It has certainly been a MOST,,, engaging/interesting three weeks, hasn't it?

Imagine what's coming next?

I'm with you however. None of this is 'New,' and all of it will return/resume. How did that Battle Star Galactica/Cylon quote go again- "This has all happened before, and will happen again!"?

:-/

I'm a little hopeful.
Some part of me knows it's all going to turn out to be fake lip service psyop bullshit again, but I'm hoping the state actually shrinks this time and not in a conservative slow and measured sense either. I want to see all these worthless 'haha stupid pipeliners learn to code' fuckstains learning to weld pipe, or at the very least pushing brooms rather than soaking up the good life at the cost of anyone they can steal it from.

We'll see how it goes.

I am certainly one of the 'Olde Guard.' I have ZERO 'Tech skills,' and no interest in learning (More than I must, to operate a PC). I'm Old, tired, and this stuff has no appeal to me (To invest my time/remaining energy and life), but I DO understand it is important.

Like you, I'd LOVE to see all of these screeching harpies actually go out into the real world, and WORK to survive. Muck out stalls all day long, earn those blisters, splinters and muscles!

Given the skills I do possess, I'll take them over 'High Tech' any day of the year, because I know they will keep me warm, clothed, and fed. My PC can do none of those things, and if the power goes out, doesn't even make a suitable paper weight!

Ultra tight-knit community at the village controlling every aspect of your life or just culture itself like manifested through church in medieval times was much worse than liberal state. This is this typical libertarian distinction people vs state acting as essentially synonymous to good vs evil.

And I have to tell you that I prefer living in my country in Europe rather than USA. I at least have universal healthcare here and don't have to worry about that. The same with public transport. Oh and obviously things like paid leave and so on.

I saw this image a few days ago and thought of you https://ibb.co/XkJKc9Vv Yes let rich people tread on you. They aren't government after a-... oh wait, Musk who is one of the richest people on Earth is the government right now. Anyways...

Sorry if I come off as abrasive, but it's how I felt like after reading this post. Actually if you are happy about current politics that's good for you. I am just presenting my perspective /ᐠ- ᴗ -マ

Again, all that matters is coercion versus persuasion.

Look at your example of musk a little closer. Where does his economic power come from; some of it is offering products people want to buy and some of it is through taking advantage of governmental programs.
One is clearly and plainly good, originating in filling a demand. Nobody is forced to buy his products against their will.
The other is clearly and plainly bad, sprouting outta bureaucrats deciding he needs many millions of dollars for carbon credits or whatever other program he's soaking up. Try and refuse to give those bureaucrats money to "donate" to his "cause", you'll find the distinction between persuasion and coercion sharpened to a razor's edge.


>Actually if you are happy about current politics that's good for you.
No, it really isn't. I want to watch these monsters burn in the fires they themselves created. This isn't a good state of being at all...
"lest ye become a monster" and all that line entails

While there are many rats fleeing DC, the plague they harbor is just harder to see when they're spread out. And they're likely being replaced to some small degree with partisan rats of red color instead of blue.

It seems like the bureaucracy, fueled by folks that simply 'don't care' about spending or being accountable has created a situation. I can't imagine the panic that's happening inside the ranks of the current government, that an in depth audit has arrived and folks might be held accountable. I know many folks in the community say what does it matter, a million, a billion, what's the difference. I think the difference is the country going bankrupt or not. I imagine with healthcare being paid for by taxes, and mine being an election of who I think offers what services I need in trade for monthly payment, it might just be a wash. Poor folks can get medical care and can mitigate any bills but they have to ask for the financial assistance, often its available to them.

That makes sense to look at it that way. In any case I hope if you voted for Trump you will be satisfied with current government. Audit on the government is very reasonable, but I wouldn't really trust Musk who has his own interests at heart first and foremost.

Satisfied, hmm, nope, The President is one cog in a huge wheel, and the wheel is broken. It seems almost every house and senate member, shortly after taking a position, soon joins the multi-millionaire club, pretty good for a 100k salary, makes me think the majority are rotten to the core and the actual problem. Musk is weaponized autism, give him a flamethrower and lets see what happens. Part of the issue is civics being removed from schools, if the youth are taught how to engage each other and how the system is supposed to run, they have a chance of being an informed voter, to make independent decisions, think critically and get out from the wet blanket of the media, all the media

George and his family and ilk are a cancer, a blight, a seething cauldron that breeds and feeds corruption. A quick search shows how many of his tendrils he has inserted into governments around the world.
I don't know if there is enough time to undo so much damage, but the corruption needs to be exposed.

Yup. Really goes to show the stark difference between 'economic privilege' and 'regulatory privilege'. How one can come from producing goods people want, while the other is based entirely in holding hostages and cannot be of any other origin.

Where the rubber meets the road will be if the NPCs will allow themselves to see the corruption being torn out right in front of them.
It didn't happen too much during the twitter files shit; the biggest reaction I saw was people clamming up and defending their suicidal programming.
Hopeful and optimistic. It's burned me a hundred times but I'm cursed to see others in a better light than reality offers.

I can't imagine if the entirety of govt payments to outside interests are mapped, how much corruption they're going to find. Everyone that's trying to block might need a closer audit.

I'm laughing my ass off, they're so entrenched in their quid-pro-quo mindset that they're loudly and proudly outing themselves for scrutiny.
Meanwhile, the controlled media is spreading actual economic fact about taxation in their mindless reactionary fervor. That 'department of christian whatever' has another section newly screaming for limits to be put on government. It's as if it's all intentionally choreographed to make the "trust big government" crowd look like fools.

I have to remind myself constantly that popular leaders never actually shrink the size of the state, because I've gone and got my hopes up.

now its looking like individuals subverted a process to send fema tens of millions of payments to illegal migrants in new york, that won't ever make the news.

It just keeps coming out into the light though. I'm seeing it, you're seeing it, everyone that's known it has been going on has seen it confirmed.
The news is crying about it from time to time but they're too distracted by blatant trolling (that thing about religion, elon in the white house, gulf of America, Big Balls, etc) that they aren't opposing much of anything in any meaningful way. Just flailing and screaming in impotent outrage that their funding source has been revealed.

It's continuing to amuse me how many things keep coming out 180 deg opposed to official narratives; and yet people still act surprised when that tactic is used.

Hey again. ・ω・ Putting aside the coercion vs persuasion we will never agree on, I was curious by a few things you wrote and if you want to share if you want why not ask after all.

What do you mean by "suicidal programming"?

And "It's continuing to amuse me how many things keep coming out 180 deg opposed to official narratives" "that their funding source has been revealed" Do you have trustworthy sources that would inform me more on the matter? You are really confident in what you are talking about calling others npcs for instance, so if you want to I want to understand what is happening from your perspective. I wouldn't trust news sources like fox news and I don't know what are other ones that would immensely challenge 'big government' and so on.

What I mean by suicidal programming.... Surely you've noticed a whole lot of unnatural movements which are clearly serving an outside interest to individual cost, rather than the natural self-interest of an autonomous human, right? People being unwittingly led to their own ruin, rather than being encouraged to better themselves (and therefore strengthen everyone around them by strengthening themselves). It can't get more blatant than being commanded to stop doing your own research back in '20.

If you're into the podcasting scene, mike benz has a couple good episodes on rogan recently. Mostly dealing with the recent bits of USAID spending being pulled from behind the curtain. The twitter files was a prelude to this, if you'd prefer something a little older and more settled. The various psyops around the 16 and 20 elections are also a good place to look, too. Pfizer and moderna and j&j; bernie and warren and seemingly 7/8 of congress being purchased in whole by those companies.

Absolutely, I wouldn't trust fox news either, because they're just as owned and paid for as all the rest of the corporate press. By the very same people, no less.
And yes, all of my sources are also programming which are self-serving, too. That is all news distribution. You don't get ahead in that world by sharing information which serves to ruin your own position. Even alex jones, for all the beauty the sound of his voice holds, is likely to have a handler of some sort. This stuff about JFK files being released? I can hope that it is transparency, but if history is to be learned from it is simply another distraction, to direct eyes away from the current regime's actions or lack of actions.

Don't focus on the messages or the messengers themselves, assemble a worldview which encapsulates all the shitheads frantically scrambling to backstab each other.
Or, on the other much easier side of things you can cut to the end of the soul searching and I'll probably trigger your failsafes installed at an early age...
Know that all of government is not something you are a part of. Populism (democracy with a small D) only serves to give the illusion of involvement and responsibility. The ruling class is not beholden to you in any way shape or form. They will always act in their own interest, and that interest is usually in turning the lower and middle class against each other. All of politics is the mechanism of accomplishing this, and that's why it all smells so foul from every angle.

What do you mean by stopping research back in '20? I don't really know what you might be referring to. But I think I do with suicidal programming to an extent, nevertheless the main problem is with how people react to those who might be struggling with be victims of this programming, which is more hurtful than actual programming in the end. It's also not possible really to know what is programming and what is just humans being humans in a way that arose from their own psychology or biology.

Well do you think Mike Benz is a trustworthy person? As I read your second and third paragraph I get a slight impression you might be prone to conspiracy thinking. Alex Jones so obviously is delusional. The fact you might consider those not in the know NPCs is just how conspiracy thinking manifests, not something to put your trust on in context of identity or epistemology in a sense.

But nevertheless I fully agree with your fourth paragraph. Well I am curious so I have to ask. Are you sympathetic to Luigi Mangione's cause? To me he is an example of someone who did something against higher class. I feel like if you are a sort of person who is rather against it perhaps you are more sympathetic to ideological commitment towards capitalism than problem of being under control of others. Consider the possibility that Joe Rogan caters to those prone to believing in conspiracy theories such as ancient aliens bullshit and whatnot for profit, and that if Mike Benz has a couple of episodes there it actually somewhat makes him less trustworthy. Also consider who he specifically targeted as enemies; Pfizer and Moderna (vaccines bad you anti-vaxxes are sooo amazing yes weee love you anti-vaxes!!! ^-^) and Bernie Sanders (DIIIISGGGUSTING jew and A COOOMMMIEEE!!!!!! Remember to hate COOOMMIES!). This is the impression I get to be honest.

"As I read your second and third paragraph I get a slight impression you might be prone to conspiracy thinking."

Oh yes, I'm entirely untrustworthy. This is said with no sarcasm or irony or anything. I'm just some random 30something retard who spends too much time online. Only chatterboxing because it's mildly interesting at times.

Please, don't take my words as an attack as you seem to have. I know how uncomfortable it is to examine your own morals and motivations, and I wouldn't force that on anyone. If you want to chat about my views that's perfectly fine, but I really don't want to cause the kind of upset that you're displaying (but maybe it's just cheery banter? I am socially retarded and anything but direct earnestness doesn't translate well)


Anyways, the direct questions in order;
There was a huge push toward demonizing self-education in the pandemic era, I forget which specific media outrage was behind it, coulda been '21

I do not figure he's trustworthy, nor should you. I just recall him giving a lot of bibliography while talking, something I'm generally not very interested in. Are you interested in sources, or are you interested in convenient counterarguments? I've noticed a lot of that, where people don't actually want reciepts while asking for them. Again, not an insult to be taken personally. A lot of these hangups are just conforming to a social protocol how discussions are done in some circles, I'm not from your circles so I don't really follow the same (cadence, pattern, etiquette, sequence, I know there's a word) so naturally there's going to be lots of hangups. Alex jones isn't delusional any more than you or I, he's a personality who plays his own character in a satirical comedy news program, just the same as those babylon bee folks, or the onion before they were bought out.

Luigi m. seems like an idiot or a patsy, with how he was caught and what he did and how he did it and the official response to it... Lotta fishy smells and feelings reminiscent of 1/6 but blue instead of red. He mighta seen himself as some kinda class warrior but the guy he killed was pretty solidly only in the upper middle class. Probably in the 5% or something. The ruling class isn't even the 1% that used to be talked up, it's a much smaller cadre than that and it isn't really shown in visible net worth. Like everyone's friend soros; as was displayed plain to see he had the power to spend other peoples' money. His own net worth is therefore irrelevant.
Also, I recall some banter about how luigi's family was pretty high in the upper middle class brouhaha, too.

One question from me of you: Why the interest in chatting with someone who you're clearly harboring a lot of distaste toward? I'm not going to convert you into thinking anything. I don't want to.

Ah I will begin from answering your question. Very honestly I genuinely like you and don't feel any sort of distaste towards you. My style of writing might be sarcastic definitely, but I never mean it as an attack but only a mean to express my thoughts and feelings I have. I feel strong antipathy towards people kinda obsessed with disliking Bernie Sanders as it reminds me of stupid videos on the internet from populist far-right in my country that talked about Sanders saying things like "jew commie disgusting communists nearly elected president!!! america is falling!!!" so when you mentioned Benz talking shit about him I just felt like it's similar.

But sorry owo if I come off as unpleasant in my interactions with you. I really like chatting with you and I am just curious about your thoughts and way of thinking. I am interested in whether I don't understand something I should. I think everyone has their reasons for thinking what they do and I want to understand these reasons. I think you're a really good person and I liked talking to you on SoFurry and like doing it here. It really made me happy to see you posting on FurAffinity as well. Real exchanges of thoughts with people is why I am here at all, and you have a lot to share.



"30something retard who spends too much time online" I am a retard myself, 21 in my case currently but I feel more like 17. It makes me very depressed to see I am older and too retarded to be an adult lol. I am really more inclined to call myself a retard MUCH more quickly than yourself. I think you aren't one. I would call you someone who has his own sort of social charm and is intelligent.



Hmmmm I never looked at Alex Jones that way. I don't think it's sarcasm from what I saw. It's genuine anti-estabilishment sort of narrative, even if some of it is sarcasm not enough to just shrug it off as something similar to Onion. And even if Onion currently is mainly kinda anti-maga it isn't really that bad. But in the past it was better, that's true.

As for what I am interested in that would be what I already said I think. Your own reasoning and what makes you think the way you think combined with wanting to confront it with my own understanding. As for my social circles I don't really have any in particular because I'm kinda a depressed neet hikikomori lol. But I feel best when talking to people who are honest and benevolent at heart, without any sort of false politeness or adherence to some rules of social conduct that if you break are seen as someone to be cast out.



Well as for Luigi and who he targeted that is true, but at the same time a CEO of huge insurance company is someone relevant in structure that governs peoples life nevertheless. You don't really see it that way as a capitalist, but killing him was an act of defiance towards it and a showcase of how people want to be free from control of those who accumulated resources and now exert their control on others.

You should be more concerned with Musk than Soros. Do you think 400 million contract on Teslas from state department is justified?

Ah and alright, as for self-education in pandemic era I don't agree with you to be honest. I saw pushback against charlatans on the internet, but doing your research isn't believing idiotic videos on youtube. People who create them do it because it's an opportunity at gathering views or getting some profit from gulibility of people. For example doing research on vaccines would be reading academic papers and not watching someone on youtube dramatically talk about them causing autism without it being supported by science.



"(but maybe it's just cheery banter?" Hmmmm I think it was my intention alongside the sarcasm. :P

"400 million contract on Teslas from state department" Huh now I read about it again and it isn't mean to be fulfilled. I suppose that might have been kinda a clickbait /ᐠ • ˕ •マ Anyway I am sure Musk will do what he can to benefit himself through his current position and power.

"so when you mentioned Benz talking shit about him"
I don't know if he did or didn't, that bernie and warren and mcconnell and many others were taking hundreds of millions of dollars from big pharma was from a meme. Don't trust the meme, use it as impetus to look it up for yourself. Unless you're invested in that "doing your own research is racist" that I was being derisive of earlier.

"I would call you someone who has his own sort of social charm"
You can trust me when I tell you it absolutely does not translate to IRL interaction.

" It's genuine anti-estabilishment sort of narrative, even if some of it is sarcasm not enough to just shrug it off as something similar to Onion."
Controlled opposition is very important in statecraft, it is the whole point of USAID. It isn't foreign aid in the interest of foreign interests, it is foreign "aid" in the interest of domestic interests. Fifty years ago it might have been a little more benevolent in the sense that it was intended to benefit the whole US populace, but that power always corrupts. Therefore it makes perfect sense that over time USAID operations gradually became more and more insular and self-interested.
Remember we're talking (and they were bragging about on their website) about their aid spending resulting in coups regime changes wars and assassinations. This isn't 'feed the hungry' this is 'arm the angry' and 'create murderous resentment where there was none'.
Anyways back around to Jones being controlled opposition; you brought up ancient aliens and flat earth types. They're very important and valuable associations. Stick any narrative you want discredited alongside screaming loons raving about how 'the ghost of elvis is living in my den' and you yourself can see the emotional result. That narrative you want discredited being discussed openly but in discredited circles taints all discussion of the topic with reactionary emotions.

"But in the past it was better, that's true."
Look up who bought them (the onion) out.

"but at the same time a CEO of huge insurance company is someone relevant in structure that governs peoples life nevertheless."
Only because of government is that the case. Corpos cannot use force on the populace without governmental mandate. Imagine the public reaction that pinkertons with maxim guns being used for 'labor relations' would garner today. Now imagine the public reaction garnered by US-backed separatist rebels unwittingly enforcing US monetary policy in some sandy oil producing country.
Yes. It is a conspiracy. That's what a government is.

"You don't really see it that way as a capitalist, but killing him was an act of defiance towards it and a showcase of how people want to be free from control of those who accumulated resources and now exert their control on others."
Because I see through it. He was a middle class boy killing another middle class boy. This is why marx's work is one of the greatest tools the ruling class has; it is used to turn the lower class against itself to the benefit of the ruling class. Every time, the same story. Ever see 'the book of eli'?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FpIjWWWtXvU
It's about the bible, but it's a concept that transfers over to many sects of collectivist thought. Yes I'm calling out most religion is collectivist in nature, don't get too lost in that tangent though.


"You should be more concerned with Musk than Soros."
Why focus specifically on the one that all the controlled news outlets are frantically smearing? If anything he's less of a concern to me since everyone's hounding him so closely. Can't get away with much.
Yes, he is carting corruption out into the open for all to see to his own benefit. He exposed the twitter censorship model, then built his own self serving one in its place. Know that the very important distinction is? His censorship model is smaller in scope by a huge amount; people are very aware of its existence since he put peoples' attention on the previous one. I don't engage with his site, just the same as I don't engage with most algorithmic content aggregators, but I do have less distaste for his than the rest.
Yes, he takes in governmental funds. This makes him a particularly big welfare leech; fairly low on the totem pole of corrupt scumbags.
So far he's been pulling back the curtain on governmental spending which far outweighs the bad. Painting him as someone seen as a saint is a misrepresentation, most seem to understand that he needs to be monitored closely. We'll see in time what misstep he gets crucified on; I just hope it isn't something stupid and pedantic like what they got capone on.
Kinda just like trump. Yes, he is a shitbag, but he's a shitbag that's currently doing useful things by tearing apart the credibility of government and exposing their manipulative tricks. We'll see in time if he (either T or M) grows or shrinks the government.


EDIT: fucked up the youtube link, fixed

"t is the whole point of USAID. It isn't foreign aid in the interest of foreign interests, it is foreign "aid" in the interest of domestic interests"

Sure. I just have to say I don't know much about USAID. If I had to judge it as of now I can say that I think its purpose would be for exactly what you said because it's most reasonable. People in the government act for their interest. Perhaps now criticize air to Israel too and how aid to Egypt is used as a leverage. It's a difference between supporting actual shrinking of state or just different direction of foreign aid. I am not supportive of imperialism of any flavor.



"That narrative you want discredited being discussed openly but in discredited circles taints all discussion of the topic"

Well or maybe just the same type of people tends to believe this sort of thing. You don't have geologists being tainted by young earth creationism, it's just separate thing. If your anti-estabilishent jonesonian narratives were reliable wouldn't they be like that geology in comparison to young earth? Don't tell me now you're a sort of person to believe QAnon sort of thing or that 2020 election was stolen. It would just make me feel sad and worried.



"Why focus specifically on the one that all the controlled news outlets are frantically smearing?"

Because there are reasons for it. And try to avoid closing yourself in that right-wing bubble of amazing Musk exposing this awful corruption. It's just a particular narrative that isn't fully true. And Musk's censorship model on twitter isn't smaller. He banned that asmongold dude if I remember correctly for making a reaction video to people criticizing him larping as a gamer. It's just idiotic and silly lol.

I don't engange with twitter too. I dislike it.


"Yes, he is a shitbag, but he's a shitbag that's currently doing useful things by tearing apart the credibility of government and exposing their manipulative tricks. We'll see in time if he (either T or M) grows or shrinks the government."

Well I suppose that's one way to look at it then. I myself prefer my government not shrunk but more effective, but if you are that libertarian why not. By more effective government I mean serving interest of people. It isn't stricte something easy to really achieve, but I don't think at all that libertarianism serves interest of people; it serves interest of the capital. Do you think that me having that sort of preference and genuinely just not wanting to live in the USA but prefering Europe is a sign that there is some validity in my way of thinking about government, or all people like me are just delusional? >⩊<



"Because I see through it. He was a middle class boy killing another middle class boy. This is why marx's work is one of the greatest tools the ruling class has; it is used to turn the lower class against itself to the benefit of the ruling class. Every time, the same story. Ever see 'the book of eli'?"

Nope. A CEO of a large insurance company isn't a middle class boy. It's someone who represents one of the main ways aforementioned capital exerts its control over the lives of people. And I can see how it makes sense to think that way about Marx considering what political systems came out of it, but it doesn't represent socialism as a whole. Think about paris commune and their more democratic approach. Also Marxism could take different direction that marxism-leninism and maoism and so on. Maybe if Spartacists in Germany were more successful it would be an example of different kind of marxism.

Also just consider actually reading Marx instead of listening to what right-wing libertarian have to say about him. Just begin reading Das Kapital for yourself if you actually are curious about truth. I am not afraid of reading your sources like that book of if I remember correctly Hoppe. I understand libertarianism and don't agree with it. I read actual sources from libertarians rather than listened about it from socialists.

Also actually for example maoism was nevertheless successful in securing China's government and society. It may have been necessary when political situation there was very unstable for a very long time. And communism in Soviet Union allowed for industralization and big improvement of standard of living there. When someone would say that it was a total shithole they don't take into account that people before soviet revolution lived there nearly as if it were still feudal times; communism saw constant improvement rather than stagnation or decrease of life there.

I am not supporting totalitarian policies there though. But it's worth noting how there isn't stricte that illusory divide between "capitalism - rich, socialism - poor" that libertarians very much adopt and is popular in America. It's more complicated than that.



"It's about the bible, but it's a concept that transfers over to many sects of collectivist thought. Yes I'm calling out most religion is collectivist in nature, don't get too lost in that tangent though."

To separate yourself from collectivism like that you need first to be entrenched in individualism. Are you sure you aren't under control of that individualist ideology just like someone would be under collectivistic one?

That's why I was bringing up problem of free will, because it isn't just something to brush off as something that doesn't matter because functionally everything is the same. Your very strong belief in it is a part of your mind working under framework of the ideology you have.



So okay, I feel like I wrote a looot. Sorry if too much at this point. It's odd how our interactions always become gradually so extremely long. I wish you a nice day then. ^^

"I am not supportive of imperialism of any flavor."
So, how about humanitarian aid? Feeding the ducks at the park does create a dependent population after all. I recall a figure of 75% of Africa's food being imported from another continent. Hard not to see how those cobalt miners are slave cattle to whoever's feeding them.

"You don't have geologists being tainted by young earth creationism"
Uh, yeah there are. The rationalization is that god assembled the world artificially* aged because obviously god can do that, being god and all.
*not the best word but I'm not going to spend fifteen minutes trying to suss out what word I'd rather use

"Don't tell me now you're a sort of person to believe QAnon sort of thing or that 2020 election was stolen. It would just make me feel sad and worried."
Qanon was a fed psyop, plain as day since well before 2018.
Every election is stolen depending on perspective and justification. Same same for people saying the 24, 16, 12 and 08 elections were stolen. Wasn't one of the trump-russia hoaxes a bunch of hoopla over nothing more than hiring russian advertisers? I recall it coming out later that hrc's team was doing just that, along with all the shareblue and actblue paid advertisers. Elon paying people to 'get out and vote' garnered an outcry, too.
Partly why I found all the "populism" outcry so funny; after looking at it in depth rather than as a rallying cry, the dfl party was hyping up some very strong arguments against lowercase d democracy.

"And try to avoid closing yourself in that right-wing bubble of amazing Musk exposing this awful corruption. It's just a particular narrative that isn't fully true."
You want me to suck his dick? I'll do just that about getting humanity back into space again. Getting involved with government however I see as a terrible waste. That applies to anyone who works for any level of government though, since government can only destroy wealth and people. It can reduce, it cannot add.

"And Musk's censorship model on twitter isn't smaller. "
I can assure you it applies to such a smaller swath of discussion that it is pretty misrepresentative to even call it the same thing. The effect of twitter opening up was felt in discussion across nearly the entire internet. For censorship to collapse there doesn't need to be freedom everywhere, there only needs to be one single relatively free alternative. People migrating toward less restrictive locales causes enough pressure to reduce the restriction in neighboring regions. Recall recently one of them nordic countries enacting a big tax hike and chasing off so many producers that they lost more revenue than the figure they hoped to gain.
Anyways, other than banning personal detractors and that account that would track his jet, he also word filtered competitors' site URLs, all of that is as has been done for many years. Neer regularly banned people who talked enough shit of him on here.

"but I don't think at all that libertarianism serves interest of people; it serves interest of the capital."
Capital goods can only be owned by people. Corporations are just collectives by another name. Same as governments, they're just collectives comprised of people; same as any other marauding street gang.
I don't understand getting angry at the existence of capital goods. They're just the tools that are used to produce additional consumer goods more efficiently. 'Efficiently' in terms of labor-hours, since that is basically the only currency that there is; man hours valued in scale to how productive their individual efforts are.

"Do you think that me having that sort of preference and genuinely just not wanting to live in the USA but prefering Europe is a sign that there is some validity in my way of thinking about government, or all people like me are just delusional? >⩊<"
You're going to feel like I'm insulting you, but I'm not, this applies to me just the same as it does you:
Humans are meat computers regurgitating their programming.

Your position is perfectly rational within your worldview. I see that view as naive, just as you see my insistence that government cannot be a force of good in just the same manner.

"Nope. A CEO of a large insurance company isn't a middle class boy. It's someone who represents one of the main ways aforementioned capital exerts its control over the lives of people."
Do you realize that there are hundreds of UHG "CEOs" right? It's become a fluff title given out to make people feel good about getting a 0.25% yearly raise. Remember: health insurance as an industry wouldn't exist without government backing. Insurance (just like government) doesn't produce anything at all; they're just an intermediary between medical billing departments and customers. An intermediary that takes a cut of every dollar that passes through their hands.

"Also just consider actually reading Marx instead of listening to..."
I recall asking exactly that of you. :p

"And communism in Soviet Union allowed for industralization and big improvement of standard of living there."
You really oughta research the beginnings of the soviet union a little better. All that grain they were exporting during the holodomor? All the gold that the Torgsin shops were taking in at terrible exchange rates? Directly paying Ford to set up factories. Paying royal dutch Shell to set up oil production. Siemens, General Electric, International Harvester, Allis Chalmers. Many red westerners were also sending tons of goods over to prop it up too, in order to try out 'the marx experiment' thousands of miles away in case it went badly. Almost all skilled labor was foreign in origin at very high cost, many being killed of local resentment. Foreigners had exclusive shops which actually had goods on the shelves to buy...
Don't trust me, look it all up. This is just hammered out by my own poor memory.

"It's more complicated than that."
It really ain't when macroeconomics is being discussed. Very much a field for occam's razor to be applied with a very broad brush.
Complexity serves only to hide, obfuscate or justify corruption.

"That's why I was bringing up problem of free will, because it isn't just something to brush off as something that doesn't matter because functionally everything is the same. Your very strong belief in it is a part of your mind working under framework of the ideology you have."
I'm probably butchering the quote but as Heinlein said in one of his 'lazarus long' books; "You don't need to argue with a determinist, you just kill him." After all, his death was clearly predetermined, right?
What is there to say of free will other than that man acts in his own self interest. He prefers more goods to less, he prefers goods now to goods later, his time preference determines how long he will delay gratification in order to receive additional goods later as opposed to less goods immediately. Theft destroys future wealth just as certainly as eating your seed corn.

It's an extremely simplistic ideology, not much can hide in its folds.

"I am not supportive of imperialism of any flavor."
So, how about humanitarian aid? Feeding the ducks at the park does create a dependent population after all. I recall a figure of 75% of Africa's food being imported from another continent. Hard not to see how those cobalt miners are slave cattle to whoever's feeding them.

"You don't have geologists being tainted by young earth creationism"
Uh, yeah there are. The rationalization is that god assembled the world artificially* aged because obviously god can do that, being god and all.
*not the best word but I'm not going to spend fifteen minutes trying to suss out what word I'd rather use

"Don't tell me now you're a sort of person to believe QAnon sort of thing or that 2020 election was stolen. It would just make me feel sad and worried."
Qanon was a fed psyop, plain as day since well before 2018.
Every election is stolen depending on perspective and justification. Same same for people saying the 24, 16, 12 and 08 elections were stolen. Wasn't one of the trump-russia hoaxes a bunch of hoopla over nothing more than hiring russian advertisers? I recall it coming out later that hrc's team was doing just that, along with all the shareblue and actblue paid advertisers. Elon paying people to 'get out and vote' garnered an outcry, too.
Partly why I found all the "populism" outcry so funny; after looking at it in depth rather than as a rallying cry, the dfl party was hyping up some very strong arguments against lowercase d democracy.

"And try to avoid closing yourself in that right-wing bubble of amazing Musk exposing this awful corruption. It's just a particular narrative that isn't fully true."
You want me to suck his dick? I'll do just that about getting humanity back into space again. Getting involved with government however I see as a terrible waste. That applies to anyone who works for any level of government though, since government can only destroy wealth and people. It can reduce, it cannot add.

"And Musk's censorship model on twitter isn't smaller. "
I can assure you it applies to such a smaller swath of discussion that it is pretty misrepresentative to even call it the same thing. The effect of twitter opening up was felt in discussion across nearly the entire internet. For censorship to collapse there doesn't need to be freedom everywhere, there only needs to be one single relatively free alternative. People migrating toward less restrictive locales causes enough pressure to reduce the restriction in neighboring regions. Recall recently one of them nordic countries enacting a big tax hike and chasing off so many producers that they lost more revenue than the figure they hoped to gain.
Anyways, other than banning personal detractors and that account that would track his jet, he also word filtered competitors' site URLs, all of that is as has been done for many years. Neer regularly banned people who talked enough shit of him on here.

"but I don't think at all that libertarianism serves interest of people; it serves interest of the capital."
Capital goods can only be owned by people. Corporations are just collectives by another name. Same as governments, they're just collectives comprised of people; same as any other marauding street gang.
I don't understand getting angry at the existence of capital goods. They're just the tools that are used to produce additional consumer goods more efficiently. 'Efficiently' in terms of labor-hours, since that is basically the only currency that there is; man hours valued in scale to how productive their individual efforts are.

"Do you think that me having that sort of preference and genuinely just not wanting to live in the USA but prefering Europe is a sign that there is some validity in my way of thinking about government, or all people like me are just delusional? >⩊<"
You're going to feel like I'm insulting you, but I'm not, this applies to me just the same as it does you:
Humans are meat computers regurgitating their programming.

Your position is perfectly rational within your worldview. I see that view as naive, just as you see my insistence that government cannot be a force of good in just the same manner.

"Nope. A CEO of a large insurance company isn't a middle class boy. It's someone who represents one of the main ways aforementioned capital exerts its control over the lives of people."
Do you realize that there are hundreds of UHG "CEOs" right? It's become a fluff title given out to make people feel good about getting a 0.25% yearly raise. Remember: health insurance as an industry wouldn't exist without government backing. Insurance (just like government) doesn't produce anything at all; they're just an intermediary between medical billing departments and customers. An intermediary that takes a cut of every dollar that passes through their hands.

"Also just consider actually reading Marx instead of listening to..."
I recall asking exactly that of you. :p

"And communism in Soviet Union allowed for industralization and big improvement of standard of living there."
You really oughta research the beginnings of the soviet union a little better. All that grain they were exporting during the holodomor? All the gold that the Torgsin shops were taking in at terrible exchange rates? Directly paying Ford to set up factories. Paying royal dutch Shell to set up oil production. Siemens, General Electric, International Harvester, Allis Chalmers. Many red westerners were also sending tons of goods over to prop it up too, in order to try out 'the marx experiment' thousands of miles away in case it went badly. Almost all skilled labor was foreign in origin at very high cost, many being killed of local resentment. Foreigners had exclusive shops which actually had goods on the shelves to buy...
Don't trust me, look it all up. This is just hammered out by my own poor memory.

"It's more complicated than that."
It really ain't when macroeconomics is being discussed. Very much a field for occam's razor to be applied with a very broad brush.
Complexity serves only to hide, obfuscate or justify corruption.

"That's why I was bringing up problem of free will, because it isn't just something to brush off as something that doesn't matter because functionally everything is the same. Your very strong belief in it is a part of your mind working under framework of the ideology you have."
I'm probably butchering the quote but as Heinlein said in one of his 'lazarus long' books; "You don't need to argue with a determinist, you just kill him." After all, his death was clearly predetermined, right?
What is there to say of free will other than that man acts in his own self interest. He prefers more goods to less, he prefers goods now to goods later, his time preference determines how long he will delay gratification in order to receive additional goods later as opposed to less goods immediately. Theft destroys future wealth just as certainly as eating your seed corn.

It's an extremely simplistic ideology, not much can hide in its folds.

ah fuck me

"ah fuck me"
OwO



And sorry for slow response. I appreciate your messages. • ω •

"You really oughta research the beginnings of the soviet union a little better. "

I will try to research it a little bit. Even if how you portrayed it in the post was accurate it doesn't change the fact that at least it introduced change to the whole society allowing for changes like in healthcare and access to electricity. If foreign capital was so incredibly excited for Russia why not for example 10 years earlier but suddenly when Soviets took control? And I struggle to believe that there were many people sending goods there to have fun with participating indirectly in some Marx's experiment. Like I can imagine there were instances of what could classify as humanitarian aid, but it isn't stricte related to economic growth of soviet union.



"It really ain't when macroeconomics is being discussed. Very much a field for occam's razor to be applied with a very broad brush.
Complexity serves only to hide, obfuscate or justify corruption."

Well, I can agree with you on that, but it also leaves question of what exactly constitutes capitalism. Because China with its state capitalism is doing better than USA as of now. If more capitalism and less state meant better economy then perhaps it wouldn't be the case with China and USA. I mean economic growth, not current GDP. USA has higher of course. But everything points to it changing at one point.



"I'm probably butchering the quote but as Heinlein said in one of his 'lazarus long' books; "You don't need to argue with a determinist, you just kill him." After all, his death was clearly predetermined, right?"

Lol that's more like a joke than argument obviously.


"What is there to say of free will other than that man acts in his own self interest. He prefers more goods to less, he prefers goods now to goods later, his time preference determines how long he will delay gratification in order to receive additional goods later as opposed to less goods immediately. Theft destroys future wealth just as certainly as eating your seed corn. "

I can agree with the first part of self-interest. I think it's important to see how there is no magical sort of mind that just rises up above human nature and allows people to make rational decisions. What people do isn't in their control but factors outside of anything they could "choose". Taking that into account capitalism doesn't distribute resources based on personal respondibility and decisions everyone can make equally, but earlier predetermined state of things such as even just social environment or education.

And sure, I can see validity in later parts of what you wrote with time preference for example. But shouldn't people then be educated to have as best as possible for them preference and thinking that allows them to act rationally? How would capitalism support that when it's more useful for people with optimal traits to keep others down as cheap labor for example. I want society not of egoist individuals who use resources for their own purposes but society of resources being used for benefit of everyone, including helping people act in their own interest.



"I recall asking exactly that of you. :p"

>_> Ok I'll read Das Kapital. But I feel like it won't change anything in my life. Even after I read it I need to read a lot more later works of different authors because Marx isn't some sort of god to read only him. I was recently trying read things from here https://theanarchistlibrary.org/cat.....urray-bookchin of Bookchin. But I am just not political enough to really be invested enough into this. I just want to act in self interest you were mentioning earlier in a way that maximizes my pleasure. Hm that's actually why I don't read these works or books because it doesn't give me enough pleasure to motivate me. Others can overcome this probably, but I have very bad delay gratification and so on.



"Capital goods can only be owned by people. Corporations are just collectives by another name. Same as governments, they're just collectives comprised of people; same as any other marauding street gang.
I don't understand getting angry at the existence of capital goods. They're just the tools that are used to produce additional consumer goods more efficiently. 'Efficiently' in terms of labor-hours, since that is basically the only currency that there is; man hours valued in scale to how productive their individual efforts are. "

I am not even really that angry at their existence, but how they are owned by individual people for sake of enriching them and using others as resources. I think capital goods should be owned collectively. It's an assumption they can be owned only by individual people. Imagine even just capital goods owned by corporations that are owned by workers there. Instead of shareholders being in control it could be people who work there.




"Uh, yeah there are. The rationalization is that god assembled the world artificially* aged because obviously god can do that, being god and all."

Hm not sure what you mean. :P There are known processes that shaped the Earth on various layers. They can at most say that these processes were created by god, but it isn't geology but just someone saying something that can't be proven, similarly to how there can be biologists saying evolution was like it was because god wanted it that way. There is no creationism in actual biology, only in areas around biology like science communication and education. It's different with conspiracy theories that are often believed by the same people who believe in flat earth for example.



"So, how about humanitarian aid? Feeding the ducks at the park does create a dependent population after all. I recall a figure of 75% of Africa's food being imported from another continent. Hard not to see how those cobalt miners are slave cattle to whoever's feeding them."

Well, that food is a part of global trade nevertheless, not just humanitarian aid. And yeah, I oppose humanitarian aid for purpose of creating a dependent population who will fill a desired niche such as mining. I don't know how they could overcome their current situation though. African societies and countries are doing very badly and they would require a lot of changes to change into something else than powers on the bottom of global supply chain and so on. Using them this way is in interest of a lot of countries and USA and if USA retreats from acting there just China and Russia will fill the void. There should be no colonization in the first place overall. I don't know what should be done now, but it isn't a dichotomy of bad USA hurting Africa vs good Africa crying and begging them to stop. More a matter of how countries in Africa need to change themselves in various areas too.



As for Musk's twitter I honestly don't have much experience as I haven't used twitter at all never at any point. I dislike it. Maybe you are right about Musk's model of censorship being in the end lighter as it's a sort of more visible direct sort of thing.

Sorry for writing so much in this message, a lot of it more personal thoughts than something interesting probably. Oh I see another thing I should respond to.


"Do you realize that there are hundreds of UHG "CEOs" right? It's become a fluff title given out to make people feel good about getting a 0.25% yearly raise. Remember: health insurance as an industry wouldn't exist without government backing. Insurance (just like government) doesn't produce anything at all; they're just an intermediary between medical billing departments and customers. An intermediary that takes a cut of every dollar that passes through their hands."

I'm not sure if they wouldn't exist without government backing. Insurance is a sort of thing people often want and would choose to have even if they can choose not to. Killing that CEO was still an expression of anger from people towards the way system works. The CEO wasn't very important of course and it didn't change much, but in my opinion he was a member of higher class of capital owners who benefit from having accumulated resources and using them against people below. Middle class are still those who don't have enough accumulated capital to use it in that way, at most small business owners. I suppose they are more petite bourgeoisie rather than bourgeoisie such as CEOs.

Overall I'd say petite bourgeoisie is what can be called middle class, while bourgeoisie is higher class. Ruling class is very interconnected to bourgeoisie in a plutocratic sort of way.



Sooo okay. I should respond earlier probably. And I see we switched the topic already from Trump to discussing our beliefs more at their core again. "Humans are meat computers regurgitating their programming." Yeah I agree! I don't see it as an insult. I just agree with you.

fuck I did it again, goddamn I'm fucking stupid

reply is below

"it doesn't change the fact that at least it introduced change to the whole society"
a society's wealth was stolen from them for generations and given to oligarchs' pet projects
and then some wonder why the eastern block are still a bunch of animals living hand-to-mouth with no mind for the future

"why not for example 10 years earlier"
There was plenty of foreign investment in the tsarist era, too.

"but it also leaves question of what exactly constitutes capitalism."
Easy to get confused when word definitions drift over time and certain groups specifically use language to manipulate rather than communicate. Sadly I'm not good with words, so you'll have to accept that you won't understand classical liberalism's capitalism until you can understand the distinction between coercion and persuasion.

"But shouldn't people then be educated"
Centralizing education makes slaves of the masses, because schooling cannot be meaningfully separated from the propagandist's programming. Even your word choice reflects it. 'Educating someone' is synonymous with shoving your thoughts into their brain. Allowing people to seek education as they see fit is very much distinct.

"How would capitalism support that when it's more useful for people with optimal traits to keep others down as cheap labor for example."
Without using force how is this done? Voluntarily consumed advertising efforts?
There isn't any deprogramming of slaves, a great majority will always be of a mind to be owned by another. Another fault of democracy. Anyways, plenty of humanity is most productive as assembly line drones. There's a bunch of slander about the quality of life in industrial revolution era cities, but people were still flocking in from the countryside for a better life than their toil in the farmlands.

"Ok I'll read"
Don't bother, you'll probably end up with a translation that cheers up all the best parts about slavery and eugenics and...
It is good of you to out and admit to recommending books you haven't read. I believe that used to be called out as "bad faith" or some other such hoopla by parrots like a few of the guys on that sofurry forum. Luckily I don't really care any more, figured out how "the dialectic" isn't used to find "the" truth, it is used to shift the window of what an acceptable truth is toward a more favorable direction for the manipulator. Away from the truth found in observable reality.

"I am not even really that angry at their existence, but how they are owned by individual people for sake of enriching them and using others as resources. I think capital goods should be owned collectively. It's an assumption they can be owned only by individual people. Imagine even just capital goods owned by corporations that are owned by workers there. Instead of shareholders being in control it could be people who work there."
Divorcing ownership from investment is completely incoherent.
Corporations are examples of collectively owned capital. Shareholders are not a specific class of people as you seem to have been educated, publicly traded companies can have anyone as shareholders; most even have programs to distribute shares to employees at a discounted rate.

"There is no creationism in actual biology"
Hard sciences are based in reality, reality's existence implies a creator. Ain't nothing to it, ain't nothing to be scared of, ain't nothing to be revolted by.

"It's different with conspiracy theories that are often believed by the same people who believe in flat earth for example."
You're seeing ghosts again, aren't you? Flat earthers aren't real; they can't touch you. The ones you see are trolls given voice by a controlled media who profits from your alarm.

"China and Russia will fill the void ... There should be no colonization in the first place overall."
Golly gee whiz, governments doing government things in a manner plainly governmental? If only there were some ideological set of beliefs assembled from an opposition to overarching coercive power structures. Nah, such a thing would never be accepted in the mainstream.

"Sorry for writing so much in this message, a lot of it more personal thoughts than something interesting probably. "
Sorry for being a lot more terse than I have been, it just hurts when I overestimate people; yet I continually do it.

"Middle class are still those who don't have enough accumulated capital to use it in that way, at most small business owners."
Small business owners might be lizard people to you, but I can assure you that they're middle class just the same as you are. They just work 168 hour weeks instead of 40. I've been offered buddy-deals on several turnkey businesses by their retiring owners and turned them all down, much happier being a worker that can walk away at the end of my shift. It's still allowed me to build up enough excess that I'm mostly retired at 30, but I'm not making any children, so there's no point to accumulating capital beyond what I want to use in my own lifespan.

Being envious of those who have accumulated more savings than you is natural. The animal gets angry and lashes out, the human tries to emulate the recipe for success. To clue you in; it ain't a path of coercion either, only mutually beneficial voluntary exchange.

"Sorry for being a lot more terse than I have been, it just hurts when I overestimate people; yet I continually do it."
Oh noooo it sounds bad as if it turned out I am just more stupid than you thought. I mean yeah, I am not a particularly smart or interesting person. Maybe you like talking to me (If you really like it) because I try to be open and nice and seem like a person trying to learn... I'm not sure if that's the case.

"Being envious of those who have accumulated more savings than you is natural."
I am not envious of those people. The only thing I want is to do as little work as I can and have as much pleasure as I can. It isn't envy of savings as I don't care about money, only these two aforementioned things.

"the human tries to emulate the recipe for success"
Weeeell I think that I am unfit to become a mechanic like you if that's one idea of how to be successful.

"It is good of you to out and admit to recommending books you haven't read. I believe that used to be called out as "bad faith" or some other such hoopla by parrots like a few of the guys on that sofurry forum."
I was recommending it to you because you are very clearly interested in Marx. I don't know if it's a good book. It wasn't bad faith when I wanted to just make sure you understand what you are talking about considering you are talking about Marx. Doesn't seem really like a weird thing to recommend even if I didn't read it. :P

"so you'll have to accept that you won't understand classical liberalism's capitalism until you can understand the distinction between coercion and persuasion"
Well you're just dividing these two where it's desirable for you. You don't believe there exist more social or indirect forms of coercion. For example to you telling someone to prostitute themself for you or continue to starve isn't coercion like we were discussing it with homeless dog comic. It is coercion because how resources are distributed isn't attributed to someone's personal responsibility but just various factors and state of things bigger than individuals themselves, so someone using their position higher in that hierarchy is just like someone punching someone weaker because owning something is a continuous act and not just something passive.

"you'll probably end up with a translation that cheers up all the best parts about slavery and eugenics and..."
Yeah exactly why you should read it. Instead of just understanding what's there you repeat libertarians points of "Maarxx was baaaad heeee is proo-slavees and pro-eugenics" like yeah just read the book and relevant to modern marxism points in it. :3 Which don't include eugenics.

"Hard sciences are based in reality, reality's existence implies a creator. Ain't nothing to it, ain't nothing to be scared of, ain't nothing to be revolted by."
Reality's existence doesn't imply a creator. It implies there was something that made it exist in the form it exists today and it's a matter of physics rather than impossible to prove points. When you see a tree it implies there was a seed it great out of, not that a human planted it there. And especially not that human genetically engineered a tree.（• ˕ •マ

"Small business owners might be lizard people to you, but I can assure you that they're middle class just the same as you are."
Yeah, I don't think they are in any way lizard people lol. And I can see your point very well. But working 40 hours a week is thanks to laws that keep it that way by the state. Otherwise you would be working more like 50 at least and earning less.

"Corporations are examples of collectively owned capital."
Yeah, and how they work could be democratized and ownership of them distributed more evenly. Think about sort of ideas like from richard wolff if you know him. I hate the way he speaks and seems to target some sort of low common denominator, but he represents ideas in economics that I think are meant to make life of people better. I don't think everyone should be like business owner while being just an employee isn't that bad, but being more in control of your life in workplace and profit from the company being more evenly distributed and so on doesn't sound bad at least to me.

"Even your word choice reflects it. 'Educating someone' is synonymous with shoving your thoughts into their brain. Allowing people to seek education as they see fit is very much distinct."
The problem is that what people seek is already a matter outside their control and different forms of education that was given to them previously like from example parents and how their relationship with them looked like. There is also to what they were exposed to and their biology. I think capitalism doesn't support people having good conditions before even choosing what they would pursue, just good enough for human resources.

I think that people should choose what they want to do in life, but education should be public without distinction between private schools that are meant to be more elitist and those for masses. To me it's important everyone feels a part of the same group rather than divisions being created at pre-teen and teen level in society.


"a great majority will always be of a mind to be owned by another"
They should at least be owned by one another in an abstract sense, like for example nationality. It's better than worshipping individual people like billonaires. What you perceive as desire to being owned is probably better described as conformism and people wanting to take simple path. Then that simple path should be as good as it can, for example having 40 working hours in a week rather than 60 and there being a minimal wage. It's something that's protected by the state you dislike.


Okay let me write some last thoughts I have. ・ω・So if that's the impression you potentially got, when I said that I am not interested in politics it just means I don't feel like I can change anything even if I read 300 relevant books. It's not that I support more leftist politics because I want someone's money, but what seems to me to be more reasonable and subjectively moral thing to support. The fact I don't actually have much knowledge about what I kinda support doesn't matter that much because I don't even do anything to actually support it, just write comments like this one to you. I didn't even vote in my country's elections that were a while ago because I didn't feel like there was anything I want to support and that it would be relevant to my life at the moment no matter what side would win.

Also I don't mind if you are being terse. It's just you being honest and sharing your feelings. uwu

As for flat earthers these people actually exist. But take into account even just creationists for example who don't really believe in evolution. In USA it's something like even 40% isn't it? Totally absurd to me. And as for profiting from my alarm weeeeell yeah I am not alarmed to be honest, it's more just slightly funny to me someone would believe that.

"I'm not sure if that's the case."
But you aren't approaching the conversation with an open mind. You're just looking for easy snags to pull at.
The funny thing about that is how I approach all these sorts of conversations desperately hoping to encounter someone who has a solid position I hadn't considered. I know I'm extremely pessimistic in my political view. In all this negativity I want to be wrong, but much to my dismay I keep being slapped in the face with confirmations.

"I am not envious of those people."
That statement was in reference to one single word choice. Very specific dehumanizing language used to demonize future-mindedness.
As lenin put it 'we must speak in language which sows a hate, revulsion and scorn in the masses toward those who oppose us'
Whereas if you instead humanize your pet demons with simple language, you'll find them much more understandable.

"It isn't envy of savings as I don't care about money, only these two aforementioned things."
Because you don't seem to understand that money is an abstract concept as well as a physical good. What's thought of as money now is in fact entirely valueless without the abstraction behind it. The value in money is its fungibilty. That means you can exchange it for many other things, a more fungible good is exchangeable for a wider array of things in a wider array of places. Things such as productive capital goods which will in time return your initial investment plus a profit. Reducing the need for you to labor, increasing your available leisure time.
It isn't the money that anyone cares about (especially now in a time of valueless fiat), it is the value the money has in exchange. If it were a natural money it would have eventually found itself (in comparison to any other good) to be the most fungible good, but since fiat was coercively introduced we find ourselves sequestered into artificially segregated markets with a pair of false moneys which are counterfeited as matter of course. It is much easier to see in yours, once pounds of silver, then corrupted by being reduced to sterling silver, and finally to floating fiat. Look up how much a pound of silver is worth now in your currency and you'll get a feel of what has been stolen from your countrymen through only the avenue of inflation.

"Doesn't seem really like a weird thing to recommend even if I didn't read it. :P"
I've only recommended you books I have myself read. I cannot recommend you a food I've never eaten, nor a music I've never heard.
So excuse me if I take your suggestion as a flippant insult instead.

"I was recommending it to you because you are very clearly interested in Marx."
I wasn't interested in the man, I was interested in how his words were used to get people to act in a plainly suicidal manner.
Do you not wonder how it was that hitler could rise to doing what he did? In another cruel joke those "read banned books" people are mindlessly saying the correct thing, but in a context which can't be taken seriously. Another book you should read is 'mein kampf' as it has been banned for so long that its only english translations are very sympathetic to its original author, meaning and intent. (to again spoil the ending 'another big government socialist created a big government socialist utopia to everyone's cost, peril and horror')

"Which don't include eugenics."
Which is part of why I react derisively to your suggestion that I read a book that you have not. The modern notion of egalitarianism is incompatible with his system, top to bottom. It has been pasted atop it in broad brushstrokes, but looking closer it falls apart fast. Please take a cue from all the agitprop about the spread of malinformation; carefully examine ideology before allowing it into your heart and out of your mouth. Especially that which you've always accepted as self-evident and therefore left unexamined.

"and it's a matter of physics rather than impossible to prove points."
Which is why creationism is just as valid as any explanation until we can see beyond the event horizon of the big bang to what existed before the universe.

"and ownership of them distributed more evenly."
Evenly according to who.
The problem with state socialism is that there is no altruism, nor any facsimile of it.
Look at who is in power, that is exactly who gets to divide up ownership of assets when businesses are nationalized.
It is popular to spread the lie that those in positions of power don't work as hard as the rest of people, but the reality is that their labors are just different to yours. They spend their entire lives competing among themselves for positions of power over others. You know what kind of people succeed in the trade of governance? In a structure where only the most manipulative two faced bastards can rise to the top of the pile of assholes, scumbags and con-men.

"The problem is that what people seek is already a matter outside their control "
Yes. We're all mandated to pay for one singular education to be forced upon all children. Some can afford to buy both that education (while not redeeming it) and also a second education in a private school of their choosing.
Imagine a world where people weren't forced to buy any 'education' they don't want, and can therefore direct those resources to an education that they do want.

"They should at least be owned by one another in an abstract sense, like for example nationality."
'The cheapest sort of pride is national pride; for if a man is proud of his own nation, it argues that he has no qualities of his own of which he can be proud; otherwise he would not have recourse to those which he shares with so many millions of his fellowmen. The man who is endowed with important personal qualities will be only too ready to see clearly in what respects his own nation falls short, since their failings will be constantly before his eyes. But every miserable fool who has nothing at all of which he can be proud adopts, as a last resource, pride in the nation to which he belongs; he is ready and glad to defend all its faults and follies tooth and nail, thus reimbursing himself for his own inferiority.'

"It's something that's protected by the state you dislike."
Negative. I prefer a 24 hour work week, two twelve hour days, but the state supports a 40 hour week, so if I choose to work less my compensation package drops off sharply at the (actually I think it is 36 or 34 hours these days) point of legal distinction between part and full time. Without state interference there would be no need to tack on a purposefully confusing perk structure either. That came about due to wage caps enacted in the '40s. Instead of getting pidgeonholed into insurance I don't want and PTO I don't want and a clothing stipend that I don't want and so on and so forth why isn't all of that just included in my hourly pay instead of a convoluted compensation package? Government.

"what seems to me to be more reasonable and subjectively moral thing to support. The fact I don't actually have much knowledge about what I kinda support doesn't matter"
Hitler believed he was acting in the interest of the german people, with all his heart he thought he was doing the morally right thing. Stalin deluded himself with similar madness. Nobody sees themselves as a part of the problem until it is in hindsight if even then.

"just write comments like this one to you. I didn't even vote in my country's elections"
Organic narrative distribution is much more powerful than voting. The cattle will always vote for their own destruction, generally based upon whatever ad campaign is more effective. Like it or not, you're part of that ad campaign by discussing politics publicly.

"weeeeell yeah I am not alarmed to be honest"
Does it not play into your mental math in support of compulsory state-run education programs?

Okay, I feel like I want to respond to this one differently. I feel like I am slightly on auto-pilot when responding just writing down more my surface-level thoughts that are like a first impression to what you wrote. Though it can make it shorter probably.

First, there are some things I see huge validity in and some that is something I disagree with. That quote about nationality is very true. I just meant that if someone wants to be owned by someone else, let it be at least a group they are a part of, not an employer. Then employer and employee could be a part of the same group and be interconnected in that mutual ownership. But maybe thinking people want to be owned is false in the first place anyway. And I dislike nationalism just like you I suppose, but I don't dislike people feeling like they have connection to one another and I think there should be something that makes them feel that way, be it empathy or anything.

"Hitler believed he was acting in the interest of the german people, with all his heart he thought he was doing the morally right thing"
It's just an assumption, you don't know that. If it was the case why did he obsessively focus on Stalingrad instead of attacking better targets. And attacking Russia itself probably was a bad idea. Also German Jews were a part of German people and he decided they were not human anymore. So well I don't think you are right about his motives.


You: "I've only recommended you books I have myself read."
But a few messages ago:
Me: "Also just consider actually reading Marx instead of listening to..."
I recall asking exactly that of you. :p
Which means you were asking of me to read Marx. But anyway why are you actually kinda so angry at my admission I haven't read him and said you should read him? I mean you already explained it, but to me it feels unreasonable and not like an insult. And you also already spoke as if you assumed I haven't read his books. Why does it matter if I read some books or not if I am just speaking my normal thoughts that can be taken at the face value? I am not repeating what I heard someone say or whatever but sharing what I think trying to explain why I think it. You don't link all the time bibliography yourself but speak similarly just sharing your thoughts.

Actually when you were 20 or 19 years old have you read as much as you have at this point? Imagine you are talking to yourself from 11 years ago. If you think you from back then is more foolish and less educated than you from now it's perfectly rational. And it's why it is the case with me in comparison to you. I am not contributing to this organic narrative distribution because I watched progressive videos on tiktok or whatever but because this is what I think is right after trying to think about it even if not very deeply because I tended to be interested in other things than politics. Does that mean I should avoid speaking and just nod saying "oh you are so right I am dumb" just because you self-educated yourself more in comparison to me? I am just sharing what I think is true and you can respond to my thoughts as you read them. OwO

If you told me in a fully 100% seriously way to read mein kampf I would be okay with that and I think it actually is worth reading because of its historical importance and exercise for critical thinking in not believing idiocy. I wouldn't start saying you were insulting me.

"The problem with state socialism is that there is no altruism, nor any facsimile of it.
Look at who is in power, that is exactly who gets to divide up ownership of assets when businesses are nationalized. "
I think ownership should be transferred to people more organically. I was also saying in the past I support more grassroots socialist models like Kibbutzim. You didn't have a response to how they managed to be democratic socialists because you just had to claim they were autocratic, so in the end it ended with you aborting the topic. If you desire so much to be convinced about something maybe it could be how socialism doesn't have to be autocratic and it doesn't have to work in a way of those in positions of power deciding everything. I don't support marxist-leninist state socialism. Again consider how other manifestations of socialism could look like if more successful such as Spartacists in Germany or if Paris Commune survived and so on. Not everything is marxism-leninism and one singular model of autocratic command economy.

"Which is why creationism is just as valid as any explanation until we can see beyond the event horizon of the big bang to what existed before the universe."
https://www.txst.edu/philosophy/res.....ignorance.html It's just as invalid as other explanations that don't have basis other than appeal to us not knowing.

"Imagine a world where people weren't forced to buy any 'education' they don't want, and can therefore direct those resources to an education that they do want."
Such as having 6 years olds being educated how to work at an assembly line because everything else was too expensive or less optimal for family. For an education of similar quality provided to everyone it needs a more equal system than just buying it individually. People can still choose school and what they want to specialize in, like what trade and so on.

"The modern notion of egalitarianism is incompatible with his system, top to bottom. It has been pasted atop it in broad brushstrokes, but looking closer it falls apart fast."
How do you know without having read it? Like why is it surprising I was recommending for you to do that when you are making such claims? And I will the entire book before February ends. Like it's actually very motivating when you are so fucking angry at me not having read it lol. Pretty brilliant in making me want to actually do it.

"Very specific dehumanizing language used to demonize future-mindedness."
Billonaires aren't billonaires because they were so smart and daamazing, but because of circumstances they were born in. Do you think you could become a CEO of insurance company?

As for humanizing my pet demons and understanding them better; isn't an assumption that everyone does what is in their self-interest in always some capacity even if indirectly true? I just think of everyone that way and that's how I try to understand them. Think about actions of people who have power, be it also power over others through ownership of resources, and if feeling sorry for them all the time without thinking something needs to be done to aleviate their power is reasonable and rational.


"Things such as productive capital goods which will in time return your initial investment plus a profit. Reducing the need for you to labor, increasing your available leisure time.
It isn't the money that anyone cares about (especially now in a time of valueless fiat), it is the value the money has in exchange."
Sure. I mean that I don't desire particularly much money that would give me particular luxury and so on, but only enough for me to be passive. Though of course it is a lot to want. And to acquire productive capital goods I need to have resources in the first place that I don't really have, though if it turns out I manage to be a normal person who functions in society I will do what I can to be resourceful with what I earn to increase that leisure time in the future. I am not a sort of person to instantly consume.

"I cannot recommend you a food I've never eaten, nor a music I've never heard."
If I had a friend who is an expert on classical music and was talking a lot about it and they said that they haven't listened to Mozart, I would recommend them listening to it thinking it would be beneficial for them. Maybe we just have different ways of thinking, but it doesn't mean it feel to me like it's you who is acting in bad faith condemning so much just what I thought to be a normal and reasonable thing to say without any bad intentions from me. /ᐠ - ˕ -マ

Also if you were thinking about killing yourself everyday and considering the entire world around you to be something you are apathetic towards and plan on leaving it, would you read political books and think about that sort of things? I can't change it that I am not convinced by everything you write to me, but I genuinely try to think about what you are saying. For example what you wrote about insurance and PTO and so on, honestly it just makes sense to me how it isn't something you prefer. I can perfectly understand how a lot of people would rather have more disposable income than benefits. Though I think that more co-operative social ownership I was talking about as something I support doesn't contradict it and support people deciding for themselves on these manners, and more pure capitalism would rather meant no benefits for those who actually want them then can't take PTO while someone in Europe will just have pity on them as they enjoy it. Consider also maternity leave.

"Does it not play into your mental math in support of compulsory state-run education programs?"
Not flat earthers to be honest. I find them just too silly. One of main reasons why I support state education is because of my personal experience with it and how I think it just shows people who lives around them in a real way that makes them be one with actual social environment rather than artificial more elitist one that will create divisions between normal people and richer ones. Also think about schools in Japan and how they teach people to care about one another and so on. It has real effects in what people in society are like. I think it's necessary and good. I hated school and people around me but think it was good to be forced to see what they are like to understand where I live better.

"The cattle will always vote for their own destruction"
I am not sure with what exactly to respond to it. o.O I am thinking about it now and honestly I think I have to conclude it's more of an overly broad generalization. I'd rather say people are conformists as I said earlier. It isn't a matter of self-destruction but blending into the structure and adopting appropriate for them role in it even if it's not beneficial.

"Look up how much a pound of silver is worth now in your currency and you'll get a feel of what has been stolen from your countrymen through only the avenue of inflation."
Ok, I'll do that. I will also think more about economy in context of inflation. There are other approaches to it and counter-argument I could have brought up. I just haven't thought very much about it lately.


Alright, I don't know how long will be this message once I post it. o_o Actually now I thought about it and want to ask; what is it perhaps then that wants to make you talk to me? If it's not me being open and so on, is it me being here to listen and respond so that you can write down your thoughts? • ֊ •

"let it be at least a group they are a part of, not an employer."
Your job is a collective of at most few hundred in any one department, sharing a common productive purpose, the ruling class is dependent upon the labor of who they are organizing. One further, it is all a voluntary association which is chosen by you and can be quit at any time for another job. Your employer can't get away with physically harming you.
Your geographic location is often happenstance, you can't opt out of association without great cost by physically relocating away, and I don't see much connection between the ruling class and those who are beneath them.
All collectives are a lot less cohesive than one would like them to be. Even marriages (a collective of two) fall apart with great regularity.

"but to me it feels unreasonable"
I'm one of them scumbag humans, of course I'm unreasonable and hypocritical.
It's just a pattern that I've encountered a lot, raw wounds that might not heal... 'Appeal to authority' bias or something like that, accepting/distributing things as fact, unexamined because of their lofty origin.

"I am just sharing what I think is true and you can respond to my thoughts as you read them."
I'm just grumpy because I wasted a significant portion of my life unravelling the lies hammered into my head from childhood. Political reality is extremely simple, but the machine doesn't tick over as it does without the artificially complex programming given. It's all choreographed bullshit assembled solely to stymie human advancement.
Wish I could tell myself fifteen years ago how there ain't nothing positive at the end of that education. Maybe that's an excuse for my shitty demeanor. Scare you away from breathing the fumes given off by dumpsterfire politics.

"because of its historical importance and exercise for critical thinking in not believing idiocy."
there's a very good reason that reading it is frowned upon; it tends to wake people up to how much of fascism is already in place, who is arguing its merits in other names, and also how interchangeable all the political control schemes are once you can ignore the hype around their chosen name

"and it doesn't have to work in a way of those in positions of power deciding everything"
hierarchies always emerge, ownership outs itself to be seen eventually
Of all faces that power struggles can take, I just look at economic power as the most easily justified.

"It's just as invalid as other explanations that don't have basis other than appeal to us not knowing."
I'm saddened to see you applying logic to science. Don't you know that science is to be trusted and never questioned? :p

"For an education of similar quality provided to everyone it needs a more equal system than just buying it individually."
We sadly can't wish goods into existence. An education is a good which requires productive effort like any other. Egalitarian dreams can be enacted, but economic reality dictates they take a much darker form than anyone would want.
Harrison Bergeron is something to google for a nice li'l short story to peruse. It isn't a particularly happy one.

"How do you know without having read it?"
True, I haven't read it in German, nor French. Maybe that'd make the difference, give me the nuance lost by smashing it into English.

"Billonaires aren't billonaires because they were so smart and daamazing, but because of circumstances they were born in."
Do you want people to be mindful of what impact their actions will have on future generations, to be mindful of what they're leaving behind?
Economic privilege is silly to balk at when the only way to level the playing field is to destroy every incentive toward a time preference which extends beyond death.

"Think about actions of people who have power, be it also power over others through ownership of resources, and if feeling sorry for them all the time without thinking something needs to be done to aleviate their power is reasonable and rational."
I do not understand.
Government is the largest tool used by the powerful to control the weak. All notion otherwise is plainly fabricated to strengthen that tool wielded by the few. Do you think you could become a lobbyist buying some congressperson's vote on a key issue? How many votes do you think you can buy before your funds run out?

"I will do what I can to be resourceful with what I earn to increase that leisure time in the future."
Look into investing your savings by becoming... (shudder) a shareholder (gasp) in something which pays reliable dividends and isn't prone to bouncing about wildly. Stock market is no different from gambling, you can bet toward getting rich quick (tech) or you can bet on a slow stable future (energy).
Interest paid on savings accounts never keep up with inflation and bonds barely do so, inflation also bouys investments at the same rate it eats currency.
You can become that dastardly do nothing cigar smoking monocle wearing tophatted mogul, making more at the end of your life than you ever did while working 40 hour weeks, maybe leave that nest egg to one of your grandkids in exchange for taking care of you in your later years. They might be a scumbag for having an empire handed to them by sheer happenstance of being the one to take the time to wipe your (by then) wrinkly butt. Silver spoons and privilege!
sorry, I just had to poke some fun because I'm terrible

"Also if you were thinking about killing yourself everyday and considering the entire world around you to be something you are apathetic towards and plan on leaving it, would you read political books and think about that sort of things?"
Oh I sure did, luckily I was able to see through a lot of the lies straight away, then it was beating my head against trying to figure out why the obvious wasn't obvious. Spite saw me through a lot of it, I still spend way too much spite on minimizing my tax burden and my general productivity (since that also benefits the parasitic ruling class).
Hell, I might have even turned out straight if it weren't for a few interactions in first grade.

"Consider also maternity leave."
Consider a time when large families stuck together and pooled their resources. Collectives with actual meaningful connection.

"what is it perhaps then that wants to make you talk to me?"
It's cold outside (-19f right now, maybe something like -28c) and if I don't chat people up somewhat regularly then I'll get stuck in a closed circle full of identical thoughts, which only rots the brain.

Oh, if you read books you are talking about sorry then. I just thought for some reason you said you haven't read Marx. I don't remember what made me think that. As for appeal to authority I don't think these books are an authority that need to be read because they are The Truth but it I just thought if you didn't read them it would be better to do that if you talk about them. Well what works of Marx did you read? And did you read works of any other socialist thinkers? /ᐠ- ⩊ -マ And welp it's 7 days until march, I have to read das kapital as I promised.


"I still spend way too much spite on minimizing my tax burden and my general productivity (since that also benefits the parasitic ruling class)."
That's pretty based tbh owo. I mean you are much worse at doing that than me, though I don't think it's something I should be happy about. I have negative productivity and society would be better if I died essentially, so I am a sort of a hindrance for ruling class. Anyway I might come off as very estabilishmenty and moderate sort of person, but I don't feel any sympathy for people in power or those who might come to replace them.

Generally I understand where your anarchism comes from and I very much see logic of it. We disagree on it because I don't think state of anarchism is viable and something else would replace the state as it is now that doesn't have any guarantee of being better, like even just cartels. So I try to think of what would be a better form of state, though in the end it feels very speculative and just unrealistic to me.


As for what I said about money and people in power; to get power you need to be someone with money or join cause created by people with money, and ideas you can support are limited to what is acceptable within limits set by aforementioned conditions. Lobbying is also a problem of course, but I mean mainly that liberal democracy is plutocratic. Also media works that way.

"hierarchies always emerge, ownership outs itself to be seen eventually
Of all faces that power struggles can take, I just look at economic power as the most easily justified."
Hmmmm, it's something I just admit I see a lot of truth in. I just would rather minimize these hierarchies than support their existence by virtue of considering what they are based on to be more easily justified. I don't want to go as far as to say that I don't see any hierarchies as justified, but I think I prefer a society that's meant to be as beneficial for everybody in it as possible and works in this benevolently horizontal way.

"All collectives are a lot less cohesive than one would like them to be. Even marriages (a collective of two) fall apart with great regularity."
That is true too. It's hypocritical of me to support collectivism when I am a very egoist and individualist person. I am totally a perfect fit for the sort of person you described while poking that fun at me lol. If I became that mogul it's not like I would hate it and talk about how I need to be killed now.

Also if I made it look that way it's not like I want to steal money of other people. My political beliefs are just based on what feels moral to me, not my usual egoist hedonistic self. Though these two can't be separated perhaps. You also quoted Schopenhauer with that quote about nationalism and I have to say that I really like his philosophy and tend to just slightly think about my life as if applying it, such as understanding world in context of the will and how I want to free myself from it. This is how I actually live my life in the end. And it's why I am apathetic about politics and haven't read these works of Marx; it's something proactive in this world while I am fully passive. Everyone has some manner of political convictions and I have these I have because it's just unavoidable. I could have 100% centrist ultra moderate ones as an expression of ignorance but I suppose I just ended up differenly.

"Stock market is no different from gambling, you can bet toward getting rich quick (tech) or you can bet on a slow stable future (energy)."
I would diversify my portfolio owo. But yeah, I can see your point about savings accounts and actually investing it and becoming (covers muzzle with paws and gasps) a shareholder is reasonable. To be honest there isn't much wrong about money being used that way. I see more a problem when businesses are controlled by these shareholders and put workers at disadvantage.

"one of your grandkids"
You know, I don't think I will have children just like you don't plan on having.

One further, it is all a voluntary association which is chosen by you and can be quit at any time for another job. Your employer can't get away with physically harming you.
It isn't really that voluntary. You are becoming a resource to the employer and that's if they even agree to employing you. People have to work to buy food and so on, so that already isn't voluntary, and where they choose to work is limited based on a lot of things outside their control as well. It would be really nice if it was that pleasant as your description makes it feel. As for me I only have minimum wage jobs to choose from as I dropped out of college due to what I can describe as just mental problems and working at cash registry or whatever isn't voluntary lol. Or these people working at amazon. I'd rather just kill myself which I might do. It isn't a system that is very appealing to me.

"Consider a time when large families stuck together and pooled their resources. Collectives with actual meaningful connection."
Well, countries with less social safety net and so on still have these stronger families I suppose. But being forced to rely on family is unpleasant and just unecessary when there are alternatives. It's more a necessity in poorer countries. I am not very fond of worshipping work and having both parents working all the time though and it's what our society shifted towards. Still not working and relying on other people in the family requires trust and people unfortunately often aren't worth having trust put in them.

"Do you want people to be mindful of what impact their actions will have on future generations, to be mindful of what they're leaving behind?
Economic privilege is silly to balk at when the only way to level the playing field is to destroy every incentive toward a time preference which extends beyond death."
I don't know what to respond to that. It's just a rational way to look at it. Just generally when social values and capitalism would change these things people are mindful of would potentially change as well, shifting incentives towards time preference rather than destroying them. Like again look at Kibbutzim and if their model destroyed incentive towards time preference. I think it wasn't the case.

"it tends to wake people up to how much of fascism is already in place, who is arguing its merits in other names, and also how interchangeable all the political control schemes are once you can ignore the hype around their chosen name"
That does sound interesting. Maybe I will read mein kampf at one point. I'm not sure if really that much can be taken from it, as I imagine it has rather just specific odd narratives in it arguing for fringe ideology. I would have to think more about it to see if it genuinely helps see these things you mentioned. As of now it feels to me to be very specific interpretation from you influenced by your beliefs. o.O But I might be wrong of course.


As for cold weather and chatting with me... I hope you at least like talking to me. ^ ω ^ I really like chatting with you and it very genuinely makes me think and consider everything you're saying. Oh, also I have been talking lately to someone who is a financial analyst and asked him about Hayek as he is a libertarian. He said that keynesian economics actually works and is used while Hayek represents more ideological and in the end unreasonable approach. Do you have some thoughts on it?

"Well what works of Marx did you read? And did you read works of any other socialist thinkers? "
Only the first volume of capital, right after mein kampf and... ugh, I asked Rob over there for a rec on a description of keynes but I forgot who it was or the book's title, it's probably still in one of them threads if you're good at making search functions work. I'd consider all of those to be state-socialist works. I've read some of oscar wilde's stuff but he was a state socialist only in the sense that he hadn't yet seen its terrible potential. I recall one of his later collections of shorts had a section on political musings which explained after the soviets were well known. Been meaning to pick up something by emma goldman, she had a similar experience of being slapped with the reality of state-socialism. Though I don't think she had much trust in any state apparatus to begin with, just going by quotes of hers I've read.

"I have negative productivity and society would be better if I died essentially, so I am a sort of a hindrance for ruling class"
Well that's where you're wrong. (aww hell I'm really going to take that one trophy away from you?) Being that you're supported by the system as it stands, you have a great incentive toward conservative views in the lowercase C sense of conservative.
You profit plainly and clearly from the current status-quo being continued without change. The welfare state doesn't mind supporting anyone; it in fact welcomes as many as possible. It isn't spending its own money, but it does get looked at as the one 'providing welfare' through that expenditure of others' money, so of course it wants as many under its wings as possible.

" and something else would replace the state as it is now that doesn't have any guarantee of being better, like even just cartels. "
Some of what's coming to light in regards to 'cartels' is pretty silly, if you're speaking of the MS-13 types. They're quite oftentimes CIA funded, the ATF has provided them with guns several times, the drug trade is entirely propped up by prohibition and so on and so forth.
Yes, they (the organized criminals known as the state) will be replaced immediately by several other power structures. The gem hiding in the panic? they'll all be smaller and less powerful. Have less resources to draw upon to enforce their will. They'll have less ability to circumvent the need to provide services with natural demand. Like comparing the level of service you get from anywhere a monopoly is contrasted to a competitive market.
But I look at basic incentive structures and might be a bit wildly idealistic, making it really easy for me to separate 'anarchy' from the 'disorderly' image it was purposefully painted with from the turn of the... from the turn of two centuries ago? (like around 1890) onwards.

"So I try to think of what would be a better form of state"
The question is always "better for who" because everything comes at cost to something (and someone) else. My ideal is a screaming calamity for all those who have been making (and killing) millions off of constant war, disease and strife.

"to get power you need to be someone with money or join cause created by people with money"
Thus my seeming non-sequitur focus on specifics around money.
If money were still physical gold, then there would be much less ability to pervert the natural will of the unconscious masses. Money runs out and cannot be replaced without people generally agreeing with what it is being spent on. Even in the case of some evil monacled moustache twirler, he needs to be producing something that people want to buy in order to fund his machinations. He needs to be building that thing cheaper and better than any competitor, and he also needs to keep a good public image, lest his customers take their money elsewhere because they don't want to be using toilet paper which is indirectly funding african border wars.
Being able to print inflationary money allows the support of things which are plainly in the interest of nobody but a sick few.
Inflation works just the same as counterfeiting. They can keep printing money forever and in any quantity they desire. There's a soft limit on what people will tolerate, but it is easy to print money to spend on making it more palatable for those closest and most able to resist. Inflation is actually wildly profitable for anyone who has a large amount of debt such as many of those with large 'net worth' figures on paper. And those profits come directly from the pockets of those who cannot help but have a much larger proportion of their wealth in the form of dollars rather than goods (or even better, debt). The sorts with a couple thousand in their bank account, slaving away for a pension that might disappear.
Sorry, sidetracked easily.

"I just would rather minimize these hierarchies than support their existence by virtue of considering what they are based on to be more easily justified. I don't want to go as far as to say that I don't see any hierarchies as justified, but I think I prefer a society that's meant to be as beneficial for everybody in it as possible and works in this benevolently horizontal way."
I like fixing cars, it comes easily to me and it is plainly "good and proper" in that I'm bringing order to a disordered hooptie that'd otherwise be crushed.
I cannot answer phones and I cannot do any work on the billing side of things, I cannot organize other workers, nor can I manage suppliers and ordering of parts and supplies. No amount of money would make it enticing work, but luckily there's a whole litany of people who do all of those things in support of my working on cars. Bossman charges about $250 an hour for my labor and I get about $50 out of that, I consider that a great trade, he's real friendly and accommodating in every way I'd feel right asking for. He provides a space to work in with most of the large expense tools like hoists, manages people who talk to customers and order parts and handle tax paperwork and...
It is a natural hierarchy, and he's clearly the more valuable person than I am; managing to organize all that productive labor. I absolutely do not want to see it minimized, and cannot see where it could be improved upon without increasing waste and therefore increasing the disorder of the world by a little bit.
If I could see where waste could be eliminated he'd be cheerful to hear, and the elimination of that waste (say, a door that doesn't close right and lets the heat out) would clearly reflect in a better world for everyone. Quantify it by accounting costs in dollars, or man-hours, or whatever other "unit of human suffering/joy" you want.

Hell, but I am verbose right now.

"I have to say that I really like his philosophy"
He sure has a lot of good quotes and insights.
If you want a good laugh, look up his mother's opinion on him. She wrote a good scathing diatribe about his demeanor.

"I see more a problem when businesses are controlled by these shareholders and put workers at disadvantage."
As I pointed out, laborers are free to become shareholders if they want to. Someone needs to own the buildings and the machines and the patents and the... Most businesses can be undertaken with much less 'capital stock' than the big multinationals have, but the production is just much more laborious. A single man in a dirt floor hut can hammer out buckets with a piece of railroad rail as an anvil and a chisel used to cut the tin. Of course he'll be much less productive than a 1000 ton stamping machine which automates all steps of the process. All levels of production are in existence simultaneously, and with a world market they're all in competition for which makes the most economic sense. It really is anarchism, simply because there is no way to centralize human action all to one standard.

"as I dropped out of college"
I never finished my 2-year tech school thing because I wasn't learning much of anything that I hadn't already learned on the job. hell, I don't even have any of the relevant certifications to work on cars
Yeah people have to work to buy food, but that is pretty universal and not really anyone's fault. If you don't drink water you'll die too, but where we are at water's so abundant that getting it ain't much challenge at all. Same with food, thinking about it. I'm pretty sure I could live comfortably off of a dollar a day in food if I were to limit myself to staples and seasonings bought in extreme bulk. 50lb bags of rice, beans, noodles and 144 packs of eggs are ridiculously cheap when portioned out.
Don't look at it as a job to be dreaded, look at it as a pattern-interrupt to your week. Find somewhere you can put in a few hours a couple days a week at times that work for you. Unless that'd screw up your current income. It is a lot more fun and rewarding when there isn't any pressure or stress (you will have to laugh at people who try to load you down with artificial stress, but that's all of life)

"Do you have some thoughts on it?"
Eh... Keynes' words "work" in the sense that they baffle people into inaction against a system plainly contrary to their own interests.
Hayek's early work was pretty good but his later work got quite a bit less straightforward. He made a lot of compromises in order to fit in and schmooze with detractors. Mises' other (later) prominent student Murray Rothbard is a lot more direct and consistent, and then that Hoppe guy I brought up earlier who I fanboy over? Late in life student of Rothbard's.
It isn't an economic theory that sees much "adoption" because it isn't an order of things applied to a people as if it can change them. It is just observations about how people interact on their own. It therefore underlies all attempts at economic control, being the natural state of human economic interaction.

I'm not really on any welfare, just still living with a parent as I didn't move out when enrolling at that university because it was where I live so I just stayed in the same place. I was of course meant to do something else with my life but now I am pretending that I attend a part-time school and that's enough to just be left alone as of now. Overall my plan is just to kill myself soon. For now I am just passively letting life progress as it does just not caring about anything.

I can see a few viable reasons to support more liberal approach to gun control and how commiting suicide with it one is not that hard is one of these things. I really would want to just be able to press one trigger and that's it.

Also I feel a little bad at this point with self-deprecation I am doing in this convo. It would be fun if it was a sort of "I am a cutee adowable catgiwl pwease insult mee moweee nyaa :3" thing but it's just politics. I mean I really shouldn't give a fuck at all if I fit some of your expectations. You aren't some sort of genius walking with a lantern and checking people if they are wise enough to say something that finally convinces you. You're just a dude who believes in anarcho-capitalism and generally austrian school and if someone else doesn't convince you something else is true it doesn't mean everyone else is a dumb npc retard but just that you don't find something else convincing. That doesn't mean anything other than that.


"Eh... Keynes' words "work" in the sense that they baffle people into inaction against a system plainly contrary to their own interests."
I put more trust in judgement made by that financial advisor economist friend over yours, sowwy OwO Keynesian economics works in a sense of it giving the expected results.

"It isn't an economic theory that sees much "adoption" because it isn't an order of things applied to a people as if it can change them. It is just observations about how people interact on their own. It therefore underlies all attempts at economic control, being the natural state of human economic interaction."
I don't agree that this sort of capitalism is a natural order of things. We discussed that a few months ago from what I can recall. Of course I can see how it really is very sensible to look at it that way, but I see it as a sort of theory to use as a way of interpretation rather than that objective factual reality. For example I could try to interpret the world one time through lenses of austrian school and another time through historical materialism; both seem to be a similar philosophical instruments to me.

"If you want a good laugh, look up his mother's opinion on him. She wrote a good scathing diatribe about his demeanor."
Thanks, I will!

"The gem hiding in the panic? they'll all be smaller and less powerful. Have less resources to draw upon to enforce their will."
Have you ever played any game from Fallout series? There are exactly governments of this sort. It doesn't change nature of governments but their scale. I like the notion of people having more power locally though overall.

"It really is anarchism, simply because there is no way to centralize human action all to one standard."
Yeah, how you described it in that paragraph is very sensible. I don't have much to disagree with on that. /ᐠ> ⩊ <マ

"As I pointed out, laborers are free to become shareholders if they want to."
well other than that. These people don't have enough money to become actual shareholders. And I can see how it's more comfortable for many people to just have a normal paycheck without negative aspects of being a part of that company otherwise. I dislike mainly involuntary aspects of being an employee and how they are under control of the company rather than just doing labor on their own initiative and earning from that. I think the way workplaces work should be more democratic.

"Hell, but I am verbose right now."
Yeah! Sorry for all the things I didn't respond to. I just try to find things I have thoughts on and write them.

"It is a natural hierarchy, and he's clearly the more valuable person than I am; managing to organize all that productive labor. I absolutely do not want to see it minimized, and cannot see where it could be improved upon without increasing waste and therefore increasing the disorder of the world by a little bit."
Not everyone has that sort of amazing situation and so on. I am happy to hear it's like that in your case. I don't think he is more valuable but just has different talents and competencies. I don't see anything wrong with how the arrangement you have works. Cooperative enterprises could function exactly like that.

"I'm pretty sure I could live comfortably off of a dollar a day in food if I were to limit myself to staples and seasonings bought in extreme bulk. 50lb bags of rice, beans, noodles and 144 packs of eggs are ridiculously cheap when portioned out."
Hah that sounds good. I could do exactly that probably myself. For now I buy just portions like 1kg in normal shops. These bigger bulks are a better alternative.

"I like fixing cars, it comes easily to me and it is plainly "good and proper" in that I'm bringing order to a disordered hooptie that'd otherwise be crushed.
I cannot answer phones and I cannot do any work on the billing side of things, I cannot organize other workers, nor can I manage suppliers and ordering of parts and supplies."
Well I think that I am unable to do anything at all basically. It's very nice you found something you're good at. I would try to just do something with programming probably if I wasn't too retarded uwu. I think it requires skills I would be able to learn and I would be happy to have a work where I just sit in one place for hours in front of a computer.

"If money were still physical gold, then there would be much less ability to pervert the natural will of the unconscious masses. Money runs out and cannot be replaced without people generally agreeing with what it is being spent on."
I think it just made everything work better when money became something more abstract, like made everything more elastic. The problems is when the system breaks down, but I think it can easily happen under the sort of capitalism you support as well. Great depression began when gold standard was being utilized. Think about policies of FDR and what effect they had. It's what I would support and they had actual positive effect.

"Don't look at it as a job to be dreaded, look at it as a pattern-interrupt to your week."
It's complicated. I have a few reasons why I am the way I am. It feels much better for me to just stay at my room living in my own head and everything else is something to be dreaded.

"he needs to be producing something that people want to buy in order to fund his machinations. He needs to be building that thing cheaper and better than any competitor, and he also needs to keep a good public image"
Not really better. Consider planned obsolence. Marketing and controlling what people desire is a huge part of capitalism and it's something marxism very heavily touches upon. That's why I need to read finally that das kapital and just educate myself more. It would very easily give me good answers to everything you're saying and would probably be a better way to explain to you other ways of thinking than just my own answers I try to think of.

Generally I am not like totally a marxist or a socialist, as I don't have as a goal achieving classless society for example. My goal is to know what would be good for people. I like how current society has individualism and a sense of empowerement for individuals. Even entire furry thing is a part of it as people can individually shape their own identity instead being a part of one greater one. I think private property plays a huge part in it. But there is a lot of situations where it isn't the case, for example even just gambling.

"Some of what's coming to light in regards to 'cartels' is pretty silly, if you're speaking of the MS-13 types. They're quite oftentimes CIA funded, the ATF has provided them with guns several times, the drug trade is entirely propped up by prohibition and so on and so forth."
Oh that's interesting. And I can see your point with drugs. We probably might have similar opinions regarding this prohibition. If you were happy about pardon of Ross Ulbricht that's at least one thing that connects us. As for these cartels again I will try to read about it. I am not sure why exactly they would be funded.

'uwu, suicide, I just don't care'
don't contradict yourself, if you actually didn't care you wouldn't see yourself as a burden or life as something to be tolerated but not enjoyed, or cut shorter than natural
If you really feel that you want out of life, you gotta come up with a lot better justification than that weak shit. If you cared about being a burden to your parent then you'd care about their reaction to your solution.
I kinda hope you don't kill yourself, but that really ain't my choice at all.

"I can see a few viable reasons to support more liberal approach to gun control and "
Guns suck for suicide, lots of people turn their face into hamburger and then live many years after the fact just without eyes and generally in a much worse place than they previously were, never mind the ones that are only mildly more successful and spend hours or days in agony before bleeding out.

"I mean I really shouldn't give a fuck at all if I fit some of your expectations"
Thing is, "nobody cares" can be seen in a negative light but I can't look at it as anything but the greatest blessing. There's just so much possibility from general ignorance, and on the other side there's so very many terrible things that come with being monitored.

"Keynesian economics works in a sense of it giving the expected results."
Yes, when you expect slavery by another kindlier name. I don't like mushy words and gentle justifications.

"For example I could try to interpret the world one time through lenses of austrian school and another time through historical materialism; both seem to be a similar philosophical instruments to me."
Marx does get a lot of things right or near enough, but he gets many underlying incentives disastrously wrong.
Like for example how he figures that the worker's labor is worth the value of the worker's labor multiplied by the tools he uses in his work... Instead of being worth just his own labor, with the additional value brought by the tools (capital investment) is clearly paid to whoever owns the tools. If there is no incentive to owning tools then nobody will make tools. Labor will be more valuable in a very narrow way but only because you need more labor to make less product. Just like the technological stagnation in ancient greece. The ruling class didn't see any value in technological advancement because it devalued their slaves' labor. They seem to have missed the other side of the equation where their slaves would be producing more saleable goods with their set amount of labor.

"Have you ever played any game from Fallout series? There are exactly governments of this sort. It doesn't change nature of governments but their scale."
Nothing after new vegas.
Lots of people bring up fiction as though it is representative of reality. Someone or another I was chatting with kept bringing up some post apocalyptic netflix series as if it was reality instead of being programming.
Though the US is now annexxing canada, so there's a point to the falloutverse's credibility. :p

"I dislike mainly involuntary aspects of being an employee and how they are under control of the company rather than just doing labor on their own initiative and earning from that."
On one side; what better incentive to better yourself and save what little you can in order to accumulate capital of your own?
On the other side; what tool makes such dystopian conditions unavoidable but a territorial monopoly on the use of force? With free markets* there'll always be an alternative to such conditions, resulting in those conditions evaporating away since laborers will naturally move to employers who provide better conditions and pay.
*I realize now as I often do that we're likely looking at the "market" word differently. I do not mean the New York Stock Exchange, nor the London Metal Exchange. By "market" I mean anywhere at all that there is choice between options. Buying, selling, laboring, exchanging, bartering. As Mises put it so succinctly "human action".

"I don't think he is more valuable but just has different talents and competencies. I don't see anything wrong with how the arrangement you have works."
Ah but remember, I'm a heartless capitalist!
If we are cost accounting in terms of dollars per hour of effort, he is indeed worth far more than I am. After expenses (paying all those other supporting-role people I mentioned, and the typical consumables) he might make $50 an hour off of my labor, same as he pays me, but he isn't managing a business of just me. There are of course ten others just like me also employed by his business. So he's making a few hundred an hour, if we figure his hours as 'office hours' and not the '24/7' that I tend to think of small business owners as working.

"Well I think that I am unable to do anything at all basically."
you've been holding a conversation pretty well, that's gotta transfer over to some kinda sales type job or some such shit, I dunno.
Ain't nothing wrong with pushing a broom or stocking shelves, either. If I weren't good at mechanical shit that's probably what I'd do, either janitorial or night stocking. Ain't gotta really deal with "people" in either job, and you can let your mind wander without any danger of getting munched up by some production line equipment. I'd lose fingers quick working a stamping press or some other manufacturing type thing.

"Great depression began when gold standard was being utilized."
Negative. The stock market crashed because people were trading paper stocks that didn't actually exist in any meaningful way. When enough people wanted to turn their paper into gold it was realized that there wasn't actually gold behind those papers that they'd been trading.
Then nearly every intervention made the crash worse and wider reaching. From '33 until '75 gold was actually illegal to possess in the US.

"Not really better. Consider planned obsolence. Marketing and controlling what people desire is a huge part of capitalism and it's something marxism very heavily touches upon."
Yes, on one hand people with a short time preference are stupid and will buy things clearly designed to fail in short order. (What better example of disincentive? Who buys crap pays the price of buying crap, themself.)
On the other hand, removing the ability to choose what anyone buys is functionally identical to forcing them to buy substandard goods from a state affiliated monopoly. Because that's exactly how it goes. Pretty soon you've got moscow tractor factory #56 pumping out tractors measured in merit not by any value but by their tonnage. Because that's what the yearly production quota is listed in.

"That's why I need to read finally that das kapital and just educate myself more. It would very easily give me good answers to everything you're saying and would probably be a better way to explain to you other ways of thinking than just my own answers I try to think of."
I'm just quoting this so you'll read it again.
Li'l bit circular, don't you think?

"for example even just gambling."
A fool and his money will always part ways. You ban gambling and it'll just be something else (apart from banning gambling making the concept of insurance questionably legal)

"I am not sure why exactly they would be funded."
Same reason that both sides of foreign wars are often funded by one entity. Plutocrats will make terrible waste of their peoples' money and blood.

Yaaayy hey again. Sorry for not responding in case you were waiting for a response from me. I just felt like it would be okay to finish the conversation because I couldn't think of many things to write back to you. I appreciate your thoughts regarding suicide and your hopes I won't do it. With these guns I would try using some shotgun, I think it would work better than a handgun lol.

And I understand why you didn't play any fallouts after new vegas. Actually it scares me how close they were with that Canada. But sure, it's just fiction and I brought it up for fun mainly.

If you are going to read this and potentially will want to respond back because you are still here and so on and weather is still bad outside, what are your thoughts on why these newer fallouts turned out much worse than older ones? How capitalism accounts for products becoming worse yet more profitable simultaneously?

About gambling I wouldn't say it's a matter of people being fools. It's just how prone to addictive things someone is. Without exposure to addictive stuff someone can be safer, or avoid getting gambling addiction in the first place. Now online casinos are problematic. I feel bad for people who lose their money because of that. I think human psychology is more complicated than people just making choices always fully with our of their volition and then being responsible.

That makes sense what you wrote about Marx. I think that I generally have fondness for historical materialism, but I don't think about economy much using concepts like labor theory of value. And I am not really marxist in a sense of me supporting politics that are meant to lead to classless society. Do you remember Diogenes? I think I just have similar opinions to him pretty much on economics.

So about SoFurry, I can recall how you were saying back then that moderators are very oppressive and generally forums have a lot of censorship. I have to say that I thought more about it and I totally unequivocally agree with you. The forum died anyway in regards to politics already. Which is sad to me. How long was it existing? 10 years? Probably more. Now it's just dead. People would rather use discord than websites like that but I dislike discord myself.

Otherwise thanks for always sharing so many thoughts here when chatting with me. I like learning about perspective of someone who sees politics and economics your way. To explain my own politics more I just try to be pragmatic and understand what would be good for me. Now I am detached from the entire world so I feel apathy about politics, but it saddens me to see a lot of populism and genuinely vile rhetoric that hurts society from politicians. But generally if I was rich I would support political options that are good for the rich, and if I was less detached from my entire life I would support more leftist options that I think are good for the working class and generally society. I'd rather be poor in Denmark than in USA. And I already seem to be supporting more lefist opinions but I don't think it's impactful in any way, just what I am saying when talking to someone.


"Thing is, "nobody cares" can be seen in a negative light but I can't look at it as anything but the greatest blessing. There's just so much possibility from general ignorance, and on the other side there's so very many terrible things that come with being monitored. "

I agree with that. Unfortunately people around are very happy to heavily monitor you. Are you open about your sexuality? Do you feel like you can live a satisfying life in that regard? Or it feels like society around you is oppressive? This sort of populist democratic government often represents this conservative voter base that even without that representation would be doing its thing. If lesser government means less power for cultural oppression I can definitely see myself supporting it, but obviously for example republicans in the us aren't an example of that sort of approach, the total opposite of that.


Sorry for writing to you so suddenly out of nowhere. And I hope you didn't feel annoyed at lack of response for all this time. I may struggle sometimes with ending conversations because I don't know if I should write something short when I don't have any thoughts or just go away like I tend to do. Now I suddenly thought about writing to you and so I did because why not tbh.

Ah I remember how I was saying I would read that das kapital book. I of course haven't done it. :( Please don't beat me now. I can't force myself to focus enough on it. I can't focus on completely anything at all, like even watching anime or anything. I spend majority of my time doing completely nothing at all lying in my bed and being surrounded by my thoughts. It feels mainly like a sort of ADD or ADHD combined with maladaptive daydreaming. oO Oh sorry for writing so much about that sort of thing, I just wanted to say I didn't read that book like I was saying I would.

Damn I want to finish this message already but I don't want to stop on that dumb paragraph above. Maybe i will just wish you a nice day then. :3 I just felt an urge to send this message and I don't expect a response or anything in case you don't want to respond, and hopefully it would finish this entire convo more nicely than me not saying back anything at al.

>shotgun
nope, still a bad idea especially because birdshot is likely all you'll find in your area
guns are pretty inefficient for anything except projecting force upon things at distance, it's the one thing that they do pretty good

>why these newer fallouts turned out much worse than older ones?
Well, black isle got cut up and butchered. Bethesda kinda did what they're famous for. Remember that NV was pretty much on the order of a 'fan mod' using the bethesda created f3 game engine. Passion projects will seemingly always have more depth of character than corporate profit-driven productions.

>How capitalism accounts for products becoming worse yet more profitable simultaneously?
"capital consumption" is the term you're looking for.
Bethesda took a good franchise with a deep story and a fanbase (intellectual property can be capital).
Then just like a business owner who doesn't spend the money/effort to maintain his equipment and allows it to be damaged and worn through that lack of maintenance, they produced a bunch of low effort slop with the name pasted on it, relying on name recognition to get sales for a short while.
Consuming that existing stock of capital and exchanging it for paper profits.
Just the same as a productive business being bought then split up and sold off piecemeal same as happened to nearly all of british industry in the '70s.

>I think human psychology is more complicated than people just making choices always fully with our of their volition and then being responsible.
Well, I know one of my grandparents could moderate their alcohol consumption, but no other male in my line has been able to.
So I've never been drunk. Simple and of my own volition.
Just as you can't spend your entire life-effort propping up someone determined to destroy themself with drink and drugs, the costs of doing so is just the same as if you were consumed by those vices yourself but with none of the supposed benefits (you don't get to escape from reality for a little while). Hearkens back to my earlier comment on suicidal programming in this comment string. Subsidizing bad choices, making them sustainable. Narcanning overdosed junkies, forgiving bankruptcy seekers, monetary inflation.

>you were saying back then that moderators are very oppressive
I'd go with "stifling" rather than oppressive. Wasn't just their fault either; someone on there was reporting nearly every post I made as if it were something worth reporting. Just the same trouble every closed minded secular space finds itself in. Only so much circular discussion can be had before a disconnect from reality grows.

>but it saddens me to see a lot of populism
See why I was so giddy to figure out how they were saying the quiet part loud, denouncing populism in their partisan attacks a couple years back?
Popular democracy is quite plainly destructive; so much so that it is even warned against by those who choose it as their team name.

>I'd rather be poor in Denmark than in USA.
Of course, most everyone prefers being a high time preference person in a low time preference society.
Society is comprised of individuals however, and that low time preference evaporates as the culture shifts toward capital consumption. Those with a mind for the future are pillaged and those with no mind for the future are the ones living large on others' produce. Just the same as many familial inheritances being frittered away senselessly.

>Are you open about your sexuality?
At work a few days ago someone was making a joke about chicken fingers "oh you can only take three fingers I can take four" I think I might have shocked everyone there by taking his hand in both of mine before looking in his eyes and giving him a 'both of these hands have been completely inside my ass' everyone was a bit quiet for a while after the laughter died down.
Dunno, it just ain't important unless you make it important. You're only flagellating yourself by making it important.

>Do you feel like you can live a satisfying life in that regard?
My complete lack of a love life is probably some combination of narcissism (people annoy me by not understanding what I mean better than I do, I don't want to invest in another person just to be left again) poor communication skill (these replies take an hour or more to piece together, I don't think fast enough to match the flow of a verbal conversation) and general fear around all the casual sex that's seemingly the norm. That last one might be skewed a bit by being on here. Where else do you see people talking about bugchasing and gore and infidelity and whatever other terrible fetishes as though they're positive things? Other than when it's on the news, the news is always programming you for self destruction.

>Or it feels like society around you is oppressive?
Nothing I own is actually mine. I'm only renting it from those who can come and take it with machine guns and a logistical tail which is functionally endless.
That's all taxes are. Rent payments.
Any wonder why drinking and drugs are so popular?

>but obviously for example republicans in the us aren't an example of that sort of approach, the total opposite of that.
Man ruling over man will always expose self interest in the hearts of those who are ruling.
That to say your "but..." is not a statement against against the preceding point but instead supports small government. Neither of the two parties ever shrink the government.
We'll see eventually if it happens this time, but I have very small hopes. Especially watching Massie get attacked for refusing to vote for more spending and a bigger budget.

>Sorry for writing to you so suddenly out of nowhere. And I hope you didn't feel annoyed at lack of response for all this time. I may struggle sometimes with ending conversations because I don't know if I should write something short when I don't have any thoughts or just go away like I tend to do. Now I suddenly thought about writing to you and so I did because why not tbh.
It's all good, no awkwardness from me. I figured you needed some time to think. Even if that were the end of this conversation it'd spring up again at some point.

>I can't force myself to focus enough on it.
Well, the language used is intentionally over complicated. Conmen baffle small minds with artificially complex nonsense, just the same as any gnostic religion. Big words saying nothing carry a grandeur while simplicity is underwhelming.

>I can't focus on completely anything at all
I'm like that during panic attacks. Can't even read anything with my eyes jumping around. Shit sucks, just got to get back in bed and lay there in the dark until it goes away.
Gotta pinch off the thought-pathways that lead to pointless stress. Politics is a big one, worrying about if any of it is salvageable. Worrying about how such a swath of society can't possibly be wrong and evil and rapacious.
It calms my worries a lot, the realization that there isn't any "good" in politics and only "bad". Makes it simple and easy to file away as a total negative corrupting everything it touches.

>and hopefully it would finish this entire convo more nicely than me not saying back anything at all
Don't worry about any of it bro-ette. We'll never meet IRL, I'm nobody at all and very much prefer it that way.

I keep doing it, forgetting to hit the reply button...