Thread 519066346

answering all your questions

>>519066346 (OP)
what is your bank info

>>519066448
do you want to create a bitcoin address for you?

>>519066346 (OP)
What inspired you to write this?

>>519066346 (OP)
Explain the imposing liberal paradigm that was present even at the time of the American Revolution

>>519067637
I posted it here about 5 years ago after examining the Charlottesville rally

>>519067714
Liberalism is nothing new. Some would even say it is the ultimate conclusion of a Christian Europe. Others would say Liberalism is something that was always present at least in potentia. I seek to express the actual occurrence in this occasion and one can only conclude that this process began much earlier than it was formally declared. What is more important is that Liberalism itself is not the main focus of attention. It is the context

>>519067714
If Ted was to answer that question he might just say technology and liberalism are similar in that to be liberated is to make effective use of your environment by harnessing potential energy to produce work. What would a liberal be without easy access to petroleum; something they are afraid to admit.

>>519069095
I'm not really sure what you're implying. You think there's an elite running rampant because they are "liberal", not because they are greedy soulless cocksuckers?

>>519069956
>an elite running rampant
mismanagement is more accurate
>because they are "liberal"
no that is the context we are all experiencing. you are also a liberal. You can conclude from reading this that there is very little actual significance in liberalism itself
>greedy soulless cocksuckers?
it is more accurate to say that leadership has been impoverished by the lack of accountability. you are leaderless

>>519069095
What do you think can come next?

>>519072920
the purpose is really to explore those possibilities with an agreed purpose

>>519074465
And what should that purpose be?

>>519074572
I define that here as existing in the future

>>519072920
I do have some opinions about this but I prefer here to reason with it apophatically in the OP

>>519074572
communities usually function well without telling them exactly how to live. That is really not the function of a leader. The main function of a leader is control, or to know when to stop and enforce that action. Like the laws you have, they do not tell you what to do. They are limitations where being is limitation and being and knowing is the same. Everything else is free for you to explore with good judgment

>>519074874
I was commenting on another thread and decided it applies here equally well:

>You need to create a pseudo-religious structure that isn't cringey and also is pro-natalist. Presumably, the church is a pro-natalist institution. The idea being that the church primes the women to be good wives, and the men go along with the church so they can have wives who behave. This works less well now because men know science, so we need to stop relying on the sky daddy trick to tie this all together. Come up with an alternative anchor.

>>519075344
>communities
Are built on families. No families, no community. It's ironic we have a book like Bowling Alone that popularized this discussion but couldn't reach this punchline.

>>519075505
I agree. that was my opinion too

>>519075505
This is why civilization is built on restraining the female sexual instinct. If you don't do that, you get demographic collapse every time. Men build society because they are invested in it differently. If this system doesn't start rewarding men more, then there won't be enough numbers to win any revolution or takeover. The political left (as in, the anti-elite party in theory) needs to focus on the needs of men, NOW.

>>519075650
I guess the real question is, how do you convince the middle managers on the left that their identity politics crap is nothing but destructive. It's an actual mental illness to be caught in those thought loops. You'd have to treat the mental illness, first and foremost.

Provided you have virgin ears or are in recovery, you'd tell the truth about past revolutions and past great periods of history. We've forgotten that there was ever a _good_ time in history, because every single portrayal of the past is a conflict between good and evil. And in fairness, a lot of those stories lead to good coming out on top, but it doesn't teach people that there was ever much peace.

What we seem to lack knowledge on is that time of peace. We project ideas onto it from the present based on our current politics. If this whole thesis is true, then there's a hidden masculinity in this period that would tell a different story for us all.

>>519075650
I think we must all be having those same thoughts. When I wrote this I was really concerned with describing in summary why these things are occurring because too often people will stop at, "the (x) are ruining everything" when there is so much more relevant information not easily available to the average person

>>519075898
>What we seem to lack knowledge on is that time of peace. We project ideas onto it from the present based on our current politics. If this whole thesis is true, then there's a hidden masculinity in this period that would tell a different story for us all
I like the way this was articulated

>>519075898
>how do you convince the middle managers on the left that their identity politics crap is nothing but destructive
i think they are convinced of a different purpose: to consoom. and it really is not anymore complicated than that. Like an addict

>>519076362
I'm going to bring in another comment I just made in another thread:

>The "mysteries" are basically a set of knowledge and practices regarding individualism. The dialectic about this knowledge is essentially as old as time. I read a book one time about hunter gatherers on the southern tip of South America who lived separately from the women and hid the knowledge of how to build the fire that was kept in their camp. Of course, we're talking about literal fire here in the primitive sense, but every other sort of knowledge since then was at one point on the cutting edge, and thus it was enough to make one an "individual", as in a person with high agency or power over other people. Knowledge is power.

>Some people think this knowledge should be kept secret so that they can manipulate people and rule with it.
Some people think this knowledge should be spread as freely and widely as possible.
>Some people think this knowledge unfortunately leads to ruin when it becomes to widespread, because people who lack the responsibility for individuality are still capable of achieving it.
>Some people think you cannot create an institution that will fairly judge when someone is or isn't ready.

>There's a lot of nuance to the subject.

Consumption isn't individuality. That's ego. We need ego death, not ego growth.

I see this in a friend of mine. He has this particular weakness, and he's still trying to transition out of childhood in some ways, and he's in his mid 30s. Granted, this is a man with a job and a car and a life. He's still an utter child.

He always doubles down. I tell him, you need to take action. And he goes, ok I'm going to think about it some more. I'm saying thing 'x', and he's interpreting thing 'y'. Your point about language was salient.

>>519066448
555-5555-5. A million bucks just for you!

>>519076859
I generally dislike relying on dictionaries for the definitions of words. Words are fluid, and all that ultimately matters is what is visualized in the mind of the person who hears or reads my words. Unfortunately, smart or more advanced people sometimes find themselves racing ahead of others and turning off the lights behind them. I want to turn around and help my friend without simultaneously running this track in reverse.

>>519066346 (OP)
When you say liberalism do you mean it as the euro economic definition or the catchall faux news watching boomer own the libs sense?

>>519077260
He means liberal virtues.

>>519075898
>how do you convince the middle managers on the left that their identity politics crap
I think most people get it as in the video below, but the parameters of game itself (or lack thereof) is less understood or agreed upon by everyone. we should first understand these conditions
https://youtube.com/shorts/W2p5Gm2FAUM?

>>519076859
yeah bring it. I like that example. I will use it. you question about how to handle knowledge in a modern context is unsolved particularly with such lack leadership. I think about this often

>Consumption isn't individuality
but what happens when all needs are satisfied with cheap energy is a collapse down to the individual where people find less value in cooperative relationships. I call this oversupply conditions

>>519077260
what is the difference in your opinion? Did that political economy not result in the outcome? I think this is like the midwit meme where Grug has the same opinion without articulating it

>>519077425
I'm picking up what you're putting down.

>>519077619

Cooperative relationships haven't been invented

>>519078683
I accept your challenge

>>519078478
I thought it might help clarify where you were going with your manifesto

>>519076859
>He always doubles down. I tell him, you need to take action. And he goes, ok I'm going to think about it some more. I'm saying thing 'x', and he's interpreting thing 'y'. Your point about language was salient.
in this way you have differentiated yourself. It also seems you feel obligated to help your friend. Can you make him a follower without making him a believer?

>>519077619
Is energy the primary resource for you? (Not money, not land, not people)

I'm not saying you're wrong per se. It's interesting to think that white collar work is built off of energy extraction. And of course, I agree that this economic modality leads to the anti-social tendencies.

>>519079177
That would require less focus on making myself a believer and more on observing others. Essentially the same problem I see in others.

>>519079235
>Is energy the primary resource for you?
yes. energy animates life

>It's interesting to think that white collar work is built off of energy extraction
most importantly it is free energy. an entirely external source of (finite) overwhelming abundance that lacks any control whatsoever

>>519079458
!

>>519074732
1488

>>519079709
I'm a war-time general. I can lead when they're already interested, but I'm not so good at convincing people who don't want to be convinced.

>>519080518
but mostly everyone likes being out in the field, and everyone becomes a hunter when they get hungry

>>519080916
>everyone likes being out in the field
Only when they're willing to take a break from consoooming, which brings us back to the thread's topic.

>>519080916
>everyone becomes a hunter when they get hungry
What do people need to be starved of, and who would you penalize without going after the most minor offenders?

Not that you want to be an authoritarian about it. Let the free market decide? Is that the "moral" solution that rulers reach for?

>>519081071
indeed and we don't have a whole lot of time. it is such a astronomical problem. We can't just go around destroying everything either. I would just say it if that was true. there are risks where if things collapse this time they are not likely to come back. this is it. It's for real

>>519081255
>What do people need to be starved of, and who would you penalize without going after the most minor offenders?
if you have an X account I came up with what I believe is the most adequate solution if implemented.
https://x.com/i/grok/share/R3nBxbyYwRKW8AgCV2pPTtUG3

basically the plan they have now is to directly control behavior patterns like food choices rather than just controlling energy production and regulating markets. The other alternative is to start removing certain industries and redirecting those resources. We have just reached the pointy where this is possible.

>>519081779
I know your example was only illustrative, but the straight answer is that if coke was unavailable, that people would buy pepsi. And if not pepsi, then snickers. And if not snickers, then pizza. We'd go down this list, likely making some net gains, but not to the extent that we are measuring.

Nobody chooses what they want because they just want "it". They have some relation to it, which is more complex than mere wanting. That relationship is defined by what the person _needs_. The soda is merely symbolic of taste pleasure, and pleasure is tied with disassociation, and disassociation is tied with pain.

People live unhealthy lives when they are in pain. When we stress them out with the modern environment, and we merely take away one of their crutches, we're merely asking them to seek another drug. And sometimes with drugs, they don't pursue the less dangerous kind next. It gets worse.

Something else to consider about the modern Coke-drinking world: it is a relatively peaceful and safe time, right? According to the numbers at least.

If we're going to ask people to leave their positions of safety and comfort to come hunt with us, we need to inspire them. We need a narrative for why the Coke is bad and why someone becomes a fundamentally better person for not drinking it. It's the same think NoFappers do with their material, whether you agree or disagree with it.

>>519066346 (OP)
liberalism is a mental disorder

>>519081779
>We have just reached the pointy where this is possible.
What do you mean?

>>519083278
this type of transition would eventually result in an entirely new type of political economy that is inevitable anyways. Wherever the control can happen it should and there is good reason to suspect this gamble on controlling behavior directly (rather than production) will fail to control anything. Social media is much different than a grocery store

>is tied with pain.
what I suggest here is that most of the stress you are referring to is a direct result of the consumption patterns and lack of control. The conditions emerge from the oversupply of energy available to the market

>>519083375
>liberalism is a mental disorder
behavioral sink is the word you are looking for. psychopathology has failed to produce positive outcomes imo

>>519066346 (OP)
Have you ever read any Pufendorf?

>>519083664
50 years ago it used to be true that everyone had a little bit of oil in their backyard. Now there are really only two truly sovereign authorities that can regulate the energy market. Sovereignty in this circumstance represents the ability to divest from the market. It is possible now to, and kinda the perfect moment at just the right time to bring down the hammer on all of this

>>519083995
no but I reason well with natural law. like when tools are legal but weapons are not. Tell us about Pufendorf

>>519081255
>What do people need to be starved of
Their dependent nature.

>>519084524
correct and it is important where we develop our dependencies. It is quite a liability when your greatest dependency is external such as the case here with petroleum in finite quantities

>>519084383
Well put it this way...or take this one view...he disagrees with Hobbes who states that the natural state of man is aggression, greed and selfishness. War in other words. So Hobbes...the State rules with God-like authority. Pufendorf hints, if you look at it from afar, that this format is deceitful and exists as a format only with great orchestration...in other words by socially engineering man to have him accept his own savagery and that of others he is easier to control. And from there all manner of fuckery ensues.

System today is Ponzi...designed basically satanically and financially (might be the same thing) to drain you, to keep you ignorant etc. The Lord is mamon. Which is bad. My personal view is that the old ways are morphing into the new as they always must at some point. Old Ponzi becomes new Ponzi with new fresh names but it is all the same as it ever has been, barring pockets of harmony, eras of peace.

>>519066346 (OP)
Liberalism leads to world government

>>519085219
blackmail does work effectively though, and in the case of blackmail often it is his savagery that subordinates the victim. But if we were to say what out to be I don't know if I could entirely exclude one in favor of the other. The king for example must also follow a natural law in regard to how he reciprocates that duty. The king is not just free to do whatever he desires. Likewise we can find rigid hierarchical structure everywhere in nature

>>519085637
if you were to govern the world yourself you would do it with the least amount of effort. So question is what needs governing? It has worked out thus far up to now

>>519066346 (OP)
what's the tl;dr

>>519086544
just take the oil. take in this circumstance requires retaining it from people who want to consoom it all as quickly as possible on dumb shit and when you realize what is required to accomplish this you will understand

>>519086544
this

>>519085820
I don't think there is a way to govern large numbers without keeping them helpless. To run 'society' or whatever you want to call it. Cities for a start, in and of what they are, are hellscapes. The more I think about it the only way to get through your 70 or 80 odd years is to know the Book of matthew in the KJB, know the words of Jesus. He told you everything you need to know about dealing with shysters, the State, corruption, liars, the deceitful, the conman, the official.

>>519087508
>hellscapes
a dead ecosystem for sure. not exaggerating

giving it one last bump