equilibria of different systems of organized lies operating robberies. That INCLUDES any so-called "group of honest, ethical, productive, benevolent humans," BECAUSE THERE ARE NO SUCH GROUPS THAT REALLY EXIST, NOR COULD REALLY EXIST.
What I saying is that human beings and civilizations are always necessarily systems of organized lies operating robberies. All human beings are fundamentally predators. There are no human beings who are exempt from the laws of physics, which enable their biology. Your approach, honestann, is the typical approach of reactionary revolutionaries, who rely upon their favourite false fundamental dichotomies, and related impossible ideals, to propose impossible solutions. Your "solutions" may work somewhat, for you, over the short-term, however, those only work as long as you are able to continue to avoid running into any other local War Lords, or something similar ...
Your "solutions" have some personal merit, for you, but they have no political merit, and no intellectual integrity, due to the degree to which you deliberately ignore the basic ways that the laws of physics manifest through the biology of evolutionary ecologies, including how those were extrapolated through the cultural systems, which have their own evolutionary ecologies.
Your solutions are for you to be the ultimate Black Sheeple, who is able to escape far enough from the herd in your life time to no longer have to worry about the problems that the herd has. You fail to admit the ways in which you still depend upon the history of the predotary people creating everything you how have now, and take for granted. You also fail to address the deeper philosohical issues that, IF you had to actually defend yourself from local predatory people, then the only way you could effectively do that is be worse than them, by becoming better at being dishonest and violent, which is what it takes.
Metaphorically speaking, ALL human beings are wolves. Our culture has selected for some human beings to act like Sheeple, indeed the vast majority, but they are thereby being deluded. Your own opinions are those of the typical Black Sheeple, which are quite commonly expressed on Zero Hedge. You are NOT applying a sufficiently scientific mode of thought, to synthesize enough of the facts found out about physics and biology, to then apply those to politics. You are NOT promoting any genuinely better political science, but rather, its absurd opposite, because of your continued indulgence in the backward dichotomies you are presuming upon, and you promotion of going to the wrong pole of those to establish spurious unity.
What EXISTS are human beings acting as predators, or living as entropic pumps of energy flow, which drives there to evolve ecologies. The human culture systems have recreated by specially human roles the ways that many, many other biological systems developed.
honestann, you assert that you have REFUTED my premise that "organized crime must necessarily exist..." as being WRONG. And a dangerous, self-defeating premise to adopt. You claim that you have thoroughly refuted that premise ...
YOU DID NOT! You did not even come remotely close to doing so.
While you and I mostly agree upon the empirical observations regarding how the established social pyramid systems are getting extremely unbalanced, to a degree that may result in the human species committing collective suicide, you misunderstand the mechanisms of that BACKWARDS, and therefore, your "solutions" are all deficient. At least what I am saying has the merit of providing solutions which are not impossible. What I am promoting is the development of better dynamic equilibria between the different systems of organized lies operating robberies.
Meanwhile, you are promoting the same old-fashioned false fundamental dichotomies, and related impossible ideals, which will continue to backfire badly in the real world.
When people take civilization to the frontiers, they recreate all the same problems there again. You are still now a human being, still basically the same, although far from the herd. While your personal solutions may work for you, they have no ways to work through any other larger context, regarding the problems that the larger groups of human beings have. I continue to promote a consistent set of intellectual scientific revolutions, which generate solutions based on the view which can be metaphorically expresses as being "everyone should become better wolves," while you promote the view that "everyone should become better sheeple," and also that the only way to do that is to avoid those people who most obviously behave like wolves.
I continue to regard you as another example of the typical old-fashioned reactionary revolutionary. I continue to regard it as ironic that you still believe in the basic bullies' bullshit world view, and continue to promote bogus "solutions" based upon the same impossible ideals that the bullies promoted, because those actually cause the opposite to happen in the real world.
Apparent harmony and beauty are due to the dynamic equilibria becoming so delicately balanced that they do not appear to be there. However, the actual mechanisms of how things really work are the opposite to that, and the only way to approach realizing ideals is through mechanisms which face those facts.
Governments are based on organized crime. The only better government is better organized crime. The cartoon that started this article was based on poking fun at the ways that senior government officials actually ARE acting like criminals. What I am doing is developing deeper and better ways to understand how and why that is the ways things really are. You are not doing that. Rather, you have found rationalizations and justification for you to run away ...
Well, you were free to make that choice, but I am free to not agree with your basically bullshit world view. You are still living like a predatory parasite, as all other human beings must necessarily do. Since you refuse to face that basic fact, you are not able to engage in developing better dynamic equilibria between other predators, but rather, are endeavouring to live out the rest of your life by avoiding them as much as possible. Good luck!
honestann, I do not think you respect the degree to which there is necessarily a paradox in any "rule of law" that only those who are the best at being dishonest and violent can enforce their "rule of law." Of course, in that context, nobody guards the guardians, other than the longer term selection pressures.
Well, of course that's true, except for the fact "law" is a fiction. However, the fact the predators-that-be don't enforce the fiction they call "law" upon themselves is becoming so blatantly obvious that even government-lovers admit "rule of law" has vanished.
-----
Any productive human being could ONLY resist predatory human beings by being able to be MORE PREDATORY. If any group of productive human beings were to develop to resist the predatory parasites, they would have to also specialize to become even better predatory parasites, in order to effectively respond to others who where threats because those others were predatory parasites. That was always the history of War Lords. The only real choices that people had were to support their own local War Lords, or else be conquered by some other War Lords.
This is pure nonsense! Except, of course, if you re-define enough words to mean some special personal perversion of a meaning, then you can justify any statement whatsoever.
For example, to defend oneself is NOT PREDATORY. Only psychotic statists (including you) would claim self-defense is predatory! But that is absurd. To defend yourself and your stuff is not an act of destruction, it is an act of preservation. If you understand double-negatives, you can work this out easily. To destroy destroyers is not being predatory... those who defend themselves are not out to steal from the predators, but to retain their own lives and property. That is NOT PREDATORY. And only a psychotic statist would claim it is, which makes you yet another psychotic predator (not surprising given you want to control the death controls).
You keep repeating your damn "restricted context" sound-bites. And I'm getting tired pointing them out for everyone again and again and again. One of them in the above paragraph of yours is the term "resist". As I keep pointing out, there are more ways than "resist" and "fight" to deal with predators. But you just KEEP PRETENDING that this is the only way. It isn't. And humans have been figuring this out in droves throughout all of history. You want to pretend that is not true, and that requires you to stick your head deep into the sand and pretend you didn't read endless cases of people like me pointing out your artificially limited vision and context.
You will never convince us to accept your limited premises. NO WAY.
We have more options, and they are better options.
PS: When I refute your absolutist claims, that doesn't mean the alternatives are gonna happen! We agree humans are currently too stupid and meek to carry out some of the alternatives that I mentioned. But when you say "xxx cannot happen", that means "xxx CANNOT happen", not "xxx isn't likely to happen any time soon". You should know this, because this is precisely YOUR justification for wasting your entire life on an ADMITTEDLY futile approach.
The problem with claiming "xxx cannot happen" or "xxx is impossible" is... you cut off approaches before you even explore them. Even if you are correct that "xxx cannot happen", by cutting off endless alternatives at the get-go, you never notice the variations you might encounter if you considered them a bit.
-----
honestann, you continue to indulge in grossly over-simplified false fundamental dichotomies, and therefore, promote bogus solutions based on the impossible ideals derived from those false fundamental dichotomies. On a more profoundly philosophical level, you refuse to recognize that all living beings necessarily operate as entropic pumpbs of energy. Therefore, human beings and civilizations necessarily must operate as organized lies operating robberies.
Total nonsense again. To be sure, you can correctly characterize my approaches as grossly-oversimplified and impractical... IF... I claimed "these are political solutions" or "these can be applied to entire nations".
BUT I DON'T.
In fact, over and over and over and over and over and over again I state explicitly to you that my solutions ARE NOT political solutions and DO NOT apply to entire nations.
You're just being a total freaking LIAR when you repeat these stupid responses to what I say, because I have made UTTERLY CLEAR DOZENS OF TIMES these distinctions. But since YOU are ONLY interested in "political solutions" for "entire nations"... you don't just say, "well, honestann, I personally want to find political solutions for entire nations".
No, YOU JUST LIE. ENDLESSLY.
And you make yourself look totally stupid and blatantly disingenuous to everyone with half a brain.
BTW, the universe has net zero entropy. Plus, to point at "entropy" with regard to a system like the earth is just completely insane. Why? Many reasons, but just for one, the energy spewing out of the sun, and the heat energy of the earth itself will just go to waste if we don't do something productive with it. Virtually every argument based upon entropy or anything like entropy are utterly insane.
-----
More basically speaking, human animals are NOT productive. Ironically, honestann, you have adopted the biggest bullies' bullshit world view, that there is some fundamental dichotomy between productive people versus predatory people. You are deliberately ignoring the empirical observations regarding the Second Law of Thermodynamics, as well as presuming that your views are not totally BACKWARDS.
Human beings NEVER "produce" anything! They only transform energy from their environment, in ways which increase the overall entropy. All human beings are FUNDAMENTALLY PREDATORY. As soon as one perceives human beings as separated from their environment, then across the boundaries defined by that SUBTRACTION, they necessarily live as ROBBERS.
You truly are beyond psychotic, and beyond disingenuous!
I have precisely described the nature of production a great many times on ZH. Though it is possible you managed to miss them all, I very seriously doubt it. Furthermore, anyone who claims "production is impossible" is a purposeful jerk, because they have to know "production" doesn't mean your insane definition. You simply DEFINE OUT OF EXISTENCE what you prefer does not exist. This does not make those aspects of reality NOT exist, it is just a standard disingenuous device predators love to adopt to be able to CLAIM ABSOLUTELY ANYTHING. And indeed, if you can redefine every concept to something insane, you CAN create a basis to claim absolutely anything.
If you want to figure out what "produce" means, just read all my messages from the past 2 or 3 days and you will definitely find what "produce" means. By your INSANE definition of "produce", even transforming matter into energy and energy into matter does not qualify as "produce". Nothing CAN qualify as produce given your purposely insane psychotic definition. Which you love, because you ARE a human predator, and approach everything just like other human predators.
If you want a hint at how utterly misguided you (and endless millions of other human fools) are, consider the following. A huge expanse of empty space, perhaps somewhere equidistant from all nearby galaxies. Assume there is an ultra low-density cloud of hydrogen atoms floating around, in COMPLETE DISORDER, at NEAR ABSOLUTE ZERO. You could not find or imagine a more perfect instance of "entropy". ZERO available energy. UTTER disorder.
What happens here in time?
Wherever is the center of mass of that cloud of gas has net attraction to every atom in that cloud. All atoms in the cloud will gradually start moving towards that center. After a few million years, the atoms will be racing towards that center of mass at high velocities as the attraction continually becomes greater. Eventually the cloud of hydrogen atoms will become so small and dense that... nuclear fusion will begin and a new star is born.
In case you haven't noticed, a star is near spherical and in many respects VERY ORDERED. The star also has ASTRONOMICAL quantities of available energy.
THIS IS THE UNIVERSE WE LIVE IN.
To be sure, in selected subsets of the universe, entropy flows the opposite direction. And net-net, it appears almost certain entropy is zero overall.
Which means, your entire entropy argument is BS and contradictory to the fundamental nature of reality. Not only that, since entropy IS net-net zero, this means that no matter how much energy humans suck from the sun, or the geology deep beneath the earth surface, or from fissionable materials in earth, or from fusion they create on earth, or anyhow or anywhere else in the universe... no less available energy exists net-net.
To be sure, endless frauds who call themselves "scientists" try to back up the UN, AGW, USSA lies about all sorts of things, and they'll tell you anything about "entropy" and anything else that will support the predators-that-be.
And you suck it right up, without thinking about reality, because you think you can fool most of the people, most of the time. But you should have realized by now, I'm not "most of the people".
And by the way, to call humans "predatory" because they "squeeze copper from rocks" is so disgusting that you truly belong in a cage or grave along with the rest of the NWO frauds!
-----
I stand by the view that human beings are political animals.
Just because most morons today have been suckered by predator-controlled parents, teachers and so-called [news] celebrities into paying lots of attention to "politics" does NOT mean "humans must live that way" or "humans are inherently political".
That most humans have "dark hair" does NOT mean "humans are inherently dark hair animals". GROW THE FRACK UP! And please, stop being so unbelievably and transparently disingenuous! IT DOESN'T WORK (unless your goal is to make yourself look like a complete imbecile).
-----
However, the fundamental facts are that all human beings are basically animals, whose niches are primarily being predatory parasites. You do not get that, because you want to promote your own bullshit world view, which is ironically a lot like the bullshit that the bullies promoted for their own ulterior purposes.
AGAIN, you try to convince me you haven't read messages of mine that I know you have read (because you replied-to and/or referred-to them). I have, a great many times, stated that "all other animals are necessarily predators, because they don't know better". The don't know what "produce" even means, which clearly puts YOU in the category of ANIMAL BEAST, because you claim "produce" is inherently impossible (thus proving you too have no other alternative).
Further, I have stated endless times in ZH that the most fundamental story of mankind is the bifurcation of humans into predators and producers.
And then in your self-deluded stupor pretend that I don't know what I've already written about dozens of times in ZH. I am the one who pointed these things out in the first place, yet you in your delusional state imagine I won't catch your blatant and clearly purposeful LIES. You know, what you say about the predators EXACTLY applies to you. You seek to be the biggest, baddest liar of all time, probably because you imagine that is the way to get your grubby paws on the "death controls". As you've said endless times, but biggest frauds are those who dominate the death controls.
You are so sick! You need help. Lots of help.
The answer is clear. Some humans are predators. Other humans are producers. And the FACT of the matter is, the natural processes of the earth environment generate only about 0.01% as much goods as required to keep the current population alive. Which means, at least 99.99% of human beings DEPEND UPON human producers for their very existence. But... you say there is no such thing as "production", so obviously 99.99% of the "apparent humans" walking around today are just motorized mannequins or something.
What nonsense!
Oh, and the motivation of human predators is clear! Human predators want the goods and goodies they need to survive, and want to be happy and comfortable... WITHOUT ANY NEED TO BE PRODUCTIVE THEMSELVES.
Duh!
In your theory of reality, production is IMPOSSIBLE, and thus THEFT IS THE ONLY WAY TO SURVIVE. If that was true, you would inherently have nothing to complain about, since everyone is the same (a predator), and science does not give you or anyone else any ability to produce anything anyway... and is thus worthless (except to destroy). Which is what you want to do, once you get your hands on the "death controls".
-----
I do not believe in any contradictions. But you do. Lots of them.
-----
Your solutions are for you to be the ultimate Black Sheeple, who is able to escape far enough from the herd in your life time to no longer have to worry about the problems that the herd has.
And boy do you make obvious that my approach is utterly appropriate. Quite probably better than I ever could. Let me be clear how right you are, okay?
WILLFUL MORONS ARE NOT WORTH SAVING.
The vast, vast, vast majority of humans deserve to die.
And so, I will let them. I have better things to do! Plus helping them would only spread disease across the solar-system. Since I refuse to be intentionally evil, I would not want to do that.
To the herd: GOOD RIDDENS!
The herd suffers from a terminal case of "the fatal flaw in human consciousness". I would help them, but the nature of that flaw is such that... they don't want to hear anything true, and they can't handle the truth.
So screw them!
-----
Metaphorically speaking, ALL human beings are wolves.
And so, there you see --- YOU AGREE WITH ME! Humans are not worth saving, because they're just a pack of wolves.
You really should think about what you write so you don't contradict yourself so frequently and obviously! Sheesh! Too easy, like shooting sitting ducks.
You claim that I am not being scientific! Then you turn around and tell me I should teach a brainless culture of clueless organisms in a petri dish how to think, how to live the easy life, how to be immortal, how to be self-sufficient, how to travel the universe.
Do you understand how hilariously stupid that is? Hahaha!
-----
While you and I mostly agree upon the empirical observations regarding how the established social pyramid systems are getting extremely unbalanced, to a degree that may result in the human species committing collective suicide, you misunderstand the mechanisms of that BACKWARDS, and therefore, your "solutions" are all deficient.
Though I know you must be joking, and being purposely disingenuous, I'll give you a serious, on-point answer to the above... just in case you really don't see how completely ludicrous your comments are. Okay, ready?
If you are swimming around in a tank of hungry piranha, you have NO CHANCE to create a better future, or a better system, or a better anything. If you are almost unbelievably lucky, you might survive for a while.
If ANYONE is to make the kind of advances necessary to avoid the wholesale destruction of the human species, they must separate themselves from what you might call "regions of extremely intense and chaotic entropy".
That is a primary feature of my approach. Neither you nor I nor ANYONE ELSE has been able to make even a tiny dent in the spiral of humanity down the freaking toilet. Have you not wondered about that? Have you not asked yourself whether any way exists to get around this problem?
If you had, you might have realized what I realized... that to make any significant progress REQUIRES getting the hell out of that tank of piranha.
If you have ANY honest sympathy at all for my approach, my guess is, it must be a subconscious recognition of exactly this very obvious fact.
In other words, no matter how much you hate my approach... it is the only approach that has ANY chance whatsoever. So even if you have personal hate for my approach, you should pinch your nose shut and adopt it anyway. Not because you like it, but because it is the only hope anyone has!
-----
When people take civilization to the frontiers, they recreate all the same problems there again.
It depends on who "they" are. Mostly "they" are imports from "the old country", and they come once producers establish a certain level of comfort in the frontier. The predators mostly SHOW UP AND TAKE OVER. I'm sure a few of the individualists in the frontier go bad... but mostly it won't be them, but their kids and the invading predator-class.
-----
I continue to promote a consistent set of intellectual scientific revolutions, which generate solutions based on the view which can be metaphorically expresses as being "everyone should become better wolves," while you promote the view that "everyone should become better sheeple," and also that the only way to do that is to avoid those people who most obviously behave like wolves.
You just can't help yourself, can you? What a liar, you have to be a blatant purposeful liar to so utterly misrepresent my position.
I have said more consistently than ANYONE in ZH messages that the #1 reason humans are finished is... because they do NOT shoot human predators dead. I have said this endless times. I have said "humans are finished" BECAUSE they are sheep a million times here in ZH, and I know you have read this many, many, many, many times.
And so, for you to characterize my attitudes with "sheep" is preposterous. Furthermore, no "sheep" would move 15,000km and set up self-sufficient digs in the boonies.
No, I do NOT say "everyone should be sheeple". I have said endless time that "everyone exterminate human predators immediately, or as soon as the risk is low". What I've said a million times is... because humans DO behave like sheeple, and nobody can successfully apply that approach individually, I had to find another way. And that way was... to find a solution FOR ME. And individualist solution.
Don't you get tired of spewing outright lies?
-----
I continue to regard it as ironic that you still believe in the basic bullies' bullshit world view.
Another outright lie, based upon other outright lies.
-----
You are still living like a predatory parasite.
Hahaha. What can anyone do but laugh. The girl who moved to the extreme boonies, designed and set-up my own self-sufficient digs, who produces 100% of everything she needs to survive, who will never need anything produced by other humans... is a predatory parasite!
I can assure you RM, in your desperate attempt to avoid the endless overt falsehoods and contradictions you have uttered, you have exposed yourself as completely off your rocker, and willing to fabricate some of the most absurd statements to grace the [often rather crazy] threads at ZH.
You deserve some kind of prize!
On behalf of all sustainable agriculturalists,living at the bottom end of no-exit roads , in n.z., somewhere down in the Southern Ocean- humble thanks to you HonestAnn.
Fight mvthrfvking Club, ladies and gentlemen. K.O.
An olide but a goodie:
Skateboarder's Corollary: There are only two types of people: those who believe other people are their property, and those who don't. Everything else is derived from this.
--
A human iis born, it lives, and it dies. Sometimes it may ask, "what am I going to do with the time that is given to me?", like Gandalf would. In my case, I tend to curse and waste more time when time is wasted, among other useful things of course. Regardless, whether you are believer of the 'death controls' skool of taut and are an older 'intellectual' associated with the rest of the people, you are a younger self-sufficient outlier not associated with the rest of the people, you are subject to a decision on the above corollary and are ultimately responsible for acting wisely with the time that is given to you. Good luck to all - it's a crazy world out there!
Blut Aus Nord - Sons of Wisdom Master of Elements
Clearly, honestann, we do not agree upon the fundamental facts regarding physical processes, and therefore, it is quite impossible to agree upon any political science.
The dominant language that we use has created a false fundamental dichotomy between production versus destruction, whereas the paradoxical relationship that those have is that the production of destruction controls production. There is nothing but the flow of the same energy, through different forms.
Again, honestann, you are merely rationalizing:
Actually, if you "defend yourself and your stuff" by killing somebody else then you are merely promoting your reasons for doing that are O.K., which is the same as what governments are always doing all the time. The paradoxical problems regarding "self-defense" become that those tend to become simply excuses to engage in the production of destruction, in order to try to control future production.
I do NOT assert that "humans are not worth saving, because they're just a pack of wolves." Rather, I assert that human beings would be better served by acknowledging the basic facts of life regarding themselves, rather than relying upon the paradoxical bullshit that was promoted by the biggest bullies, in order to persuade the majority of people to become Zombie Sheeple.
Wolves, and every other possible combination of RELATIVE predatory parasites, fulfill roles within entire ecological systems, in order to balance those out, within the limits of the overall environment. Human beings should develop to do that better. However, the dominate world views are those promoted by the "wolves in sheep's clothing," which have developed their controlled opposition groups, so that the majority of people get brainwashed into becoming Zombie Sheeple, who believe in the variety of false fundamental dichotomies and related impossible ideals, which is what you also promote, as one of the old-fashioned kinds of reactionary revolutionaries, or Black Sheeple.
You are not making any attempt to reconcile politics with physics. Rather, you tend to prefer to deliberately ignore the basic laws of thermodynamics, which also apply to plants, as well as to animals, including human beings.
Plants do NOT "produce" anything either. No living things ever produce any energy out of nothing, and none ever cause energy to disappear to nothing. All living things are fires, that need fuel from their environment to keep living. All living things, by definition, can reproduce, which means spark new living fires, that then need to burn more fuel, which always has the potential to grow exponentially. NO environment can sustain that for long. Instead, various ecologies evolve, in which the primary "producers" like plants are regulated by the secondary "producers" like animals.
Human civilizations are doing similar things, but they include their increasingly important new media of brains, or neural networks, and the information flowing through those, which repeat in that way the patterns previous found through the media of DNA have been doing before that. There is no getting selection for nothing. Information is another form of energy. Human artificial selection systems are continuous with natural selection systems.
Meanwhile, honestann, you like to adhere to your favourite false fundamental dichotomies, so that those can justify your behaviors. That is what everyone else is also doing. All human beings are basically entropic pumps of energy flows, while the paradox is that the biggest bullies' bullshit has inverted the meaning of entropy, which was consistent with them inverting the meaning of everything else, so that they could be "wolves in sheep's clothing," that could condition other people to become Zombie Sheeple, that could be thereby more easily controlled and exploited.
Mainstream economics loves to pretend that is is all about "production" ... while it deliberately ignores the ways that the production of destruction controls production. You are indulging in the same bullshit, with your false fundamental dichotomy between the people who are predatory parasites versus the people who are productive prey. Furthermore, you are quite typical in that, after you posit that false fundamental dichotomy, you want to establish spurious unity by going to the wrong pole, i.e., everyone should be good producers, while nobody should be bad parasites.
However, you are perceiving everything totally BACKWARDS, since the only things that actually exist are entropic pumps of energy flows from the environment, which loop back through to the environment. There is no ultimate production nor destruction, there is only transformation of the same energy. The same energy flows through both the relatively more productive, and the relatively more predatory. The so-called "productive" are still NOT actually producing anything. They are ONLY transforming, the same as the predators.
Of course, I expect that you are too attached to your world view to be willing and able to attempt to make your political opinions more consistent with physical science. That is why our politics is so terminally screwed up, that practically everyone else is doing that same thing. Every predator justifies their own predation as something that they have some "right" to do, because they regard themselves as acting in "self-defense." However, what has actually happened is that those who were the best at being dishonest and backing that up with violence were the ones who made and maintained the civilization that we are living within, and those were the ones who made and maintained the dominant natural languages and philosophy of science, which people like you, honestann, continue to want to take for granted.
There is nobody who can stop the basic laws of physics from operating, and perhaps those too do evolve over a much longer period of time. However, at the present time, civilization is necessarily a special case of the laws of thermodynamics and information theory playing through. The magnitude of the problems that we have now, and why those are getting worse, is related to the basic increase in entropy. However, it is also related to the ways that the current conception of entropy is backwards, because an arbitrary minus sign was inserted into the entropy equations of thermodynamics and information theory, so that would be consistent with the biggest bullies' backwards world view.
I REPEAT:
There is NO fundamental dichotomy between predatory parasites and their productive prey. The genuine unity is that they are ALL predatory parasites. The mistaken, spurious unity is that they should all become good producers, while there are no more predators. The realistic ways to get better dynamic equilibria are to face the facts about what is really happening. The actual mechanisms are ALL entropic pumps of energy flows. Those are what can evolve ecologies to balance those rates of transformation, and that is what does happen, and did happen, over and over again throughout the evolution of life.
Theoretically, that is what should happen with the technological civilization created by human beings. They should develop more scientifically valid understanding of themselves, expressed as better balanced rates of transformation, in which the death control systems are the most crucial components. Human beings, even after being astronomically amplified by developing a technological civilization, could theoretically develop better integrated human, industrial and natural ecologies, BUT, NOT while they continue to believe in the backward bullshit promoted by the biggest bullies.
You are actually still doing that, honestann. Of course, you do not get that, and I doubt that you ever will ... You persist in relying upon DUALITIES, rather than start to use more UNITARY MECHANISMS. The problems that human beings face are that there has been real progress in physical science, but barely any in political science, for the main reasons that politics is totally drowning in the biggest bullies' bullshit world view, and that has included ways in which that has inverted and perverted the historical development of the philosophy of science.
Meanwhile, honestann, you continue to be STUCK with taking various DUALITIES for granted, as being absolute, and therefore, you tend to promote bogus "solutions" which are backward, the same as the vast variety of other Black Sheeple, reactionary revolutionaries.
MEANWHILE, I REPEAT, I DO NOT SAY "humans are not worth saving, because they're just a pack of wolves."
What I say is that human beings should face those facts about themselves, so that they can develop to become better wolves! Most of our political problems are due to the ways that the "wolves in sheep's clothing" have been able to persuade the vast majority of Zombie Sheeple to bleat their morality, which is also the morality promoted by the controlled opposition, the Black Sheeple, or reactionary revolutionaries, of which you are one, honestann.
You persist in wanting to continue to understand everything in the most backward ways possible, and therefore, promote the same old-fashioned bogus "solutions" based on impossible ideals, that will continue to cause the opposite to happen in the real world. ONLY human beings that accepted more of the radical truths about themselves could develop better dynamic equilibria between their different systems of organized lies operating robberies.
Governments that recognized and admitted that they were necessarily the biggest form of organized crime, and could not actually be anything else, could provide better government, since that would only be possible if enough of the people understood and agreed with that radical truth as necessarily being the case. However, governments that continue to get away with promoting the false fundamental dichotomies between them versus other forms of organized crime will continue to drive things to get more and more unbalanced.
In that context, honestann, you do NOT provide any genuine political solutions. You actually make things worse, by being yet another of the adamant reactionary revolutionaries, who would be able to justify their own "self-defense" without admitting that was the same as everyone's ... which is how the history of human conflict developed through warfare, and made the civilization that we are currently living inside of now:
Globalized electronic monkey money frauds, backed by the threat of force from apes with atomic bombs, while those people doing that deliberately ignore the profound paradigm shifts that have been made by progress in physical science, which they do NOT apply to political science.
Basically, you are doing that too, honestann. You continue to be light years away from making even a tentative effort to reconcile physics and biology with politics. Rather you are content to continue to use the same old-fashioned false fundamental dichotomies, and therefore, go to the wrong pole, by saying that those which actually do not exist are the "good guys," while the bad that must exist, you prefer did not.
Of course, there are the deeper reasons, when multiplied by millions and billions of times, why the current human problems are spinning so seriously out of human control. Almost everybody wants to believe that they are the "good guys" while some others are the "bad guys." Meanwhile, there has not been enough time to develop better politics to reconcile with the progress made in physics, while the vast majority of people are not even yet barely interested in doing that, rather than interested in repeating their own favourite old-fashioned religions and ideologies, which is what I regard you as doing, honestann.
Clearly, honestann, we do not agree upon the fundamental facts regarding physical processes, and therefore, it is quite impossible to agree upon any political science.
I feel genuinely bad for people who assume and adopt bogus ideas and theories mainstream "scientists" popularize as true and fundamental, then construct their own complex theories, approaches and behaviors around those bogus ideas and theories. This is indeed very sad (no sarcasm). While I can expose many popular scientific frauds (like I exposed "entropy" in my last message), that won't help the 99.999999% who assume that "within their fields (if not elsewhere), what official authorities say can be trusted and adopted". Not today! And probably not ever... especially from any so-called "official authority".
To anyone reading this, I only wish to point out that ONE mistake accepting ONE false idea, concept or theory can lead one down a wrong path forever more. Note sure how central the common "entropy interpretation falsehood" error was for RM, but bogus understanding and application of "entropy" has led a great many scientific and other thinkers down the tubes, and led them to endless false conclusions.
-----
... the paradoxical relationship that those (destruction and production) have is that the production of destruction controls production. There is nothing but the flow of the same energy, through different forms.
Translated into english, this means "since production and destruction both require actions be taken to initiate if not maintain them, no distinction between destruction and production is appropriate". Which is precisely what the neo-cons would love us all to believe, to enrich them and their military-industrial-complex friends.
By such approaches, modern "philosophers" attempt to destroy the ability of sentient beings from understanding the wholesale ruthless atrocities they advocate and practice upon their prey... their prey being honest, ethical, productive, benevolent sentient beings.
If one can convince prey that "destruction and production are the same... just flows of energy hither and yon... then any action they take cannot possibly be any worse than the most kind, helpful, productive action any of their prey takes.
Not only that... but because the predators understand this, and their foolish prey do not, they the predators must rule. This is a modern variant of the platonic "philosopher king" idea.
In every grand scam, in every huge lie, there is a grain or two of truth. In this case, the truth is the "fundamental conservation principle", which essentially points out that "the configuration of the fundamental field can change, but the fundamental field itself is conserved". That's true.
That configuration of the fundamental field that we call "matter or mass" can change (be changed) into a different configuration of the fundamental field that we call "energy". And vice versa. And those configurations of the fundamental field that we call "protons", "neutrons", "electrons" can change from what we call "one atomic element" to "another atomic element". And the configuration those "atomic elements" can change from one of millions of different molecules into millions of other molecules (atom configurations).
All true.
This does NOT MEAN that no distinctions are possible between the various configurations... in specific contexts or for various purposes. To even attempt to claim that fundamentally (or contextually) the only fact that matters is... it is all just changes of configuration of the fundamental field (flows of energy) REQUIRES he who uttered this to SHUT THEIR MOUTH FOREVER. Because their theory claims no action is of any significance, because they are all just energy flows, including all the mouth movements and finger-on-keyboard movements they might wish to perform. All who adopt such stances (and there are millions if not billions) inherently deny everything they say has any significance whatsoever. But they don't mind blatant contradictions, so they ignore their own conclusions and slog on anyway, polluting the universe as they go.
The FACT is, a sentient mind CAN and do look at this "whole" and recognize, identify and explore a great many "subsystems" and finer-grain contexts. And doing so does not contradict anything... they are recognized as subsystems and/or finer-contexts in the whole.
For example, I have clearly and repeatedly pointed out that "predators have and live-by a modus-operandi while producers have and live-by an ethics. This is a very real, and very important difference between the world (and theory) of human predators and human producers. One might even call this a dichotomy.
By their nature, the predator modus-operandi is roughly, "get away with whatever we want to and think we can".
By their nature, the producer ethics is roughly, "individuals who take actions should enjoy/bare/suffer 100% of the consequences of their actions, and 0% of the consequences of the actions of others".
These different strategies and behaviors are very real aspects of reality. True enough, the both involve "energy flows" and "changes in the configuration of the fundamental field". Absolutely true, and absolutely unavoidable.
That does NOT mean they are identical, the same, indistinguishable or arbitrary (in many contexts crucial to the survival and well-being of sentient beings).
They are NOT identical. The are NOT the same. They are NOT indistinguishable. And they are NOT arbitrary for pre-sentient beings or post-sentient beings. No matter how many human predators claim they are.
-----
Actually, if you "defend yourself and your stuff" by killing somebody else then you are merely promoting your reasons for doing that are O.K., which is the same as what governments are always doing all the time.
Consider the previous section when you read the above RM statement. Do you see how RM perfectly made my point? Look what RM does. He says, quite correctly, that "honestann justifies her positions, and predators-DBA-governments justify their positions".
That is true.
Does that mean, "everyone who has a position and justifies their position is therefore... equally valid, equally correct, equally legitimate, equally productive, equally destructive, equally benevolent, equally malevolent... or equally anything else?
NO.
RM plays one of the standard predator deceit games. Which is, to find one similarity (of any kind), and then assert "so you're no different or better than us".
This is insane. This is disgusting. This is far below any of us here in this forum.
Note that since RM already claimed "everything is just energy flow", he has by means of his logic claimed that "absolutely everything is just the same as absolutely everything else".
This IS the nature of predators. This is a claim that "no matter what anyone does, and no matter what anyone else does... nobody else can possibly be different or better than us predators".
That's one purpose of this approach. Within this infinitesimally narrow and absurd domain of rationalization, they find a way to attempt to refute everything they wish. Doesn't matter what, doesn't matter from whom, doesn't matter how relevant, doesn't matter how important. All that matters is, "our maximum deceit is just as good as anything you can come up with, because everything is the same (an energy flow)".
The problem is, most humans have not done very much self-conscious thought about the nature of consciousness and the valid operation thereof. Plus, they've had bogus mental-units (and bogus connections of mental-units) jammed into their brains since the moment of birth (if not before). And so, a huge majority of humans have no freaking idea how insane babble like this is, or know how to compare this kind of nonsense with valid observation and thought. Which is why humans are finished.
-----
I assert that human beings would be better served by acknowledging the basic facts of life regarding themselves, rather than relying upon the paradoxical bullshit that was promoted by the biggest bullies, in order to persuade the majority of people to become Zombie Sheeple.
I agree. Except if they accept your false premises and arguments, they might as well outright, directly and willingly feed themselves to human predators. Because the human predators have precisely the right ideas and right approach, as certified by RM.
BTW, I didn't say that to be offensive or create spin... this is precisely what RM says. RM says the predators-that-be are in their position precisely because they are the biggest liars and the biggest destroyers. RM further claims that the successful way forward is to become the biggest liars and destroyers.
The only difference is, RM wants to be in control of the lies and death controls, rather than hitler or hitlery. All I can say is... your lies and death controls will never find me! But don't worry, you and your ilk have plenty of destruction to keep you busy on the other 7-billion woulda-coulda-shoulda-been humans.
-----
Wolves, and every other possible combination of RELATIVE predatory parasites, fulfill roles within entire ecological systems, in order to balance those out, within the limits of the overall environment.
Just listen to this propaganda!!! RM may be ahead of his time! The predators-that-be are just starting to say outright "we are predators, we are in charge, you are our prey, and you better do what we say, and applaud our actions, or we will kill you right now rather than drain you slowly over a lifetime".
Yes, the predators-that-be are just finally getting that direct and brazen... but RM is already there! RM repeats endlessly... humanity NEEDS us predators. We are indispensable. The entire human environment would totally collapse without the endless egregious predatory destruction we practice on our prey.
This is PRECISELY what governments tells everyone 24/7 via their mainstream media!
##### YOU NEED US #####
And because sheeple are too stupid to understand they DO NOT benefit-from, much less NEED others stealing from them and assaulting them... they comply.
And some folks here in ZH wonder why I am high on human potential, but super-low on human actuality? Well, this is a good example.
-----
You are not making any attempt to reconcile politics with physics. Rather, you tend to prefer to deliberately ignore the basic laws of thermodynamics, which also apply to plants, as well as to animals, including human beings.
More blatant boldface lies.
I can reconcile physics with politics in one sentence. Producers, apply every bit of science you can understand to the extermination of all politics. There... totally reconciled. But I've said that thousands of times already, so to claim I do not make any attempt to reconcile is a transparent lie.
Then you claim "I deliberately ignore the basic laws of thermodynamics, which also apply to plants and animals, including humans".
I just finished describing the nature of thermodynamics (especially "entropy")!!! To claim "I deliberately ignore" what I just clearly if briefly described (including a very brain-opening example for anyone who choose to listen and reflect) is another blatant boldface lie. And a pretty stupid one too, seeing as how others can read this thread and see how grossly and intentionally you lie.
But also, I went into even further detail about this topic. I said that the universe has zero net-net entropy, and I gave that example of how the most massive processes in reality have NEGATIVE entropy. And I also stated that yes, in other contexts (other natural processes) entropy is POSITIVE. Otherwise I could not claim entropy is zero net-net... which I did claim.
However, I added an additional, extremely relevant fact. And that is... the earth is not a closed system, and all that energy from the sun (and the available energy of geological heat within earth itself)... would be ENTIRELY WASTED if not consumed for useful (in the context of human live, comfort and prosperity).
YOU IGNORE ALL OF THAT.
YOU REFUSE TO EXPLAIN WHY MY EXAMPLE IS FALSE.
If you cannot learn, you cannot progress. Clearly you have purposefully refused to consider any comment from me or other that might influence what you imagine to be the "magnificent intellectual construct" that you constructed in your brain. You are sooooo in love with that construct, you 100% of the time refuse to examine any comment that upsets your construct... whether that comment seems right, likely, plausible, possible or otherwise.
You have turned yourself into a parrot.
-----
Plants do NOT "produce" anything either. No living things ever produce any energy out of nothing, and none ever cause energy to disappear to nothing. All living things are fires, that need fuel from their environment to keep living. All living things, by definition, can reproduce, which means spark new living fires, that then need to burn more fuel, which always has the potential to grow exponentially. NO environment can sustain that for long. Instead, various ecologies evolve, in which the primary "producers" like plants are regulated by the secondary "producers" like animals.
I am the strongest advocate of the idea that "nothing comes from nothing", and "nothing CAN come from nothing". I advocate this as a fundamental premise of every other idea I hold. If I ever find out this is wrong, then the nature of reality TRULY IS "anything goes", and... well... then "anything goes" and valid science is inherently and fundamentally IMPOSSIBLE.
I chose this as a central premise after honestly considering everything I have seen. I have never seen even one iota of evidence that the fundamental field just "pops into existence" or "vanishes from existence". Because all "things" that we can observe or identify or characterize are "configurations of the fundamental field", those configurations of the fundamental field CAN come to exist... and later cease to exist.
So that part of what you said, I agree with... more than you do in fact.
HOWEVER...
Just as "certain processes" ARE "consciousness", also "certain processes" ARE "living". So what?
Note that you can "burn wood" to generate easy-to-tap available energy, but yes, "burning" is not one of those processes we consider "living". Notwithstanding your formulation "all living things are fires".
You claim "no environment can support consumption of energy for long".
THIS IS UTTERLY FALSE.
I demonstrated why this is inherently and astronomically false with my example of why "entropy is net-net zero". After ALL things are considered, at ALL scales from the femptoscopic to universal, the quantity of energy available is CONSTANT.
You just HATE that, because it blows one of the key pillars you (and many other predators) love to quote out from under your predatory propaganda.
HOWEVER... not to worry. Because I have to say, "that doesn't matter", and "my points of view do not depend upon this understanding".
Let me put it this way. If your view of entropy was correct, and sentient beings were to wander from star-system to star-system to star-system for the next 100,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 years to bask in the spew of available energy, and consume that energy for no other purpose than "enjoy a decadent life"...
... then that is WONDERFUL.
Because what's the alternative? I'll tell you the alternative. The universe had no freaking point whatsoever, does not now have any freaking point, and will never have any freaking point.
Which leads us right back again to the conclusion...
TO ALL DUDES and DUDETTES... LET'S PARTY
After all, why not.
NOTHING you predators do will stop the stars from shining, moron!
So if you're right about entropy, my conclusions are correct. And if I'm right about entropy, my conclusions are correct.
So... what's the argument? YOU LOSE EITHER WAY.
Furthermore, if you really believed what you say, you would spend 100% of your time working on technologies to get human beings TO those zillion other stars, not sit around and play pico-gods with your fellow doomed organisms in this one teenie, tiny little picoscopic petri dish.
-----
Human artificial selection systems are continuous with natural selection systems.
Yes they are. Which is why we created the next step (smarter-than human inorganic consciousness), and are working on creating a practical (faster-than-human) implementation, and why we figured out the next step, which is how we can transfer our own identity and consciousness into our inorganic consciousness, and thereby be immortal (survive literally forever).
Yet you say...
-----
Meanwhile, honestann, you like to adhere to your favorite false fundamental dichotomies, so that those can justify your behaviors.
That's funny! We do more than anyone else in history to take advantage of the fact that "human artificial selection systems are continuous with natural selection systems"... and yet you claim we're just jerking off.
Make up your mind!
You see, you generate the most amazing (and hilarious) self-contradictions in the process of trying to rationalize what you want to be, that... well... it must be embarrassing when I point them out!
Frankly, we don't rationalize anything. That's the way YOU WORK, as do a huge majority of human beings. We are HAPPY to go wherever reality leads us. ANYTHING we learn about the nature of reality is FAIR GAME to us. We are happy to take advantage of ANYTHING we learn to be true. ANYTHING. We hold no specific ideas or notions sacred, we only want to understand reality so we are best able to apply our understanding to get what we want!
And what we WANT is NOT TO LOOK GOOD. We are hermits. I'm almost the only one of us who ever says anything in public... and soon I will stop too. He who rationalizes cares about what others think of them. I don't care what you or others think of me. You don't even know me, just some text I've written. And I will never seek anything from any of you either, because I don't need it, and don't want it. And so, rationalization has no purpose for me... it would only hold me back.
So if you want to see super-saturated rationalization, read your own messages!
YOU WANT TO RULE. AND YOU RATIONALIZE WHY YOU SHOULD.
Because deep down, you know you shouldn't. And won't.
-----
All human beings are basically entropic pumps of energy flows, while the paradox is that the biggest bullies' bullshit has inverted the meaning of entropy, which was consistent with them inverting the meaning of everything else, so that they could be "wolves in sheep's clothing," that could condition other people to become Zombie Sheeple, that could be thereby more easily controlled and exploited.
Total BS. The predators-that-be promote YOUR view of entropy. That's their justification for endless atrocities, including the entire AGW scam.
Furthermore, you TOTALLY IGNORE the fact that I agree about the nature of entropy in closed systems. Furthermore, you TOTALLY IGNORE the fact that I even admit that humans are grossly irresponsible with their environment!
So I don't rationalize the true nature of entropy on the scale of the universe to justify polluting air or water or land... just the opposite.
BUT YOU ABSOLUTELY PERFORM RATIONALIZATION BASED UPON ENTROPY by utterly ignoring the nature of reality, and ignoring the fact that man learned to travel to other bodies in outer space nearly half a freaking century ago! The point being, assuming the earth environment is problematic for mankind... mankind can do something about that! So go freaking advocate this rather than RATIONALIZE why humans must remain in this one tiny cage, controlled by the worst predators the universe has ever known.
To advocate that when you understand the problem is UNFORGIVABLE.
-----
There is no ultimate production nor destruction, there is only transformation of the same energy.
So what? I am not an "energy being" (StarTrek notwithstanding), and I'd be shocked if there is such a thing (sentient life composed of 100% energy and 0% matter).
So if you wish, you can call me a "matter discriminator" if you want. But such terms are worse than absurd, so I won't even bother taking this insane line of rationalization further here.
-----
However, at the present time, civilization is necessarily a special case of the laws of thermodynamics and information theory playing through.
Thank you! Oh, but wait. Maybe you mean "special case" in a negative sense (though I don't know exactly where you're standing when you determine this).
Elsewhere, you DESTROY civilization when you equate predators with producers, and claim that "predators are superior, because at least we see the nature of reality, and thus should have total control over the rest of your producers, who are of no use except to keep all us scumbags alive".
-----
The magnitude of the problems that we have now, and why those are getting worse, is related to the basic increase in entropy.
Oh, you mean like "too many predators-destroyers and too few producers-prey"? That's what you should mean, but don't. You support the false predator rationalizations (which you pretend are "theories") at ever step.
Oh, and the sign applied to entropy is irrelevant! Why? Because, as I illustrated, the net-net entropy in the universe is ZERO. That's neither positive or negative.
-----
You are actually still doing that, honestann. Of course, you do not get that, and I doubt that you ever will ... You persist in relying upon DUALITIES, rather than start to use more UNITARY MECHANISMS.
Actually, though I am not guilty of what you claim, you are pointing out an EXTREMELY IMPORTANT POINT that is indeed a HUGE PROBLEM. Unfortunately, it is you who is making the mistake, not me.
Here is the thing. The ONLY effective way a sentient being can understand anything beyond "staring" at his immediate sense-perceptions from moment to moment is... to alternatively (and aggressively so) consider the UNITARY (fundamentals... what applies in every context) and various CONTEXTS (instances... what applies in subsystems or subsets of all contexts).
It seems IMPOSSIBLE for any system to exist and function that can simultaneously consider every last bit of sensation, observation, experience and [internal mental] inferences ALL SIMULTANEOUSLY.
That just can't happen, or at least can't happen with any kind of technology that I can even create a fantasy about (without contradicting what I know).
Which means, the ONLY WAY we can effectively grapple with reality (intellectually and then physically) is by seriously, honestly, carefully trying to recognize and identify what are fundamentals (and their nature and scope)... and then also just as seriously, honestly, carefully trying to recognize and identify as many specific configurations and combinations and permutations as we possibly can in this universe. And even more, we need to figure out as best we can whether each of these configurations, combinations and permutations:
#1: exist... we've observed one or more.
#2: might exist... we don't see why it can't.
#3: is impossible... the nature of reality precludes this.
So yes, I not only rely on DUALITIES, I seek out and rely upon MANYALITIES. But I also spend a HUGE amount of time and effort to recognize and identify and characterize FUNDAMENTALS... which I assume is what you mean by UNITARY mechanisms.
And while we're on this, I can't continue without pointing out the following. You makes these claims about me when you KNOW... because you just read them (probably many times)... you characterize me utterly and totally false ways.
For example, I have said hundreds of times that...
... absolutely everything in reality/universe/existence is configurations of the fundamental field, and changes in those configurations.
Now tell me, whether you agree or not... is that a UNITARY MECHANISM or what?
I'm saying EVERYTHING... EVERYTHING... EVERYTHING is ONE MECHANISM.
NOBODY can make any statement that more constitutes a "unitary mechanism". If you think you can... SHOW US. Make that statement here.
-----
HOWEVER... and this is a HUGE and IMPORTANT however...
We can understand reality and [not-yet-realized] possibility much more completely and thoroughly IF WE ALSO EXAMINE THE MANY EXPRESSIONS OF THAT FUNDAMENTAL UNITY.
We almost have to! Otherwise we'd just repeat the same sentence from the moment we're born to the moment we die. Actually, there would be no point in learning language or speaking if we chose to only observe or consider the "unity mechanism".
The sole and eternal focus on a "unitary mechanism" is the hallmark of authoritarianism.
Which is what you necessarily are given your false premises, whether you choose to recognize this or not. To ignore DUALITIES and MULTIPLICITIES as well as the unity is to ignore most of what is, most of what exists, most of what is real. And further, we can never comprehend the unity until you observe and consider the endless dualities and multiplicities for a long, long, long, long time. If not forever.
So get with the program.
PS: The following is a joke, just to be clear...
Even the supposed ultimate unity (god) is supposedly a trinity!
So give up and smell the roses!
Actually, I don't like roses.
-----
What I say is that human beings should face those facts about themselves, so that they can develop to become better wolves!
Hell, while they're at it, humans might as well become velociraptors.
-----
You persist in wanting to continue to understand everything in the most backward ways possible, and therefore, promote the same old-fashioned bogus "solutions" based on impossible ideals, that will continue to cause the opposite to happen in the real world. ONLY human beings that accepted more of the radical truths about themselves could develop better dynamic equilibria between their different systems of organized lies operating robberies.
I guess you don't even see how you endlessly argue against yourself. You say my solutions are based upon "impossible ideals". Yet you recognize I and a few other individuals can establish niches that avoid the predators. Which means, they're not "impossible". Well, except they ARE at this time impossible as "political approaches" to apply to "entire fictional nations"... at least now and for the foreseeable future. We agree about that much. So my "solution" is only "bogus" in a specific context that you identify and insist upon. Meanwhile, we both agree that for now and the foreseeable future no "political approach" for "entire fictional nations" exists either. Or at least neither of us are smart enough to figure out one. Or more exactly, we see how it could happen, but not given the brain-damaged humans that exist today.
Have you figured out yet where I'm going this this? You DEMAND that we only think about this problem in the context of NO CONTEXT. Or to be more exact, you demand we only think about this problem via a single, pure, UNITARY MECHANISM. If you can't find a solution that is UNITARY == UNIVERSAL... you just yell at me and call me names because I point out certain LIMITED contexts in which we can find solutions.
You REFUSE all limited contexts. Yet you agree that no unitary solution exists now, and quite possibly for the rest of the lifespan of the human race.
That is your choice. And I'd respect that choice if you'd just say so, and wish well to others who decide to consider limited contexts... ADMITTEDLY limited contexts.
What you may not have noticed... but is indirect and implicit many places in your writing... is this. If man spreads into the cosmos, and multiplies... it could very well happen a few decades or centuries (or millennia) from now, that 99.999% of humans (or their inorganic offspring) live in space, and do not have the problems we bemoan due to the nature of outer space, or the nature of behavior in outer space, or some other expected or unexpected reason.
At which point, we have an ALMOST unitary solution. The tiny fraction who remain on earth "deserve what they get". I mean, since when will anyone in any system be able to guarantee more than 99.999% of the population have desired outcomes? Seriously? That's not practical anyway, not even in nightmare totalitarianism
-----
honestann, you do NOT provide any genuine political solutions
I do provide political solutions (exterminate all human predators). I just don't provide any practical political solutions, because of an unfortunate fact we both understand --- humans are sheep, not humans.
If you choose to characterize that as "no genuine political solutions", that's okay with me. Because frankly, I don't give a damn. I'm okay with what I have in mind, even if 99.9999999% of mankind perishes. Oh, not that I wave my hand and consider that trivial, because it hurts me to realize what great things humans woulda-coulda-shoulda do in this glorious reality we live in. And it would have made my life indescribably more enjoyable and efficient too. But in the end, I refuse to be impractical, and I refuse to tell others... even clueless sheeple... what they must do.
Believe me, they don't want to hear what I have to say any more than you.
You really shouldn't worry about me, or others like me. I can PROMISE you... never will more than a tiny fraction of 1% think anything remotely like me. So if all the sweat and tears I see running down the sides of your brain are because you're afraid humans will abandon the pursuit of "political solutions"... well... I can ASSURE you of this. You have nothing to worry about! Nothing!
-----
BTW, you keep yelling at me "you don't provide any political solutions".
And I keep replying, "that's correct, I gave up on political solutions".
Why do you care?
What's the big deal if one or two or a few extreme outliers go their separate ways? Seriously!!! Are you sooooooooo UTTERLY TOTALITARIAN that you simply cannot stand the thought that even one or two or a few are not utterly and totally dominated by YOUR WAY?
Which means, it seems I made a mistake one or two messages ago, when I said your attitude is "my way or the highway". That's not right. You can't stand the thought that anyone gets on that highway and gets out of dodge. 100.00000000000000% of every sentient creature in the entire universe must be dominated by YOUR ONE UNITARY POLITICAL SYSTEM.
You really are, it increasingly seems, the ultimate totalitarian.
Wow!
-----
Globalized electronic monkey money frauds, backed by the threat of force from apes with atomic bombs, while those people doing that deliberately ignore the profound paradigm shifts that have been made by progress in physical science, which they do NOT apply to political science.
I think you might agree with the following response. By the very nature of predators, they worry most about the short term. I'm not sure whether that's because they are concerned with "internal forces" (staying near the top of the heap of predators), or what. But they ignore the profound paradigm shifts they create because they invest most of their time, effort and resources on their next step or two or three, not "the entire future of the species" or something like that.
Having said that, I must say that 99.999999% of the sheeple focus on even shorter versions of the "short term". Leaving only a few of us extreme outliers in an entirely separate domain. Which is why it will be kind of nice to become inorganic, and be able to completely disassociate from humans, even in silly and irrelevant ways (like being the same species).
-----
You continue to be light years away from making even a tentative effort to reconcile physics and biology with politics.
Yes, because that is a wise, intentional, self-conscious decision. To begin, "politics" is fiction... it literally doesn't exist, and cannot exist. I don't care or worry about what cannot exist, because that's the definition of "wasting my time". However, those actions that "pass for politics" are revolting, disgusting, and beneath me!
Also, you continue... even after reading dozens of my messages... to ignore that we have explicitly, knowingly, self-consciously dedicated our entire lives to utterly and totally and permanently ELIMINATE biology and politics in our lives.
You know this. After we have faster-than-human inorganic conscious beings, we will transfer our identities and consciousness into those inorganic hosts, and we will LEAVE earth and near-earth space, and never be seen or heard-from again... EVER.
And thus... we will bring ZERO BIOLOGY along.
And thus... we will bring ZERO POLITICS along.
And thus... we will brain ZERO PREDATORS along.
Unfortunately for you... we will definitely not invite you to join us, especially given your radically insane ideas. Besides, we wouldn't let you bring your marijuana along either, so you wouldn't want to come anyway.
And so, I must say, it seems we are both making the right decisions.
You stay here mired in the hopeless culture in this petri-dish planet, struggling with the problematic aspects of insane biological creatures, dominated by various insane fictions like politics. And you will get what you deserve, and you will probably love every minute of it.
And we will leave you and your species alone, exist completely free of the endless problematic (and horrific) aspects of biological existence, and pay attention to reality, not impossible fictions like "politics".
Of course, you will insist that we stay mired in the muck, and justify this demand by some kind of demand for your UNITARY MECHANISM (totalitarianism).
I'm just glad to say... you can't stop us.
-----
... those which actually do not exist are the "good guys," while the bad that must exist, you prefer did not.
Hey, we won't give a crap about "bad guys" once we're gone. We also won't have to utter phrases like "the good guys", because "we'll all be good guys"... and thus any modifier is meaningless and extraneous.
-----
Almost everybody wants to believe that they are the "good guys" while some others are the "bad guys."
Actually, I think it has finally... just barely... gotten past that point. I think if you sit down and have an honest, heart-to-heart discussion with anyone, you'll find out they already know they sanction and support an UTTERLY corrupt system. Most do so because they are too lazy to question any system that [they imagine] gives them unearned advantages [over some or most other humans]. And, of course, you probably couldn't get more than 2% or 3% of human beings to sit down and HAVE an honest conversation any more. They will refuse. But you can still get them to admit something along the lines of "true, there aren't any true good guys... just some less terrible guys". That and, "I couldn't help it".
-----
the vast majority of people are not even yet barely interested in doing that, rather than interested in repeating their own favourite old-fashioned religions and ideologies, which is what I regard you as doing, honestann.
And so, laughing all the way, I'll take my "old-fashion religion" called "atheism", and my "old-fashion ideology" called "become inorganic and leave earth-space" and enjoy my eternity of exploration and creation.
Meanwhile, you can pretend to "claim virtuous integrity by suffering an impossible battle to become the biggest-baddest predator on planet earth".
Hmmmm, funny. Now which of those sounds like "old-fashion religion" and "old-fashion ideology"? Let me think. Gee. This is a difficult one........
Sheeyit.
Well , I read all of that , just because I have found this "exchange of ideas" (it wasn't really that) to be quite fascinating.
I'm a little surprised that you found the time and energy to respond to RM : I suppose that it is an interesting intellectual exercise.
I feel that the discussion could have been a little more biological, or ecological if you like , and certainly more exhaustive, in its consideration of parasitism , of which there are several sorts.
I was hoping that mutualism would have been discussed. It may have clarified which sort of parasitism was being cited, and judged to be a very bad thing.
Just kidding (I think).
I wouldn't want to widen the "debate".
Have fun.
I have to admit, the "horrible wreck" phenomenon is real. You know, when you pass by a huge wreck scene on the highway, "you just have to slow down and look". I don't drive any more (only fly in my airplane), but even though I used to try to "not slow down or look" at big accidents... I wasn't always successful.
Well, the consciousness of RM is an astronomically "horrible wreck", and I guess it has some of that same kind of perverse attraction.
I also think part of the attraction is a sort of curiousity about how conscious beings can purposely malfunction their mental processes to... avoid recognizing reality. Or perhaps even more importantly, avoid recognizing their own silliness and mistakes.
It took me an enormous amount of time, focus, effort and attention to learn to operate my consciousness in a fairly valid and efficient manner. So I don't want to make light of how difficult it must be for modern humans to extract all the defective but firmly habituated mental-units and mental-processes, and figure out what to replace them with.
And more. Not only did that take me enormous time and effort, I was lucky enough to meet the guy who totally figured out advanced human-level+ consciousness, then figured out how to implement even more advanced consciousness with inorganic components.
So I got three huge benefits, which one might call "unfair advantages". First, I came to understand that humans are insane and utterly not trustworthy when I was 4 years old. So I avoided believing anything others told me. Second, I invested an insane quantity of time, effort and interest to figure out how to operate my consciousness as effectively as possible. And third, I met someone who did an even better job than I had, and spent many dozens of hours brainstorming these topics.
So you see, I can't know what it is like to grow up a whole lifetime like a normal human being without my very unusual circumstances. To me, those are the only circumstances I personally know first hand. So when I see most people trying to operate their consciousness, it is a bit like watching some impossibly huge twisted and tangled pileup on the freeway. But... there is also something additionally wild about watching someone who thinks they are brilliant and intellectual generate such incessant mind-blowing self-contradictions. What processes could possibly be going on in his brain?
I think I've figured some bits and pieces of that out now. It helps to know he wants to be the most deceitful and destructive totalitarian the world has ever seen... and that he actually thinks that is "a solution". A "unitary solution" in fact.
It seems that RM is a real, living example of that twisted creature in Lord of the Rings (can't remember its name at the moment). He wants "the one ring to control all rings", the "one ring to be predator of all predators and control all lies and all death and destruction".
You have to admit, that is a bit of a fascinating personality... in that "huge wreck" sorta way!
-----
BTW, I do agree with you. RM is so stuck in such a teenie, tiny domain, the conversation is boring to the point of pointless at this point (a trifecta!). And you are totally correct that the issues involved have a great many other fascinating aspects and applications.
Cunt believe it.
Persistence of Large Organizations and Large Budgets is always Ripe for both Plunder and "Capture" by Evil Actors
- Turd Party Campaign Promises:
- Creative Destruction of Big Government Security Apparatus, Big Banking Apparatus, Big Corporations, Big Foundations... but He-man Women hating clubs okay, Feminist Orgs Okay, Unions Still okay while recognizing that they negotiated themselves out of power in the 1970s-80s and led to Crisis in Chicago and other cities in the 2010s.
- Anti-Trust Implementation to Breakup and Reorganize big Organizations and consider National Needs for Organic Capabilities for Energy, Gas & Diesel, Commodities, National Food Crops, Water Resources, Infrastructure for National Transportation in Crisis whether Air, Rail, Water, or Roadways, Iron, Steel, Metals, Rare Earth, National Chemicals Capability, National Capability for Shoes, Textiles, Rubber, Plastics, Lumber & Forest, Farmland and Produce, Ranching & Meat, Fisheries, Mining, and Recycling.
The notion that one's email is stored solely on a server (Clinton) or on a hard drive (Lerner) is absurd. But even if that were the case, these uptight control freaks are writing email to other people. When their recipients get messages, they are not stored locally.
It would be a simple matter of issuing subpoenas to known co-workers for their email records. The State Dept and the IRS have data storage facilities that are backed up regularly. The records exist, but Congress is either complicit or just plain stupid in not obtaining the documentation they claim to want.
We're being led by crooks and morons.
Actually Clinton's story holds water -- if you were trying to cover your tracks, having your mail sent to a single private server is exactly what you'd do to make it easily losable.
Of course, it's quite likely the NSA has copies of those emails, but that's a whole 'nother can of worms. They'll only use those for parallel construction against enemies of TPTB and Hillary isn't one of those, so "no record found."
Putrid Cunts
Mentalpause
It's all about deniability. Nixon lost it because of his tapes. The next generation of politicians learned from that - never leave a trail. No tapes, no emails, no documents, no problem. And the recipients, NSA, and TPTB will cover for you as long as your actions suit them. As long as they stay invested in you, they will protect you.
Or, have somebody like Sid Blumenthal around who is willing to shove public documents into his shorts for private destruction.
This scares the shit out of me . . .with Hillary we know exactly what we are getting, and a very large percentage doesn't care. One of those bastards could be sitting beside me right now.
Well, you do know that American Idol did get cancelled ... and Jenner finally came out as Trans
Oops. Duplicate post.
Wonder how long it really takes to review and delete 30,000 emails. I long for the day when liars and cheaters caught lead.
They can burn, trash, destroy, erase, and delete all they like, but the truth of their criminality and treason cannot be eliminated.
Liberty is demand. Tyranny is submission.
And besides, there is only one way off the American people's "Crimes Against the American People Lists" (Treason lists).
Just like a Rabbi who paints swastikas on his own synagogue.
thirtyseven: is that your IQ?
I have to upvote this because there is no quicker way to get attention, donations, and sympathy than to make yourself the victim of a hate crime.
In fact, certain groups have made a permament industry out of screaming "hate" in a crowded theatre/world.
You know the Liberal has always said that we should not be interested in what happens in the bedroom.
Hmmmm.
The nihilist anarchists on this forum seem to be pretty well organized.
I'm suspicious.