Recent comments

  • WhiteIndian's picture
    WhiteIndian 4 years 15 weeks ago
    Natural Law
    Web link Don Stacy
    Locke's Divine-Right-Of-Property is Bible-based, and is just as plausible as the Divine-Right-of-Kings. "...it is very clear that God, as King David says (Psalm 115:16), 'has given the earth to the children of men'..." ~John Locke Two Treatises on Government (1680-1690) Book II, Chapter 5 Of Property "To date, however, no philosopher has ever successfully divorced Lockesian property rights from monotheism." ~Jason Godesky The Right to Property 18 July 2005 http://rewild.info/anthropik/2005/07/the-right-to-property/
  • WhiteIndian's picture
    WhiteIndian 4 years 15 weeks ago Web link Melinda L. Secor
    Federal Gov't = Business Elite's Middle Management. Obama's just a tool of an efficient, interlocking network of boardroom elite capitalists. Those same hierarchical elites are the ones paying for the religio-economic think tanks promoting laissez-faire capitalism, which absolves business of any wrong doing. Basically, the gov't is the "cut-out man." If anybody gets hurt, the "cut-out man" gets blamed; the elite get to say "I didn't have anything to do with it; hell, I'm all for freedom!" Plausible deniability through libertarian think tanks! It's pretty easy to find priestcraft whores to preach the message, and useful idiots who believe it, like you.
  • WhiteIndian's picture
    WhiteIndian 4 years 15 weeks ago
    Natural Law
    Web link Don Stacy
    I'm not writing on walls with crayons in somebody's house; I'm writing in a space provided to invite public comment. What you're seeking is conformity to a religio-economic catechism, and I'm not playing along like a submissive true believer. Instead, I've provided documented evidence that you hold contradictions, and encourage you to check your premises. But its easier to call me a troll or vandal than to think.
  • AtlasAikido's picture
    AtlasAikido 4 years 15 weeks ago
    Natural Law
    Web link Don Stacy
    What I care about is liberty and I will point out flaws in any system that would diminish it. I would also challenge any system that is totalitarian in nature and any attempts to reconcile dictatorship with liberty/ self ownership. My *moral grounds* for rejecting murder stems from property rights and self ownership. You do not need religion to justify basic morality. You know that murder is wrong without anyone telling you. And it is still wrong when done or commanded by imaginary friends (and its corollary The Most Dangerous Superstition--Authority). George H Smith points out "...Rand's principles, if consistently applied, lead necessarily to a repudiation of government on *moral grounds*". “IN DEFENSE OF RATIONAL ANARCHISM” http://heim.ifi.uio.no/~thomas/po/rational-anarchism.html Do bible believers honestly not see the inherently illogical and unsolvable conundrum they face by trying to resolve two antithetical systems? I don't understand how anyone who cares about ethics can be religious after having read those "holy" books. The power of denial is amazing. Cue George Carlin...
  • Darkcrusade's picture
    Darkcrusade 4 years 15 weeks ago
    Natural Law
    Web link Don Stacy
    Some have advocated a bannishment of a new member on STR. Suggesting that it was somebodies 'house.' If an omnipotent God has souvreignty over his creation,and the Body and soul of individuals,by your own "logic???" He has the Just claim to decide to shorten an unrepentent body,if he so choses, and than have mercy on the everlasting soul. The woefully misunderstood reading of Yeho-Shua, and the warfare-stratagems of the adversary addressed throughout,from Genesis on. Reveals the principle of exposisitional constancy,although written by many different authors seperated by thousands of years.Why go to Yeho-Shua,When you could have pointed to the flood God sent. One of the disturbing aspects of the Old Testament record was God's instructions, upon entering the land of Canaan, to wipe out every man, woman, and child of certain tribes inhabiting the land. This is difficult to justify without the insight of a "gene pool problem" from the remaining Nephilim, Rephaim, et al., which seems to illuminate the difficulty.(As the Scriptures state Noah was perfect in his generations! http://www.khouse.org/articles/1997/110/ ) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yIukHNKVkSA http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VBbBenCTTwE Further concerning a bannishment;the metaphor would be correct if some were invited to come to my house and use my crayons to color in my coloring books,but now i do not like the colors you are using so iam taking away my crayons and books and you must leave. As this is my house,crayons and books,It IS MY RIGHT! (Which i agree with, IF he does the financing of STR.)
  • AtlasAikido's picture
    AtlasAikido 4 years 15 weeks ago
    Natural Law
    Web link Don Stacy
    On those trying to reconcile liberty w the bible To those who imbibe in a bible (amplified) and ask if one needs be a believer? The bible is a theocratic totalitarian system and cannot be reconciled with the concept of liberty and peace which is what i am living. Why try to? Bible based amplified teachings? You can't address a person logically who is either a) someone claiming to be Christian/Jewish who is ignorant regarding what the bible actually says (Yahweh is a murderer and condones murder as well) or b) someone who know's of the bibles immoral nature and defends it anyway because common sense and morality don't apply to "god". This is like arguing non-aggression with someone who thinks force is just dandy because it works so well. What could you ever possibly hope to say to such a person of this mentality? With all due respect. Pointing out the incompatibility of theocracy and liberty is not disrespectful (although a waste of time to some but others may get the information they may need to become free). The religious system of a murderous entity claiming to be god is in no way in line with freedom or self ownership. All one needs to do to see the tyrannical mentality of Yahweh is to peruse the list of laws in the Torah and see how many are absurd (much like our (mal prohibitum) laws are today) and how many are punishable by death. Or you can start with Joshua chapter 6 where Yahweh sanctions the murder of women and children, innocent people. This sort of *genocidal* edict is common in the Old Testament. Evilbible.com has many examples of such behavior. You can make excuses for why murder isn't really murder because god did it, or said it ok or they must have deserved it for being wicked. It's hypocrisy and fallacy.
  • WhiteIndian's picture
    WhiteIndian 4 years 15 weeks ago
    Natural Law
    Web link Don Stacy
    It would be fascinating to study the connection between biblical Fundamentalism and economic Fundamentalism; I suspect the correlation is high.
  • Darkcrusade's picture
    Darkcrusade 4 years 15 weeks ago
    Natural Law
    Web link Don Stacy
    CORNELIUS TACITUS (55 - 120 A.D.) Tacitus was a 1st and 2nd century Roman historian who lived through the reigns of over half a dozen Roman emperors. Considered one of the greatest historians of ancient Rome, Tacitus verifies the Biblical account of Jesus' execution at the hands of Pontius Pilate who governed Judea from 26-36 A.D. during the reign of Tiberius. "Christus, the founder of the [Christian] name, was put to death by Pontius Pilate, procurator of Judea in the reign of Tiberius. But the pernicious superstition, repressed for a time, broke out again, not only through Judea, where the mischief originated, by through the city of Rome also." Annals XV, 44 What this passage reveals and how it confirms the Biblical account: Jesus did exist Jesus was the founder of Christianity Jesus was put to death by Pilate Christianity originated in Judea (With Jesus) Christianity later spread to Rome (Through the Apostles and Evangelists) ************************************************************** GAIUS SUETONIUS TRANQUILLUS (69 - 130 A.D.) Suetonius was a prominent Roman historian who recorded the lives of the Roman Caesars and the historical events surrounding their reigns. He served as a court official under Hadrian and as an annalist for the Imperial House. Suetonius records the expulsion of the Christian Jews from Rome (mentioned in Acts 18:2) and confirms the Christian faith being founded by Christ. "As the Jews were making constant disturbances at the instigation of Chrestus, [Claudius] expelled them from Rome." Life of Claudius 25.4
  • WhiteIndian's picture
    WhiteIndian 4 years 15 weeks ago Page Glen Allport
    You see 2 people living in a rabbit cage as "prosperity?" You're evading reality. Domestication = greatly increased violence. It's just that simple, and there are volumes of archeological and anthropological evidence backing up that statement, some of which I've provided already and won't repeat again, because people complain I repeat and repeat it. Well, as you can see, I have to repeat and repeat; the same bromides apologizing for agricultural city-Statism get repeated and repeated. Although I will repeat myself on this: the Plains Indians were a post-apocalyptic society of refugees from the Invasion further east, with double the violence of pre-Conquest tribes. It's intellectually dishonest to keep pointing to victims of Conquest as normal pre-Conquest society. Agricultural city-Statists such as yourself have a huge system of apologetics based on nothing but Hobbesian myths. It's a way of dehumanizing 99% of humanity as "savages." (Even though that word merely means "dwellers of the woods.") Thus, you and libertarians and an-caps hold a glaring contradiction: You glorify agricultural city-Statism (civilization), an integrated cultural system, while belly-aching about the inseparable Statism aspect. I'm advocating nothing but this: acknowledge your contradiction and begin to check your premises upon which your contradiction is based.
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 4 years 15 weeks ago
    Natural Law
    Web link Don Stacy
    Someone wrote: I have seen...natural law references in your posts, and so I don't think I would be mistaken in assuming you are interested in the subject. My response: It is much more than mere "interest", my friend. Individual Secessionists return to their original state. Their status reverts back to that of Natural Persons, which A Dictionary of Law (1891) defines as, "Such as are formed by nature, as distinguished from artificial persons...formed by human laws for purposes of society and government." What one creates, one controls, and since Natural Persons, i.e. men and women, are not "formed by human laws", they are therefore, not subject to "human laws", (without their consent). It is obvious, (to me at least), that I did not form myself, just as governments did not form themselves, therefore neither of us may create "our own law", we are both subject to the law of our respective creators. So, it took no stretch of the imagination to realize that if Natural Persons are formed by nature then they are subject to the Law of Nature, the Natural Law (of man). Thus began my love of the Natural Law (of man).
  • Atman's picture
    Atman 4 years 15 weeks ago Web link Cheryl Cline
    .
  • Glen Allport's picture
    Glen Allport 4 years 15 weeks ago Page Glen Allport
    You see freedom and prosperity as a "horror"? I'll repeat part of the comment I quoted above, from someone who has lived in both England and the UK; it certainly fits with what I've read about Hong Kong for years: ". . . great freedom, less beurocracy, cheap food, greater community, great public transport, people feel much safer and there is a 'life' about the place. There is also an absence of the envy, jealousy, bitterness see/ hear here. We have lived in both and prefer HK, often saying if we have to be poor better HK than UK." How is this a horror? I'm not saying Hong Kong is perfect -- it isn't. Heck, it's run by the Communist Chinese. Nor is there ANY nation I know of without too much tyranny and too little emotional health and compassion. But what, exactly, is the type of society YOU'd prefer? While I'm at it: you DO realize that the computer you are reading this on is not something a hunter-gatherer society could produce, right? Same for modern dentistry, cel phones (or any type of phone), and almost everything else in the modern world. Some of the bad things in the world are inevitable -- no society can eliminate all pain and hardship -- and some (many) are caused by widespread emotional damage and by tyranny. Respect for the rights of others would eliminate much of the evil I've seen you complain about; treating children with respect and compassion would eliminate most of the rest. Another thought for you to consider: I've read Diamond, but the fact is that agriculture does NOT require tyranny and evil -- agriculture creates larger and concentrated populations, of course, which makes tyranny more visible and gives it more to work with, but not every ag culture is cruel. I have friends who are Jain (the Eastern religion) and they are non-violent and compassionate to an extent that shocks. Buddhists, as a group, also tend to be gentle. Both religions grew and prospered thousands of years ago in a region where agriculture, not hunting-gathering, was the way of life. Those religions (and Hinduism, from the same time and era, which is also typically gentle but less so and less reliably than the other two) are generally less violent and cruel than some of the hunter-gatherer Plains Indian tribes, for instance. Yes, there was war and cruelty among the Indians and any other large group of native peoples you can name -- populations were small and there is less recorded history among such groups (if any), so we hear less about it, but some tribes were as cruel as any ag culture you can name. So again, what are you advocating, exactly? How about doing a column for STR and putting it all together for us? It's easy to point to things that are wrong with the world, and most of what you point to, I agree with: I don't want people to live in poverty and squalor, for instance, and I hate the genocide that was committed against the Indians and against almost every other native group in the world. I don't think you have to sell anyone here at STR on the idea that such things are bad. Reducing the coercive power of government and teaching respect for the rights of all is STR's official position; I add, or perhaps just heavily emphasize, that children, infants, newborns, and pregnant mothers must be treated well -- with compassion and respect -- because if they aren't, the young grow into emotionally damaged adults who create damaging societies (again, Alice Miller is a good resource on that). Love and freedom are the key elements in making any society healthy, whether the society is high-tech or not, ag-based or not, or anything else. What, in detail, are YOU advocating? This isn't sarcasm; I'm interested in hearing your position .
  • WhiteIndian's picture
    WhiteIndian 4 years 15 weeks ago Page Glen Allport
    Any horror can be justified in the eyes of those profiting from it.
  • WhiteIndian's picture
    WhiteIndian 4 years 15 weeks ago Page Glen Allport
    How to judge technology: TechJudge http://www.ranprieur.com/tech.html
  • AtlasAikido's picture
    AtlasAikido 4 years 15 weeks ago Web link Melinda L. Secor
    ~For those blaming Ayn Rand for genocide instead of embracing her break thru contributions to freedom. Lincoln, Sherman and Sheridan (Govt) do not come up in the Slavery and Native Indian genocide map for our resident We-ist. This is hardly Rand's fault for missing what he failed to mention HIMSELF and what is by all accounts considered TODAY as Revisionist History! http://www.strike-the-root.com/vision-of-free-society-1 ~For those smearing Rand as a lover of psycho-killers, by ignoring her qualifying comments is, I submit, intellectually dishonest. But what did the author-philosopher actually say about Hickman? In The Journals of Ayn Rand, she is clearly quoted: “[My hero is] very far from him, of course. The outside of Hickman, but not the inside. Much deeper and much more. A Hickman with a purpose. And without the degeneracy. It is more exact to say that the model is not Hickman, but what Hickman suggested to me.” There was clearly a context when Rand made her journal entry. Anyone who read her books would understand that the philosopher/writer is against initiation of force. She was morally against the crime Hickman committed and throughout her life, she advocated individual freedom and not collectivism. ~In general, slave-mentality can consist of any of these elements: * A compulsion or obsession to blame others and things or factors outside yourself. * A belief that the world in general is unfair. * The belief that because of "government," "its laws," etc. you can't be free. * An emphasis on changing or "fighting" factors outside yourself ("the system," "the ruling class," "big-daddy-government," etc.). * Submission to real or imagined "external authorities." * A strong orientation of "I'm right; you (and practically everything and everybody else) are wrong. * A rejection of the notion that you can improve yourself, rise above your circumstances, and become the master of your destiny. * A compulsion to attack anyone who suggests you can improve yourself.
  • KenK's picture
    KenK 4 years 15 weeks ago Web link Guest
    Any American president who wanted to fatally undermine this tinhorn dictatorship had only to announce to the world that military stuff excepted all import, export, travel, and currency controls are hereby lifted. The siege mentality against the Yankees that the Castro bros used to hold on to power all those years would have evaporated quicker than an ice cube on a Cuban beach.
  • Glen Allport's picture
    Glen Allport 4 years 15 weeks ago Page Glen Allport
    Ah, yes -- clicked over to see the piece; people in squalid conditions, got it. The "fetish" you mention is simple awareness that HK's improvement under the Brits in the second half of the twentieth century, for example, shows (as does the history of the US, Switzerland, Sweden pre-1970, Argentina before the build-up of its welfare state, and many other places) that when government is small and leaves people alone, the overall well-being of the population increases dramatically. Mainland China is another example we've all heard of -- yes, it's a mess, a tyranny, with a corrupt and cruel government, but it is far more free than under Mao and while extremes of rich and poor still exist, there is now a solid middle class about the size of the whole US population. Those people (and their parents) were almost all desperately poor under Mao. Creating even a reasonably prosperous society out of the devastation of something like Mao's China takes years of hard, messy work, but the fact is this: freedom reliably improves the situation of the masses. Of course, when a society starts to become wealthy, government takes more and more of the wealth -- socialism is the tool of choice for this, because the people will usually cheer it on, making the extraction of wealth from the people to the government easier to maintain -- and this reduces the creation of wealth (by penalizing the production of wealth, subsidizing non-production, building expensive bureaucracies, etc) and then the overall standard of living slowly degrades. See England, Sweden, and other first-world welfare states -- not yet third-world, but heading relentlessly in that direction. Here's a comment from the article you link to, from someone who (says s/he) has lived in both HK and England: Open your eyes, wake up, see how a lot of the poor really live in this country, especially elderly, isolated, lonely and afraid. No hope, Feel insecure in the streets and homes. Life in HK is, on the whole, better for everyone, including the poor and old. They are certainly happier. Yes, there is extreme wealth as well as extreme poverty but also a large middle class but somehow it is a different world to UK. Better climate, great freedom, less beurocracy, cheap food, greater community, great public transport, people feel much safer and there is a 'life' about the place. There is also an absence of the envy, jealousy, bitterness see/ hear here. We have lived in both and prefer HK, often saying if we have to be poor better HK than UK. - Turfoot, Yorkshire, England, 13/1/2012 02:37
  • Glen Allport's picture
    Glen Allport 4 years 15 weeks ago Page Glen Allport
    I'm a fan of Kurzweil also, and the accelerating pace of change he talks about is such that I'm surprised at it all over again whenever I think about it or take another look at one of his charts. He does understate the negative possibilities, though -- Bill Joy is just as reasonable and persuasive but has a much darker take on what we'll get out of the coming hyper-tech. (Joy's "The Future Doesn't Need Us" at Wired, from a decade ago, is still an interesting read). One of the points I've made repeatedly in my writing is that what people choose to DO with technology -- at any level -- depends largely on their emotional health and their world view. A healthier society will use tech in healthier ways, and this factor is going to be ever-more important going forward.
  • WhiteIndian's picture
    WhiteIndian 4 years 16 weeks ago Page Glen Allport
    The Death Cult likes to first dehumanize and degrade that which it wants to abuse and destroy. All part of the war on "primitive" life itself, Mother Earth and her Children. Well, not children. Meatbags. "The only good meatbag is a dead meatbag." Nips, Huns, Injuns, SandNiggers and no-good-Shit MeatBags.
  • GeoffreyTransom's picture
    GeoffreyTransom 4 years 16 weeks ago Page Glen Allport
    Thanks for the nice response, Glenn. As I've mentioned here and elsewhere, I am an arch-contrarian in my investment strategy (my favourite Commitment of Traders indicator is what I call the 'Dumb Bull Ratio', and I use BPI and CCI extremes to position AGAINST the crowd)... BUT when it comes to the nascent ability of human ingenuity to open up the mysteries of technology I become almost almost quasi-religious. So I'm a HUGE fan of Kurzweil, Drexler and their ilk (I even have difficulty disliking Aubrey de Grey). For me it all goes back to Richard Feynman's 1959 talk - "There's PLENTY of Room at the Bottom" - I read it in the early 90s, and read Drexler's "Engines of Creation" the same week. Back then, the second half of the 21st century was the likely target date for nano-assemblers and strong AI... and Kurzweil then said "Nah - it'll be here by 2029 at the latest". And he's been correct - or even slightly LATE - on other things (like the human genome mapping projections). Last year, the Cray XK6 continued the trend set by Chinese supercomputer Tianhe-1A in 2010 - we went past Moravec's estimate of the human brain's theoretical processing capacity in 2008 with 'Roadrunner' (Moravec's estimate is equal to about 1 petaflop)... Tianhe-1A hit 2.5 Petaflops. Cray's XK6 can (theoretically) scale to 50 petaFlops, but is already delivering a 20PFlop machine (which is well above the upper bound for human brain simulation). Moore's law just got pwned. And supercomputers don't have to dedicate processing power to running a liver or spleen, dragging its meatbag to the toilet for a shit every 19 hours or so, or wondering whether its wife fancies the milkman or if Ron Paul will get any media attention. (What I am getting at, is that human cognition involves MASSIVE redundancy and also a large processor load dedicated to systems 'support'). When (not if) we get Strong AI, and the technological acceleration begins in earnest, our interaction with and understanding of the physical universe will be so fundamentally altered that our current understanding of the 'state of nature' will seem childish and silly by comparison. I can't wait. We will find out that the universe is even more awesome than we already know... and we will learn that the 'tragedy of the commons' only exists due to the primitive awkwardness of our production technology.
  • GeoffreyTransom's picture
    GeoffreyTransom 4 years 16 weeks ago Page Glen Allport
    That video was awesome - the best use of vocoder I have ever seen (WAY better than the Cher song that made it acceptable). I am a big lover of Sagan - the man knew how important altered states of consciousness are to developing a proper sense of self (and to make one's philosophical life more productive: the myth of the 'stoner' is simply dumb, since weed is mostly a force-multiplier). The man made it clear: he smoked weed EVERY DAY. That said, I have never smoked anything in my life - edibles suffice, along with 'primitive' ingestibles - from peyote to mescaline to mushrooms to morning glory tea... and one day I will do a proper ayahuasca experience. Imagine how awesome humanity would become if we forced ALL candidates for political office to undertake a (non-pharma) hallucinogenic experience: the Cheney types would trip balls and horrify themselves when they looked into their inner abyss and it snarled back at them... they would find that deep down they are so monstrous that they don't really even care about themSELVES. You're right about the OT critique though - the foundational myths of any 'nation' are almost always intensely statist. The cock-snipping and willingness to kill one's own kids in exchange for power is the sort of thing we're encouraged to associate with 'primitive' cultures, in order to misdirect us from the fact that the really horrifying behaviour is decided upon by nicely dressed people speaking in gentle voices in palaces. Michio Kaku's observation is something I have banged on about for a decade - We could be in the middle Of an inter-galactic conversation And we wouldn't even know Any civilisation that is a generation more advanced than we are, will not require little grey dorky bodies, will not need to speak through a meatbag, will be 1/50th the size of a virus, and their radio traffic will be encrypted and thus utterly indistinguishable from background noise. AND they'll be able to interact with us mind to mind if they so choose... but they would feel no need to. They would not be hostile - they would be utterly indifferent to us.
  • AtlasAikido's picture
    AtlasAikido 4 years 16 weeks ago Web link Melinda L. Secor
    Primitivism awaits. Go for it. The greatest fool can ask more than the wisest man can answer.
  • WhiteIndian's picture
    WhiteIndian 4 years 16 weeks ago Page Glen Allport
    You didn't read the article; people are living in tiny wire rabbit cages, sometimes more than one per hutch. The libertarian fetish for Heritage Kong and the other Asian police state is astounding.
  • Glen Allport's picture
    Glen Allport 4 years 16 weeks ago Page Glen Allport
    The widespread (and often stunning, yes) mistreatment of animals is a reminder that fostering compassion and emotional health generally are every bit as important as fostering liberty. Neither quality is sufficient on its own.
  • jimmonomoy's picture
    jimmonomoy 4 years 16 weeks ago Page painkilleraz
    Hello Jesse -- a wonderful piece. Part of the mystery of "Who will build the roads?," we can now see that the imperialists will. And certainly the state will. The scales began to fall from my eyes when I read 2 revealing works on major transportation sagas, Stephen Ambrose's book on the transcontinental railroad and David McCullough's work on the Panama Canal. These works are not even muckraker's pieces, but the imperialism, political corruption, plutocracy, militarism, and statism are rampant.
  • WhiteIndian's picture
    WhiteIndian 4 years 16 weeks ago Page Glen Allport
    Cage dogs of Hong Kong: The tragedy of tens of thousands living in 6ft by 2ft rabbit hutches - in a city with more Louis Vuitton shops than Paris http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2084971/Hong-Kongs-cage-homes-Te... Stunning. I know, I know, they're better off than, well something, right?
  • AtlasAikido's picture
    AtlasAikido 4 years 16 weeks ago Web link Melinda L. Secor
    The problem is primitivism. It is pure evil....It is not solving the problem. Someone who is so fixated on their problem of state and cities apparently cannot think outside their Dunbar, Malthus, Empiricism out of touch with reality map.. A Primitivist is not here to teach nor understand. Don't care what the reason is Mommy--Dunbar, Malthus, Empiricism--said so...(Replacing the State with Mommy-ism is not the answer). sTROLLING in the wilderness does not require primitivism. Primitivism is what we came from. Primitivism is old age and dead at 25. I can go modern with a 4 wheel into the wilderness. He can go build his stone ax--that's primitive. Go primitive? Who cares if a primitive wants to go. *Taking us with him is the problem*.
  • WhiteIndian's picture
    WhiteIndian 4 years 16 weeks ago Page Glen Allport
    It was a stone groove, my man! Symphony of Science - 'Our Place in the Cosmos' (ft. Sagan, Dawkins, Kaku, Jastrow) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vioZf4TjoUI A minor aside: the lunacy in the OT doesn't reflect the primitive; Jerusalem and fantasies of streets paved with gold are rather city-Statist.
  • GeoffreyTransom's picture
    GeoffreyTransom 4 years 16 weeks ago Page Glen Allport
    I used that set of adjectives because the vast vast VAST majority of the observable universe is cold (near-absolute-zero) and dark (night-sky dark, not 'nuclear bunker with no generators' dark). Those words have a nice embedded double entendre, too: physical vs anthropomorphic emotional-projection. * Hard like a rock, or hard like the 1000-yard stare of a US soldier at a checkpoint in a land that isn't his? * Cold like ice, or cold like the soul of an IDF soldier helping steal land from people who've lived on it for a hundred generations? * Dark like a movie theatre, or dark like the mind of anyone who believes in the primitive racial-supremacist lunacy of the Old Testament? I also think those words accurately reflect the disposition of the universe towards some bunch of self-important naked monkeys on a slightly-interesting ball of rock orbiting a not-special little star in a backwater of a galaxy that is indistinguishable from a hundred billion others. The more we inculcate the 'we are nothing special' view, the better: the human conceit of 'specialness' has caused enough agony and depravity when directed just at our own little mildly-interesting ball of rock and its inhabitants - if we don't get rid of that trope before we blunder out into the stars, we deserve to be extinct. Lastly... when considering the staggeringly tiny bit of the universe that we occupy, you should also consider just how much of it is relatively inhospitable to our poorly-evolved meatbags. Most deserts, a good chunk of any decent-sized mountains, the liquid environment at any depth greater than about 40 feet, the polar regions - all of those places will kill a naked ape in a relatively short period of time. Mother Nature (to personify the natural world for a sec) is indifferent as to whether humanity extincts itself or is extincted by a mutated germ or virus, or a comet, meteor, supernova, or any of the planetary-scale ass-whipping-phenomena; we're about as important in the broad sweep of cosmic history as chlamydia. The thing is, deep down I am perfectly happy with being an insignificant hairless ape whose entire life is less than a blip in the timeline of this tiny little planet, which itself is hurtling through a vast void. We each of us have that nanoscopic sliver of time, sandwiched between eternities of non-existence. Anybody who can't make peace with their insignificance will be shitting bricks, crossing their fingers and hoping for God as their last heartbeat approaches - and that's the ultimate in lacking self-awareness. That said, I am also a utopian extropian who plans on being alive when we get past the knee of our tech development curve... so I will zip up my mind, upload it to a nanobot a few million atoms across, download everything ever written (and know it instantly)... and spend eternity playing Reversi.
  • Glen Allport's picture
    Glen Allport 4 years 16 weeks ago Page Glen Allport
    What a great reply! Lots of interesting ideas in your mini-essay, Geoffrey. I feel the same way you do about " . . . the use of the shorthand that conflates a system with the way a system is MODELED . . ." and tried to be clear that everything of an *explanatory* nature in quantum theory is conjecture, and that there are multiple, conflicting views of what might actually be happening, but it's difficult to completely avoid writing in a way that uses such shorthand, because otherwise you get annoying levels of repetition. One of the things that strikes me whenever I read on the topic (including reading your comment above) is that different writers, physicists, and schools of thought see the experimental results in VERY different ways, and in fact often describe the results themselves (of famous experiments) differently. This is true to an extent in every field, I think, but seems to especially characterize physics. Many people in the field have clear and hardened views (Deutch's assertion that "no other known explanation" fits the data than the many-worlds idea, for instance, versus the late John Wheeler's Copenhagen-esq, biocentric view). If there is any *proof* worthy of the term that clearly supports one view over the many others that have been advanced, I haven't seen it. This is true for the "extra dimensions" idea, as well, and for every other bit of explanation in quantum physics that I've seen. You'll find dissenters with solid arguments on every explanatory idea, not to mention the explanations no one has come up with yet -- which might well include the *best* explanation, given that we still can't reconcile quantum theory with relativity theory. I suspect you're right about the "non-hippie wonders that we will uncover" -- interesting times lie ahead.
  • WhiteIndian's picture
    WhiteIndian 4 years 16 weeks ago Page Glen Allport
    Why "hard, cold, dark universe" when the part in which we've adapted is warm, soft, and light, and alive? Is warm, soft, light, and alive too hippie-ish? I think such a rigid, frigid description acts more as a mirror than a lens.
  • WhiteIndian's picture
    WhiteIndian 4 years 16 weeks ago Web link Melinda L. Secor
    Neocortex size isn't empirical evidence to you... • Dunbar, R.I.M. (1992). Neocortex size as a constraint on group size in primates. Journal of Human Evolution 22 (6): 469–493. • Dunbar, R.I.M. (1993). Coevolution of neocortical size, group size and language in humans. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 16 (4): 681–735. • Sawaguchi, T., & Kudo, H. (1990). Neocortical development and social structure in primates. Primates 31: 283–290. • Kudoa, H., Dunbar, R.I.M. (2001). Neocortex size and social network size in primates. Animal Behaviour 62 (4) 711–722. • Barton, R. A. (1996). Neocortex Size and Behavioural Ecology. Primates Proceedings: Biological Sciences 263 (1367): 173-177. ...but it is to anybody with a couple firing neurons. I did wonder when a neo-con psychopath like Atlas would start-up with the tired ol' "love it or leave it" bromide. In reality, the US Gov't completely obliterated the last vestiges of Non-State sociopolitical typology over 100 years ago. Even the "wilderness" has hoards of big-government Game Wardens and Forest Strangers, as Charlie Brown calls them. (A few folks desperate to live a non-state life have even tried -- and had their kids taken away from their teepee.) And the landbase, flora and fauna are often nearly or completely destroyed. For example, buffalo aren't roaming the plains anymore, since the Capitalists decimated the herd. Maybe you didn't hear. Oh, that's right, hearing and other sensuous observation is evilly "Epiricist" to you. Only pure deductively derived triangle angle dangles for you. P.S. I hope you never read Buckminster Fuller's Synergetics, who eschewed Euclid's lines because they don't describe the way nature actually behaves. But if you find any real-life entity that extends forever like a "line," let me know, OK?
  • GeoffreyTransom's picture
    GeoffreyTransom 4 years 16 weeks ago Page Glen Allport
    A pretty good article, but I dislike the use of the shorthand that conflates a system with the way a system is MODELED in pedagogic and research tools. (I've spent a decade post-academe in financial markets, which are full of people who think the 2-asset model is the real world, and that the Solow-Swan model is what the actual macroeconomy looks like). The probabilistic approach (modelling particles as probability densities) dominates quantum theory at present, but in all likelihood it simply reflects incompleteness in the theory rather than something that is genuinely inherent in the physical universe. Likewise, quantum 'entanglement' and action-at-a-distance relies heavily on the idea that physical proximity in R4 (space-time) is a useful proxy for proximity in other dimensions: the idea that other dimensions exist is no longer even at issue (when I first became interested, in the late 1970s, it was HOTLY contested; now it's a question as to how MANY there are). As an example; in R4, 'distance' is meaningful; in the macro world a large change in any co-ordinate renders information-exchange more difficult. So if I am at [X1,Y1,Z1,T1] and you are at [X2,Y2,Z2,T2], then unless ALL FOUR dimensions are 'close' (to within a few metres and seconds) we cannot communicate directly without technology. However consider if R5 is 'red-haired-ness' (call it 'G'); my red-haired-ness is quite low (but non-zero... ginger-beard unless I shave). You might be a full-on bloodnut [G=100], or a Chinaman [G=0] - you could be ANYWHERE on the Ginger spectrum, and the 'gap' between our relative levels of Ginger does not impede almost-instantaneous communication (unless G=100 and the ginger in question has been drinking) if we are proximate in R4. Now consider if R6 is 'literacy' and R7 is 'internet connectivity' (I know these are not akin to 'physical dimensions', but bear with me). If both of us have high R7 and reasonable R6, we can exchange information almost at will across R3 and T (T only in one direction at present) - even if one of us is a drunk Ginger (although as G approaches 100 and D [drunkenness] rises above 60, R6 [literacy] drops sharply). OK... this is already book-length, but bear with me for a few more sentences. If ANY of the 'higher dimensions' enables spacetime-invariant transmission of information (i.e., transmission of information regardless of the interactee's position in R4), THEN quantum entanglement is not even interesting as a concept. It's like asking "How did that fat guy in Australia tell the guy in the US what he thought over such a great distance?", ignoring the cable coming out of the back of my computer. It will become clear as humanity continues to research dark matter (and the even MORE bizarre 'dark energy'), that the constraints we thought we faced in R4 are almost entirely non-binding. The first thing that we will come to understand is that information - having no mass - is not bound by R4 constraints and can change co-ordinates (including bidirectionally in T) without hindrance. One last thing - don't anybody for a minute think I'm getting all 'New Age' in my old age: not a bit of it. But the universe - the hard,. cold, dark universe - has non-hippie wonders that we will uncover that will make late-21st century man look back on early-21st century man, the way we currently look back on societies that had not developed writing.
  • WhiteIndian's picture
    WhiteIndian 4 years 16 weeks ago Page painkilleraz
    No ship's crews, hunting parties, choirs, clubs, or families, right? No "we few, we happy few, we band of brothers." Good lord, no markets either. Dang. Or whale pods, antelope herds, baboon troops, or monkey tribes, or colonies, ant or human. All imagined fantasies, because there are only atomized individuals. Uh oh, there is no you. Only atomized, heroic Cells living selfishly, individually, and randiotionally. (Wait a second, what are the implications of mitochondria having their own DNA?) But Mr. Roark, Ayn Rand's raised eyebrow stares woefully at thee. "A government is an institution that holds the exclusive power to enforce certain rules of social conduct in a given geographical area." ~Ayn Rand Straight-up dictionary definition. And now you know. P.S. I should say, I hope you know. If not, walk around until you find the nearest marketplace. Take off all your clothes, shout at the top of your lungs, or simply stand there for hours. There's nothing like a physical lesson in what government can do to you to make the above definition stick.
  • AtlasAikido's picture
    AtlasAikido 4 years 16 weeks ago Web link Melinda L. Secor
    Dunbar, Malthus and the Empiricist posits are false alternatives. There is NO empirical evidence to support Dunbar. The Covenant of Unanimous Consent, which is for interpersonal relationships (without the need to control others; without the need for space travel (which would require an industrial civilization, which is being destroyed by Govt)) and without the need for a grand kill off. But only self-control. Those that do not take care of themselves--you--will suffer the consequences. There is plenty of wilderness. There are others out there now! If you are unable to go that is your own fault. Laissez faire. Go to it! The 99% won't go quietly into the night. Apparently you are hoping to be part of the 1% taking a BIG Gamble on the hope that they will not defend themselves and that they won't come looking for you....
  • roark1979's picture
    roark1979 4 years 16 weeks ago Page painkilleraz
    White Indian, There is no such thing as government. Agriculture produced something to steal.
  • painkilleraz's picture
    painkilleraz 4 years 16 weeks ago Web link painkilleraz
    Ahhh to be able to smoke when we wish :)
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 4 years 16 weeks ago Web link painkilleraz
    Here's another good one! Don't Step on the Grass Sam And here's the lyrics: http://www.lyricsmode.com/lyrics/s/steppenwolf/dont_step_on_the_grass_sa... so you can sing along, if you are so inclined. You've been telling lies so long Some believe they're true So they close their eyes to things You have no right to do Just as soon as you are gone Hope will start to climb Please don't stay around too long You're wasting precious time. tparker393 on Oct 7th 2010 11:34 pm "This song is about how the system (law enforcement and government) use their influence and power to keep marijuana illegal and obscure the truth behind what this 'noble weed' actually is. Further, kay points out that they squander tax money on imprisoning people for smoking bud (you waste my coin sam all you can, to jail my fellow man). Smoking herb is a victimless crime but it's portrayed as something 'evil, wicked, mean and nasty'. What a great song, it was relevant during the time it was written and still is today. Maybe our generation will finally learn how to overcome the lies and manipulation that have plagued the previous ones- we have waited long enough. Thank you steppenwolf for writing this beautiful and truthful song."
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 4 years 16 weeks ago Web link painkilleraz
    Ro-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-ol-l-l-l-l-l-l another one... "But that's after exposure to more than 10 "joint-years," which the scientists calculated as a joint a day for a decade. That's a fair amount of weed." ROFLMAO Those 'scientists' do not have a clue!! Does anyone who is currently smoking, or who has ever smoked mary jane, know anyone who smokes/smoked only one joint a day for a decade? A day, one fricken joint a day? ROFLMAO again!! "That's a fair amount of weed." ROFLMAO all over again!! Not that I would have first-hand knowledge, now mind you, but that is DEFINITELY NOT a "fair amount of weed". Somebody's been bogarting. (Years ago I dated a girl who babysat some of Joe's children.)
  • WhiteIndian's picture
    WhiteIndian 4 years 16 weeks ago Web link Melinda L. Secor
    You cite nothing; you fail the challenge. Being that "War is a staple of civilization" (Zerzan, 1005) I have stated that I think nuclear war over dwindling resources is nearly inevitable, and so do many others, (Moore, 2007; and would put us back in the Stone Age, and that having some "re-wild skills in your back pocket" is a wise preparation. You then lied and said I advocated nuclear war to wipe out the population of the earth. You must think your lies now have automatically become as axiomatic as triangle angles. You, Atlas, are an intellectual fraud. • You evade that I have written at great length about how to AVOID people dying as agricultural civilization comes to another collapse. One fellow I mentioned, John Jeavons, has proven and demonstrated for years a human diet can be gown in 1000 sq. ft. • You evade the simple fact that all agricultural civilizations collapse; ours is in the process now. People can AVOID tragedy by learning horticultural-permaculture-biointensive gardening methods. • You evade the fact that altruism, egalitarianism, and empathy are aspects of biological evolution—millions of years before the State came along; they in no way equal the forced "we-ism" of agricultural city-Statism, as you keep falsely purporting. • You evade that the State is an integral and inseparable aspect of agricultural city-Statism (civilization) and have failed to provide a single example otherwise. • You make pronouncements about the real world, then hide behind your "a priori" triangles dogma like a fundamentalist clinging to his Inspired Scriptures, evading real life observation of the real world. It's time you checked your premises. __________________ Zerzan, John (2005) On the Origins of War. http://www.scribd.com/doc/20298938/Zerzan-The-Origins-of-War Moore, Carol (2007) IS WORLD NUCLEAR WAR INEVITABLE? http://carolmoore.net/nuclearwar/ Hellman, Martin (1985) On the Probability of Nuclear War http://ee.stanford.edu/~hellman/opinion/inevitability.html Jeavons, John (2006) How to Grow More Vegetables, (and fruit, nuts, berries, grains and other crops) Than You Ever Thought Possible On Less Land Than You Can Imagine http://www.bountifulgardens.org/
  • AtlasAikido's picture
    AtlasAikido 4 years 16 weeks ago Web link Melinda L. Secor
    I got this from your own posts. If you don't recognize your own drivel you need to go back and read your own posts.
  • WhiteIndian's picture
    WhiteIndian 4 years 16 weeks ago Web link Melinda L. Secor
    I challenge you to cite anything I said close to your lies. Put up or shut up, Atlas. Funny how you blank-out Ayn "Pol Pot" Rand's talk about deliberately killing-off de-humanized "parasites" and "lice." (Some of Rand's favorite words.) Tyrants do that sort of stuff. Dehumanize, and then sanitize. Her written fantasies of philosophically undesirables dying horrible deaths is a logical exhibition of the inspiration of her novels — William Hickman, a cold-blooded serial child killer and dismemberer. Even the usual dense-headed conservatives used to have her figured out, before they too began embracing her misanthropy. "From almost any page of Atlas Shrugged, a voice can be heard, from painful necessity, commanding: “To a gas chamber — go!” The same inflexibly self-righteous stance results, too..." ~Whittaker Chambers Big Sister Is Watching You From the Dec. 28, 1957, issue of NR. http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/222482/big-sister-watching-you/fl... The reality is, altruism is observed across the animal kingdom, including humans. Weird how it hasn't wiped out whole species after millions of years, eh? Maybe Ayn should have checked her premises? I guess not if you have a novel to sell. The following essay has an array of articles and texts referenced—based on observed (empirical) reality, not fevered ideology—which Atlas must desperately evade to cling to his religio-economic faith. Biological Altruism Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/altruism-biological/ Altruism, and nearly everything else good in humans, does become a toxic mimicry of 2 million years human evolution as egalitarian Non-State social band animals who lived as "autonomous and sovereign" individuals "who bowed to no external political leaders." (Service, 1975) Agricultural city-Statism forces people into Mass Society, yet Atlas and Ayn were all for city-Statism (civilization.) Care to address this contradiction of supposedly being against the state but all for City-Statism, Atlas?
  • AtlasAikido's picture
    AtlasAikido 4 years 16 weeks ago Web link Melinda L. Secor
    ~According to our resident Altruist: What "We" need is to be freed of the inhabitants of the World in accordance with the premises of Dunbar, Malthus and the Science of Empiricism. Ask yourself dear reader, is that really what you need? ~What is self-evident (at least to me on immediate inspection)--Gak--is that the primitivist's data driven ideas are the megalomania ravings of a Sociopath righteously demanding indulgence, acceptance and the sanction of death on a Global Scale for the good of his "We" who--then and only then--will be free to gambol in the forest undisturbed... ~The non-sacrificial ideas of Rand, Mises AND Thoreau--are hardly abandoned in "Atlas Shrugged". They are hardly abandoned here (nor LewRockwell.com or Mises.org). Indeed as their students Linda and Morris Tannehill point out in "The Market For Liberty": "If revolution comes by violence, and in advance of the light, the old struggle will have to be begun again".
  • WhiteIndian's picture
    WhiteIndian 4 years 16 weeks ago Web link Don Stacy
    Do you find anything natural about a city? Artificial sweeteners? Artificial insemination? (Is it ok to drink milk from cows, 99% of whom are artificially inseminated?) Symbolic thinking? Pseudoephedrine? This Natural Law stuff intrigues me.
  • WhiteIndian's picture
    WhiteIndian 4 years 16 weeks ago Page painkilleraz
    In many ways, agricultural civilization is like being an alcoholic. First, alcohol for ritual and social control is likely the very reason for domesticating grain. Lots of fun promised ahead! Where's the car keys? Euphoria! Second, the results are similar. Much of the world is now wrecked. The vast cedar forests of Mesopotamia? Yeah, that's the Iraqi desert now. Oak forests in the Sinai and Saudi peninsulas and the Negev desert? Burned down to smelt copper.* Yay, that was fun while it lasted. Civilization is like a 10,000 year bender with all the abuse and destruction and denialists and enablers. Derrick Jensen writes eloquently about the abusive nature of city-Statist Culture. Premise Nineteen: The culture’s problem lies above all in the belief that controlling and abusing the natural world is justifiable. http://www.endgamethebook.org/Excerpts/1-Premises.htm Drive safely, man. ________________ * Even the Sinai which is located to the Southeast and the Negev, East of the present state of Israel, bear evidence of past, perhaps abundant forests. The 1960 investigations of Sir William Flinders Petrie into mining operations in the Wadi Nash area of the western Sinai desert, believed to date from the third millennium, BC, yielded unmistakable clues: "(Petrie) found a bed of wood ashes 100 feet long, 50 feet wide and 18 inches deep, and also a slag dump from copper smelting, 6-8 feet deep, 500 feet long and 300 feet wide. It seems that the adjacent area, now desert, must have borne combustibles during the period when the mines were operating. Similarly, in the Negev, copper smelting kilns of a highly developed kind dating from 1000 BC have been found in the now quite desert-like Wadhi Araba." Man and the Mediterranean Forest: A history of resource depletion. J. V. Thirgood. Academic Press. 1961. p. 57. quoted from chapter 4 of: THE FINAL EMPIRE: THE COLLAPSE OF CIVILIZATION AND THE SEED OF THE FUTURE by William H. Kötke http://www.rainbowbody.net/Finalempire/
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 4 years 16 weeks ago Web link Don Stacy
    That is correct, Lawrence M. Ludlow, "marriages are things undertaken in nature by consenting beings", LONG BEFORE the existence of states. As you, and most people here probably know, I have no 'reverence' of any states. The only "just powers" of de jure (rightful) governments, (or whatever one wishes to call such an entity), is to protect its consenting members' natural rights. Same-sex marriage is unnatural. Quick definitions from WordNet (unnatural) ▸ adjective: not in accordance with or determined by nature; contrary to nature With no intention of being judgmental, or offending anyone here, "same-sex marriage" is, logically, "contrary to [the] nature" of man, just as the union of two nuts, or the union of two bolts, is, logically, "contrary to [the] nature" of nuts and bolts", while "different-sex marriage", is, logically, in harmony with the nature of man, just as the union of a nut and bolt is, logically, in harmony with the nature of nuts and bolts. So,what is the main reason that individuals would vote to have their unnatural same-sex marriage "legally recognized"? You got it, so the unnatural STATE will give them the same entitlements attached to natural different-sex marriages.
  • WhiteIndian's picture
    WhiteIndian 4 years 16 weeks ago Web link Don Stacy
    I agree; I was just dinging him on his White Man's Ghost Dance, today including Latin, that somehow insulated him from city-Statist society and protects him from cop bullets. He's a part of the present agricultural city-Statism (civilization) society whether he wants to be or not. Civilization isn't much of a voluntary society; never has been, never will be. I sympathize with his plight, and I know it drives many people crazy, but crazy delusional thinking does get you killed. You and me, we're in this thing together now... We're In This Together - NIN http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P9BfvPjsXXw We're trapped in the belly of this horrible machine. And the machine is bleeding to death. The Dead Flag Blues - Godspeed You! Black Emperor http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cS2BrxcWWZA
  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 4 years 16 weeks ago Page painkilleraz
    Jesse, this is an excellent treatment of Manifest Destiny (which gave rise to a strange drumbeat called "American Exceptionalism"). Yes, if I were able to forgo all "civilization" today I would. I would prefer traveling in the woods, living by my own hand, and without any interference from others. Very likely I would be as he, I appreciate the positive nod. Thank you as always for the great comments! I got in deep trouble drinking in Texas in the 60's. James Michener once wrote a line something like, "...Texas is lavish with her successes, brutal with her failures..." I was able to buy a small farm in Iowa (thanks to the late Harold Hughes, then US Senator from Iowa, who underwrote my court review. Predators of state ain't all bad when you need 'em to attack predators of neighboring states on your behalf. Right?). My family and I snuck across the Red River with Texas coyotes nipping at our tails. My dream was a family organic farm (before organics were cool) where the children could learn and help, but my 7th child came along in 1973, forcing me to rent out the cropland to big row crop farmers. I had to forgo my dream for reality. It was necessary for me to earn federal reserve notes to keep the ship afloat. White Indian is absolutely right. I sometimes feel he keeps hammering away at the same old nail, but his philosophy is accurate as to the facts. But I am here, and it is now. I remember a frame on the wall of one of the rehab units I used to frequent so regularly: I am where I am I know where I could have been Had I done what I did not do. Tell me, friend -- What can I do today To be where I want to be Tomorrow. Just got called to go truckin', so will leave it there. Sam
  • Lawrence M. Ludlow's picture
    Lawrence M. Ludlow 4 years 16 weeks ago Web link Don Stacy
    I believe that Suverans2's statement is an indication NOT of his reverence for the oppression of ancient Rome, which was the evil empire of its day and the destroyer of and parasite upon Mediterranean civilization and trade. It is, instead, a reiteration that marriages are things undertaken in nature by consenting beings BEFORE the existence of the state -- or so I hope. That the evil and barbarous Romans recognized this in the statement above (despite fencing it in everywhere else as our own evil government does) does not, I hope, indicate any reverence for the evil Roman state.
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 4 years 16 weeks ago Web link Don Stacy
    One more time. Conjunctio mariti et faeminae est de jure naturae. The union of a man and a woman is of the law of nature. Unless, of course you choose to be, or remain, a member of a political corporation, (either out of fear, or to be eligible for its entitlements, the latter being the most common reason), and then you must conform to its "law" on 'marriage', in order to get the entitlements associated with 'marriage'. For those with even a modicum of common sense, this should be easy to understand. gfywi Consensus non concubitus facit nuptiam. Consent, not lying together, constitutes marriage.