Archive for the ‘Politics’ category

Modern Day Communism : China

February 3, 2016

Same as they always have been. Secure internal power using fabricated “enemies”, much like the US has been doing with Fast and Furious vs gun users, and then find an “external enemy” to cook up a war to justify emergency powers. For China, they got Japan or Taiwan. For the US, it’s the entire world at large, anyone or everyone.

Why I don’t listen to social academics and authorities

December 18, 2015

This was my reply to a general internet comment about a person that preferred to believe in academics over random internet commenters like me, because academics had put the work into studying their field and subject.

Con artists have also put half of their life into being professional or studying the bag of tricks, but that doesn’t necessarily mean trust is automatically conferred due to their expertise in comprehending the system.

I prefer to trust in my own judgement over those of sub average or average social authorities. But that’s a question of hierarchy and cultural shock. Some are brought up to defer judgment to a technocrat elite or nebulous authority of elites, although their proof of eliteness is often untested and due to even greater levels of authority, not proof in and of itself.

In the same fashion that the collective defers ultimate authority and obedience to the “System” and individuals resist outsourcing authority/responsibility to unseen bureaucrats in the “System” or strangers, there are cultures which have preferences on a scale, but they are not purely in one camp or another.

On the note of collectivsm -> slavery, that revolves around the issue of which type of slavery. As I term it, there’s Slavery 1.0, Slavery 2.0, and Slavery 3.0.

A system where the uneducated and those who were economically subsistent and reliant on the powerful, such as women or Irish workers, foreigners that don’t speak your language, or lower class servants in the ancient Roman empire, would allow for Slavery 1.0, as the lower class can move to a higher class merely by having education (Roman and Greek slaves could buy their own freedom due to money from their education) or from having resources. They are still subordinate to the ruling doctrine, such as the Helots under the Spartans, or squires under Knights, or serfs under kings and royalty. Yet the unlanded commoner may become a knight, a lesser noble, due to deeds or special favor.

A caste system that does not allow genetic cross transfer or social mobility, such as the Hindu’s caste system with the Untouchables, Islam’s 750+ AD slave trade in Africa and the ME, or 1830’s American Democrat slave plantations, would qualify under Slavery 2.0

A space faring civilization which uses a meritocratic or not system in which a significant percentage of their resource production is manned by slaves, would be between a 2 and a 3. The slaves now comprise a significant portion of the population and is critical for the proper functioning of it. They are so essential, that it would be hard to equate them to the uneducated and disarmed slaves of the American Democrat plantations of 1830. Like the slave soldiers of the Ottomans, once they begin acquiring a critical cog in the system and also power, they may be called slaves later on, but actually treating them as inferior to everyone else, becomes less feasible.

On another note, the United State’s current mainstream culture can be summed up with these precepts.

1. Obey All Authority over you, no matter the orders given.
2. The selfish outliers will be punished.

The tradition and culture may have been focused on the individual, but it has now become the sub culture, not the mainstream. In this fashion, sub cultures can take over the mainstream and reverse the demographics, much like a game of Go. As for a society of individuals not allowing slavery, that of course depends on their definition of an individual. To the Democrat plantation land owners, an individual or a human was only classified as a male white land owner. Women, foreigners, and blacks were genetically considered different and/or inferior. The blacks were born and bred to work the fields so that the white aristocrats would have leisure and time for philosophy and art, the epitome of civilization. That was their justification under their society, why they fought for it. Well, technically the land owners didn’t fight, they were exempt from military service in the US Civil War 1.

What determines the system of slavery and whether it is used or not, is the hierarchy of the social status quo. If the hierarchy is any kind of top down system, there will always be an under class, an inferior spot at the bottom of the totem pole. Some hierarchies try to make this less intolerant by having their servants commanding those lesser than the servants, so that most people can have a superior and an inferior. Like feudalism, that can become stable over time: if the bottom class isn’t a caste system but can actually move up, so they can acquire subordinates of their own. If, however, a society rejects the top down hierarchy system, and adopts a bottom up hierarchy like the Grey economy of the internet, or the non aggression principle of liberty or something other equivalent, post scarcity Banksian derived/based culture, then there is no need for a superior or inferior in a class or hierarchy system.

Average common humans will still prefer to be in a hierarchy, much as pack animals will fight until an alpha, beta, and every other rank below it are established so that everyone understands the order. But voluntary equality or superiority or inferiority between individuals isn’t really an issue equivalent to a System enforcing that hierarchy.

Police Protection underneath the State and Regime

November 22, 2015

https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121122/02340221122/early-morning-raid-sent-to-confiscate-9-year-olds-winnie-pooh-laptop-downloading-music.shtml

The police will protect you all right, from the MPAA lawyers.

Virtues and Vices in the 21st Western civilization

November 20, 2015

But if a man’s efficiency is not guided and regulated by a moral sense, then the more efficient he is the worse he is, the more dangerous to the body politic. Courage, intellect, all the masterful qualities, serve but to make a man more evil if they are merely used for that man’s own advancement, with brutal indifference to the rights of others. It speaks ill for the community if the community worships these qualities and treats their possessors as heroes regardless of whether the qualities are used rightly or wrongly. It makes no difference as to the precise way in which this sinister efficiency is shown. It makes no difference whether such a man’s force and ability betray themselves in a career of money-maker or politician, soldier or orator, journalist or popular leader. If the man works for evil, then the more successful he is the more he should be despised and condemned by all upright and far-seeing men. To judge a man merely by success is an abhorrent wrong; and if the people at large habitually so judge men, if they grow to condone wickedness because the wicked man triumphs, they show their inability to understand that in the last analysis free institutions rest upon the character of citizenship, and that by such admiration of evil they prove themselves unfit for liberty.TR

The idea that the greater the man, the greater his vices, that virtues are tools evil may use just as the good may use vices for the greater good, is why Western civ is decadent and deserving of no salvation.

Elise Ronan said…
I do take exception with your description of ISIS terrorists as “brave.” It does not take bravery to behead unarmed people, rape,crucify children, shoot into a crowd of unarmed people, blow up a plane, or murder people on their way to a religious celebration. It takes a certain amount of psychopathology, belief in an all consuming supremacist ideology that has not been employed by the majority of the world since the Middle Ages to commit these atrocities. But no it is not brave.
Comment

The West is lost, people don’t even realize what the virtue of courage is any more. They think anyone that wants the reward of jihad for dying, is brave because they go to their deaths. I suppose it is not unexpected, since many Westerners have no physical challenge to surmount, so there is no real point for them to develop courage as a virtue. It’s just an abstract concept they read about which other people have.

Government black helicopters

October 25, 2015

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/10/23/breitbart-meetup-ends-police-chopper-overhead/

This is what happens when the “crazy” becomes normal. And there was a helicopter too.

Two websites were mentioned, Yelp and meetup.com

Yelp is a facility review site for the masses and meetup is a user content site for distributed organizations and small teams, like the Japanese have to convert online meets into physical meet ups.

Tools designed for the consumer, but can be used to counter occupations and the Authorities too, by circumventing barriers to entry and all that jazz.

Saw it on Instapundit.

Economic Equality vs Power Equality

October 11, 2015

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/425225/why-were-never-moving-away-income-inequality?utm_source=jolt&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Jolt10082015&utm_term=Jolt
Courtesy Texan99
One of the reasons why Northern Abolitionists thought slavery was horrible under the Democrat plantation is because it made the South poorer and disenfranchised white workers as well.

The South lacked any real industrial power because slave labor was undercutting white workers, while aggregating wealth under white land owners. In the North, people had to be paid, so it made more sense to make factories and other jobs that were highly productive on a per manpower basis. In a feudal system, the Industrial Revolution would never happen, because serfs wouldn’t be allowed the freedom to just move anywhere and work in any city, for any wage.

Slave was becoming dangerous not merely to the blacks, white people may not necessarily care about black strangers and their families, but because it was going to start affecting white workers, normal American families that had “equal” rights.

Some people even recognized that ahead of time, such as General Lee, but they weren’t given any power to reform the system. The system didn’t want to be changed and all the land owners in power, had the power to punish and destroy anybody that thought different. A few KKK episodes, a little bit of canning here and there, and nobody would be left to contest the issue. Even poor whites and normal middle American families had to obey Jim Crow or else be punished. The State’s Rights to tyrannize their own people, even without the Black Question being involved.

The author perceives power dynamics as being above and directly connected to economic dynamics. Most people don’t really think of it like that. They think technology will end slavery sooner or later, that it is inevitable. That economics will naturally balance out the power scale. They think if some top law makes the wages better or introduces a better way of doing things, that this naturally makes things more productive or more fair for everyone involved.

From what I’ve seen of human nature, that’s a little bit too idealistic.

Got to love lawyers and their unreformed torts

October 6, 2015

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2015/10/robert-farago/we-lost-our-daughter-to-a-mass-shooter-and-now-owe-203000-to-his-ammo-dealer-and/


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.