Forum Replies Created
Gravity is a demand-pull algorithm.
Gravity is a repercussive algorithm.
@ john day
I have also considered your north korean scenario. NK might not be suitable to blame for a nuclear strike, by immediate counterstrike the US would win that war the same day it starts. They would need a more prolonged conflict and expansive war narrative to justify a command economy and dictatorship indefinitely.
Knocking out the grid via EMP would provide cover for economic collapse and martial law initially, but if the war was over too soon, organised resistance against the federal regime would form despite the chaos of economic collapse, especially since many people would correctly identify the shadow government as the real perpetrator of the attack.
Im assuming in this scenario NK or other enemy does not really strike at all, but the shadow gov does a false flag and uses one of its own nukes to knock out the grid or hit an expendable city. Blaming NK could be advantageous in that they would be annihilated before being able to officially deny their involvement.
Otherwise a prolonged but low intensity war between NATO and Russia, via the ukraine front, allowing conventional warfare and only incidental tactical nuking, would distract people for much longer and focus attention away from the real enemies in government while the domestic purges are completed.
There was a story last year about nuclear weapons being abducted by illegal transfer from a base in Texas. The incident was followed by suspicious political purging of military command positions.
Its possible these nukes were indeed stolen during transfer and are now directly in possession of the shadow government powers, to be used in some false flag scenario, to make a case for war against a foreign power, or to blame anti-government movements. One popular scenario involved a nuclear detonation in Chicago. Similar unauthorised transfers of nuclear weapons have undoubtedly occurred.
This fits into a broader pattern of strategic military mobilization happening covertly in the US, along with the ever advancing construction of electronic and economic control grids, with the DHS and their infinite ammo stockpiling and the total militarization of police, the US gov preparations for martial law and military dictatorship is mostly completed, but they seem to expect much domestic resistance.
Preparations for domestic genocide are also evident. HR 645, emergency centers establishment act, reveals that the gov has officially mandated at least six large concentration camps to be built, which may be adapted for genocidal purges during war or economic collapse scenarios. The logistical planning may allow millions to be murdered weekly in such camps. These ’emergency centers’ do not seem to have a connected food supply to feed the hundreds of thousands they are supposed to house in a legitimate emergency scenario.
In a full wellfare collapse much of the immense underclass of economically dependent people would turn desperately violent and eventually starve, the gov might want to murder them orderly in the camps instead of allowing them to pillage and burn. There would also be targeted groups of political resistors.
Even with millions of starving people, in some areas people armed with the 2nd and motivated by strong cultural resistance against tyranny should consolidate popular resistance against opression under martial law. Parts of the military, police and enforcement agencies loyal to the republic could force a civil war before the purges can be completed, then the federal regime might be quickly overthrown.
This is all very depressing. For the US, if it were possible, it might be best to overthrow the evil parts of government before economic collapse happened, so causing fewer casualties, but this would also destroy the dollar, triggering economic collapse anyway and thus cause many to starve who would otherwise have been purged or murdered.
I do believe it is better to starve than to be murdered by goverment, especially by one’s own goverment.
Also, have you considered the biowarfare and synthetic pandemic scenario’s which may cover your criteria?
I recently experienced a philosophical episode resolving the boundaries of existence, and there are none. All things exist potentially, those few things which exist actually only constitute a temporary reality, and these named components of reality only have substance in a gravitational field which is partially imaginary. Being a recursive algorithm, the logic of life necessarily extends beyond this material universe.
In this universe, there is no sufficient reason why energy exists analytically, but some say energy is a good idea as dialectic novelty, while others disagree, concerning the equity of mortality.
Physically, there remain substantial boundaries to gravitonomic energy and resource usage, depending on the instrumental parameters for growth and prosperity, much potential prosperity has been misallocated into unproductive works via additive misvaluation. But capitalism is surely not the only system to misvalue life itself, the enterprise of war is the greatest waste of life historically, and war predates capitalism as an economic system.
Life is the ultimate resource involving the production of a self-consuming commodity.
There’s something about Gravity…
ashvin post=5946 wrote: The “rules” of logic are not laws like gravity. Logic is not something God created, but something that applies to him by his very nature. God cannot be illogical or immoral any more than he can choose not to exist.
TonyPrep post=5958 wrote: Right, so there are limits to God’s power, at least from a human perspective (since you have just stated that there is something God cannot do).
Maybe there are things which God cannot do to us, under ethical or contractual obligation [enforced by the holy spirit?], since He would be running an inhabited universe for spiritual profit, it wouldn’t do to suddenly shift elementary logic mid-universe, it would confuse the audience and disenfranchise the participants.
TonyPrep post=5958 wrote:
I actually agree that God, assuming there is one, cannot be immoral because God can’t possibly have any morals; there is nothing else for God to judge right and wrong; everything God does would just be what God does.
This has always been a question in deistic discussions;
1) is everything that God does automatically [defined as] good [by Himself?] simply because God does it;
or 2) does God automatically do good things [and only good things] only because He knows they are [defined as] good? [by someone else?]
The first option defines morality as a function of God, by whatever God would choose to do, and if He chose to do absolute evil [and never good], then evil would be moral. There seems to be no objective distinction between good and evil here, not even under omniscience.
The second option defines God as a function of morality, God would be perfectly moral because He always chooses good things as the best of all possible things, He would be incapable [infinitely unwilling] of action that He knows to be evil and not a function of good [as dictated by the holy spirit?].
The moral preference arises because God wouldn’t simply do things unto Himself, but affect His creations, with moral consequences He might care about [His creations might care about] [He would care for His creations separate from Himself and identical to Himself, a minor paradox]. This option might allow for an objective distinction between good and evil, especially under omniscience.
Its preferable to assert that God is a function of morality before asserting that morality is a function of God.
TonyPrep post=5958 wrote:
For a similar reason, God cannot be illogical because, since God is all there is, there is no logic, from God’s perspective.
On the contrary, everything would be logical from God’s perspective. Semantically, the word ‘perspective’ implies a logical frame of reference, but in a subjective mode. God’s possible perspective would be the only logical frame of reference which is truly objective [disregarding the holy spirit].
TonyPrep post=5958 wrote:
What we call logic would be something God invented and cannot apply to God, unless God wanted to impose some rules on itself. But that makes no sense because God can’t really have wants or desires since that implies a lacking of something, which cannot possibly apply to God.
God could only invent or manifest things which He already contains, if He came up with logic as a good idea, He must have a logical mind [because logic is creative?].
What we call God must minimally consist of supreme logic and reason, although yielding a paradoxical self-limiting construct to allow for existence as we understand it, God would at least have a creative desire [because creativity is logical], and He would necessarily create a universe written in the language of logic, as He would write what He knows.
The question is really if the workings of God or deity can ever be defined without logical paradox, and whether they should be. One shouldn’t expect divine logic to be perfectly paradox free when reasoning from a linear perspective, but one should try to eliminate as many paradoxes as possible. If there remain any paradoxes, it is not necessarily a mistake or oversight.
Ash’ multidimensional argument does work in that way; we mortals can have only limited understanding as to what an unlimited force and unlimited logic looks like, and why such infinity would choose to limit itself for the convenience of others.
I’ve been working on such arguments myself, but it is notoriously difficult to disprove the existence of God by an appeal to logical paradox, if He exists, He would be insufferably paradoxical.
I otherwise prefer the indeterminist modes where the gravitational field itself is a moral agent or a dynamic medium of moral agency.
When I manage to formulate a coherent framework, I’ll name this system deontological gravitism, it’ll be awesome and only mildly self-contradictory.
ashvin post=5965 wrote:
First, you obviously seem to be starting with the premise that the Bible is mostly allegory and myth. That’s not really a good way to investigate the Judeo-Christian philosophy/theology, because it is intimately tied into the historical events. As Paul says, if Jesus was not actually raised from the dead, then we have believed lies and our faith is meaningless.
I am starting with that premise, since I’m not a true believer, but I think that the moral teachings of scripture are more universally accessible when presented as allegory and not necessarily as gospel truth, so that even the atheists can appreciate the ethical considerations without being forced to make premature leaps of faith.
I agree that the moral content of stories concerning Jesus would become a sham when held as fictitious, and they do seem to be explicitly meant as a historical account of actual events. but not so for many other stories, they could be merely allegory and still contain useful moral content.
Much of the situational ethics in the bible could be fictitious or moral allegory but still useful as a literary or didactic device.
ashvin post=5965 wrote:
Second, I think you are making an unnecessary distinction between “avoidable” and “necessary” suffering. Metaphysically speaking, we could say that ALL suffering of human history is unavoidable if we adopt a position in which God predestines everything. The difficulty is reconciling that position with the notion that humans can also increase or decrease suffering for themselves and others through their free agency, but I believe such a reconciliation can be achieved
This was in response to the assertion that suffering has purpose and meaning, and I used the distinction to illustrate that there is some type of suffering which can be useful [to learn] to avoid other suffering.
Although it does seem that not all suffering is equally useful or necessary, it may be that all suffering has spiritual meaning because of its minor or major utility for spiritual development.
The concept of sin really does indicate avoidable suffering, since I cannot conceive of any sin that is necessary and cannot be avoided, sin seems contradictory to necessity [except maybe for that judas incident, that seemed foreordained and inevitable somehow].
If sin exists, and is avoidable at all, it strongly argues in favor of making unnecessary and avoidable suffering a distinct moral category from necessary and unavoidable suffering.
There is a problem with defining the difference between unavoidable and avoidable, necessary and unnecessary suffering in a metaphysical sense, but not in terms of a moral heuristic or moral code, where some definitive distinction is necessary, such as between virtue and vice and in criminal law.
All types of crime which cause victims are in the category of unnecessary and avoidable suffering, and also largely conform to sinful conduct. No types of crime are in the category of necessary suffering according to law, since no crime should ever be necessary, and all victimful crimes should pertain to unnecessary and avoidable suffering somewhere.
ashvin post=5965 wrote:
By operating in extra spatial and temporal dimensions, God predestines that all of our free actions will lead to the optimal amount of suffering for his ultimate purposes.
These dimensions must still be causally connected to our plane somehow, so they would be included in a single universal logic, seemingly allowing for a compatibilistic mode of free volition in a deterministic universe, so this would conform to option 3).
The idea of an optimal ammount of suffering for an ultimate purpose is an utilitarian function, uniquely informed by divine omniscience, which may make the measure of suffering justifiable beyond human logic. But as constrained by human logic, any policy towards such an ultimate purpose could never justify itself without accountable perfect foresight. One cannot argue that crime should be tolerated because its part of God’s plan. It may be so, but that would be unknowable to any human system of justice. By default, we would have to judge all victimful crime as causing [or being caused by] unnecessary and avoidable suffering.
When you take these more defined concepts; sin, crime and justice, they reveal that making a provisional distinction in the qualities and moral magnitudes of suffering becomes a necessary suffering, hopefully to avoid greater suffering. It makes perfect sense from a certain point of view.
I agree on that point about the buddhist way of looking at suffering and attachment, that it can lead to a moral detachment which lessens compassion. I must have been confusing the buddhists with the jedi.
The idea of God can easily be proven to exist, as a subjective reality or moral force, more easily than as objective reality, but the very idea of God may lead into possible proofs that the soul exists as a moral agent, that the only way in which God can be understood as an idea is because the soul’s comprehension of good and evil as an objective reality.
If it could be proven that the soul exists in an objective sense, a form of information-processing, then this may provide proof of the objective existence of God in some way. But the soul would probably be seen as subjective reality only.
Many philosophical systems produce the substance of the soul as a moral agent of free volition without incorporating the existence of God, so for questions of moral agency and the meaning of suffering, the possible existence of the soul seems of great importance, even for non-theists.
There is no immediate contradiction between the positive existence of the soul and the unexistence of God, which may allow for the moral agency of the soul as an intransient state of mind without the existence of God, although the logic would be similar.
Funny thing with the omega point multiverse.
The designer Tipler supposedly intended it as a practical device of consmogenic recollapse, used by supersapient life at the end of time to physically resurrect the dead, while the formation of God is a peripheral effect to this purpose.
In the event that God is formed by such an omega point, the causally connected multiverse must be compatibilist in regards to the moral heuristic, allowing for a degree of freedom in willful action within a pre-ordained deterministic design, but the source universe would be operating on a deeper mode of compatibilism than the progeny universes it would be fated to generate.
Ive been investigating what mode of free fate is best for me.
Some multiverse models can simultaneously incorporate different modes of free will, mediating the same logical good in different universes. Yet all possible modes of free will as a function of God should be compatibilistic and require [omniscient] deterministic values in order to operate, whereas those possible modes of free will which do not arise solely as a function of God can use incompatibilistic modes of will, and do not require [unknowable] deterministic values to operate.
Therefore the doctrine of deontological gravitism is best to mediate the moral heuristic, using a godless free fate parameter instead, although God’s plan could be integrated into the intercausal redeterminism of freeform future will.
Do people in hell have free will? They must have had it, if having been delivered there by the weight of their actions, but no subsequent moral agency seems possible from within such an unreasonable place. And if there is no free will possible in hell, then the magnitude of punishment accruing to the moral heuristic must be limited somehow, either by being less than infinite in duration or less than infinite in intensity. Otherwise it would be unfair.
Banking has nothing whatsoever to do with judaism, the jewish people or the jewish faith.
That leaves us free to criticise banking as a business as much as necessary. We should be able to criticise the most obviously destructive and anti-social functions of modern banking without it leading to unwarranted accusations of anti-semitism.
Modern banking is one of the most concentrated forms of institutional evil and social debasement to have ever existed in the world, and reasonably, banking and the monetary system must be completely reformed and reconstituted to avoid infinite slavery of everyone who uses money.
We should have to define the exact criminal conspiracy perpetrated by the central banking cartels, in collusion with government, as usury, replicative embezzlement, extortion and racketeering, extending to seditious conspiracy and monetary genocide.
Therefore, as the worst excess of banking is a clearly definable criminal enterprise, any righteous solution [within the rule of law] to the monetary malice should include an expedient criminal prosecution of the offending parties, in conjunction with a democratic process of value readjustment, which must mediate wholesale reform of the entire monetary/banking system.
The problem remains that the money power has already extended its influence into all realms of human endeavor by the interface of commerce and the prevalent mechanism of dominant sociopathy, compromising every institution in modern society, corrupting civil discourse and the political process, systematically eliminating any possibility of a democratic reform.
The money power is centered around the banking cartels, and strongly influences the function of multinational corporations, bureaucracies, political parties, scientific and educational establishments, various industrial complexes, media, journalism, non-governmentals and religious organisations. Money malice seems to exert lesser influence over artistic activity.
The established mechanisms of dominant/clustered sociopathy indicate that societal institutions become more conductive to evil than to good at larger scales, especially if coerced by aggregation of insidious money power. This corruption of scale would perhaps affect multinational corporations more strongly than governments and religious institutions, since the corporate entity in its current configuration is fully antithetical to moral memory.
The money power also seems to dominate the esoteric construct of the mystery schools and occult hierarchies, besides wielding significant influence over the political, scientific and commercial realms.
Based on a comprehensive body of evidence, the occult nature of the alchemical processes of banking and monetization, and evident esoteric symbolism such as the eye of horus displayed on the dollar, it must be concluded that the money power extends into the institutional manifestations of the mystery schools, and has largely corrupted everything therein that can be corrupted.
Another interpretation would be that it is the evil side of the mysteries which originates the malice of the money power, and especially the luciferian sects, being hell-bent on world domination, would multiply the malice of money to gain further advantage.
One could be mistaken to think that hardcore luciferianism is not a problem. Insofar as that, as rumored, ritualistic human sacrifice is the central tenet of its doctrine, and its defining quality is to promote public suffering for private profit, organised luciferianism is so much a threat to all democratic and moral existence, and so far outside the reach of the rule of law, that some people argue that any vassals of lucifer ought to be killed on detection, being too dangerous to be left at large.
I would personally disagree with such sentiments and do expect that more constructive methods of justice and proper prosecution of crimes are still within the means of democratic societies, which may allow for less radical reform.
It may seem misplaced to mention such matters in regards to the money power, but globalised luciferianism, as an organised criminal entity, is embedded in the money power in a spiritual sense, if one considers money to be the leveraged collateral of all evil, and providing that financial elites are predominantly disposed to occultism of this variety.
Not all luciferians are organised evil, and the behavioral substructure of clustered sociopathy is a more universal organising principle for corruption within institutions than any particular religious pattern.
Banking and the money power as criminal enterprises should not be associated with any particular religious group, but if they were, it would likely be associated with some sinister occultism.
Its true that the money power is inherently an occult phenomenon, although it may not directly involve secret societies, its primary tool of manipulation is the alchemical transmutation of debt to money by mental control of the masses, yielding a form of economotive sorcery.
This piece is limited in scope, lately I tend towards a cornucopean reaction when reading such things.
Yes, the US citizens are flawed devices, and spiritually spent, and their embodiment in the AD has produced delusional exceptionalism and wrongful hierarchies of want, but there’s a bright side too. Its at least better than the soviet dream as realised.
“selfless struggle towards the good of the collective?”
This runs afoul of the collectivist fallacy; the idea that individualism is equivalent to selfishness and that collectivism must therefore be altruistic. This is not so. There could be altruistic individualism and selfish collectives too.
The collective ‘good’ is never defined by the collective itself but by dominant individual voices, using political power for selfish reasons disguised as the ‘common good’. This seems to be an intractable problem of large-scale political power structures which mobilise collectives.
The idea of ‘Entrepreneurial individualism’ may sound badly growthlike, but I’m not convinced there are viable institutions to enable entrepreneurial collectivism in any form, except maybe for war. Certainly economic entrepreneurship itself is positive, if relating to societal innovation and prosperity.
A steady state system with stable material and energy throughput also necessitates a stable population, otherwise additional population will diminish material wealth for the rest. This poses a problem, as methods of coerced pop control, being forms of tyranny, are more immediately and more certainly dehumanising than possible starvationary resource constraints.
It may be that a steady-state global economy would have to be artificially constrained and have all social change arrested by totalitarian control of all intellectual throughput and elimination of innovation.
Furthermore, one shouldn’t think that the accruement of individual material wealth is inherently bad, only if it becomes increasingly wasteful, materialistic and exponentially consumptive.
An alternative form of economic ‘growth’ can be sustained by progressively diminishing input factors and waste output while keeping material wealth creation, expressed in ambient energy flux density, stable or growing, so lessening resource constraints and lowering biospheric stressors even with a growing population.
And abusing the idea of infinity to fool people into believing that there are no material limits may be a less dangerous form of social control than fooling them into accepting artificial scarcity and placing fixed constraints on socioeconomic innovation.
I have high hopes for stellar expansion and space colonisation in the next few centuries, potentially removing terrestrial resource constraints altogether. Although this global systemic collapse will proceed for the next few decades at least, there may be another epoch of expansion and a new growth of cities afterwards, depending on energetic innovations.
Obviously sustainable growth cannot involve exponential physical expansion in a finite space, but novel forms of deep growth not requiring ever-increasing material and energetic inputs may enable some metric of wealth to increase with stable or decreasing input and waste factors.
Finally, it occurs to me that politicians so easily win elections by promising growth because the amorphous growth mantra, by subconscious neuroleptic incantation, fools people into identifying politicians as nurturing parent figures to further their infantile consumerist drives, precisely as Bernays prescribed.
Growth is the law, growth under Gravity.
Better dead than FED.
“How Congress can delegate its Constitutional powers to this independent, privately owned and unaccountable institution is beyond me.”
Congress cannot lawfully do so, without such an act being defined as contempt of congressional office and/or seditious conspiracy; in opposing by force of law their own mandated authority to coin money in contravention to their constitutional duty.
Considering the timing of this event, definitely influencing the UN gun treaty vote, and the incongruities concerning the motive and means, it may yet be a staged event.
There’s an eyewitness account of the shooters entry into the theatre, suggesting that instead of forcing the emergency exit the suspect was deliberately let inside, and also unverified accounts of multiple shooters, gas canisters coming from different directions.
Its also a valid argument that since the exposed operation fast & furious was intended to enable mass killing and gun violence along the mexican border, precisely in order to create anti-gun sentiment, the same ruthless parties within government could create this kind of staged event as well.
Its possible that the suspect is merely a lone gunman psychotic rather than a patsy under mind control who might not even be the shooter, but its clear that the reason why such gunmen have methodic or characteristic similarities is because all of them were conditioned and preprogrammed to violence in some way, either by the media or by mk ultra.
I like that thought experiment where every adult receives $50.000 in greenbacks from the treasury and people decide to just pay down their debts with it, servicing credit card debt and mortgage payments. This causes commercial deflation to lessen somewhat, and whatever people splurge on recieves price support, but it would not add so much to credit expansion or monetary velocity to result in general inflation, there’s too much debt to service first.
A traditional inflationary wage-price spiral wont start up so easily. If the cost of living were to somehow double overnight, then people still wouldn’t be able to demand much of a wage raise in this labor market, and if they did get one, they’d have to spend it in such a velocitized way with maximal multipliers as to cause further price rises, increasing aggregate demand or so, for it to become inflationary.
There’s clearly different inflationary pathways influencing monetary aggregates in something called cost-push and demand-pull inflation which I dont fully understand, I think one’s concerned with the price of oil and the other with the demand for debt.
I listened to some of that interview with Andrew Basiago.
Its the most preposterous story since Bernanke’s speech about QE.
His paper ‘The discovery of Life on Mars’ is hysterical, those blurry misrecognised rocks shouldn’t pass for evidence of rocks, let alone evidence of life.
Basiago’s highly fantastical story in the interview has him involved in a Darpa project pegasus as a child, where he believes he was forced to participate in both forwards and backwards time travel experiments, multiverse travel along divergent timelines, and physical teleportation experiments to New Mexico and to Mars, where he encounters sentient humanoid and animal species living on the inexplicably habitable surface. The martian surface is described as having comfortable parameters for atmospheric breathability, pressure, temperature and radiation exposure, completely counter to recorded scientific observations, and suspiciously no mention of lower martian gravity.
Basiago also mentions martians visiting a darpa base in a superluminal spaceship, the legend of Tesla’s lost technologies which darpa used for quantum-access, an astrophysical catastrophe wrecking the solar system and destroying atlantis 10,000 years ago, the existence of reincarnation, and how he participated in an out of body experiment where reality is revealed as a quantum hologram projected by a higher dimensional matrix machine.
His story may contain the highest number of sciencefiction and techno-mystical elements ever combined in a single fiction.
Although not all technical elements of the story may be totally physically impossible, the unusual congruence of all elements existing simultaneously in the experience of a single person would not likely occur in an average universe.
Survival of humanoid life exposed on the martian surface should be more impossible than backwards timetravel, which is deeply impossible in most cosmologies.
Good points. There’d be 80% probability of the first lunar colony suffering a catastrophic logistical or systems failure within 50 years of operation and being abandoned. Limits of complexity, but the second attempt should be more successful.
In thin atmospheres liftoff needs a different approach, maybe laser or plasmakinetic levitation powered wirelessly by orbital microwave arrays. Landing might still need balloons, whatever works. Other methods of magnetic levitation could work in a thin atmosphere, but all rely on intense energy cosumption for lifting or descending anything heavy.
but nothing concrete as such.
Jupiters gravity is severely restrictive, initial orbital construction would be difficult, but the energy for the syphoning of materials into the orbital processing station might be supplied by jupiters own magnetic field, manipulating the winds to blow resources upwards in an electrostatic vortex. Otherwise some of its moons should be more exploitable [except for Europa; attempt no landing there].
Mining the asteroid belt for rare space metals should become monetarily profitable at some demand function, especially if involved in an energy-sourcing application or economotively leveragable.
Some parts of the georgia gravestones aren’t too bad, the ideal of humanity living perpetually in balance with nature seems reasonable, only that biostatism is unnatural when enforced by collectivism and oligarchical ecotechnicians.
The part that states to guide reproduction wisely and select for fitness and diversity is more an appeal to the rule of biocracy and scientific eugenicism than a guide to humanity, to guide the reproduction of other people wisely.
I disprove of all steady state economies which require coercement of a steady population and an end to free reproduction, but it may not be possible to have a worldwide socio-economic system where the pop could remain stable without coercion, fertility restriction, or deliberate assaults on reproductive health. The demographic transition seems to work in richer countries, it should work everywhere where prosperity happens.
If it does occur that absolute planetary carrying capacity is reached or surpassed so that every additional human[s labor] would become a burden on the biosphere or the material economy, without possible relief of further technological innovations waste-reductions or efficiency improvements, then space colonisation, if feasible, would work to increase the total sustainable number of people offworld, the earth could then have some sort of loosely enforced population cap and stable material throughput while stimulating planetary emigration to the colonies. But its true that any provisional manufacturing of offworld carrying capacity requires costly terrestrial inputs and an operational earth economy.
It might be equitable to set productivity increases expressible in declining labor time as a metric of growth, so that the average labor day in the year 3000 would last 5 minutes when everything is optimally automated. Eventually the whole planets production would be handled in the last remaining minute of labor time used by the technician who maintains the planetary ai brain which controls the armies of droids and bots who collect and assemble all energy and material for human consumption. The human economy would consist of unvaluated production of unautomatable creativities. The elimination of labor would make the monetary valuation of work and the concepts of money and credit obsolete.
I don’t expect any breakthrough progress towards space exploitation anytime soon for obvious reasons of global economic collapse, but the space program could have yielded more results by now if more resources had been spent on it since the 60’s, when both energy and credit were plentiful. The kind of resources spent by the superpowers on their nuclear weapons programs might also have gone into building a first colony on the moon. We could have been into the 2nd moonbubble by now.
To be fair, those Mars landers were outfitted with delicate chemical analysis labs to search for life and evidence of vulcanism, no commercial interest in ores or suitable mining sites was evident in their mission, those rovers were only intended as one-shot science missions.
Their missions weren’t total failures as I recall, one rover lasted far longer than anticipated on its solar cells, until the dust storms hit.
The lack of oxygen in neighbouring planets’ atmospheres necessitates alternative energy generation other than combustion to operate industry there, but existant technologies may be adapted to supply energy wirelessly from orbital generators to ground machinery.
Tesla was confident of this concept, wireless electromagnetic energy transfer should work in most atmospheric media and between planets.
An orbital powerstation could be built around Jupiter to convert the harvested gasses, methane, ammonia or hydrogen into electromagnetic energy to be beamed by microwaves or radiowaves back to reciever stations on earth, the moon or other sites.
Jupiter or one of its many profitable moons should also contain layers of liquid oxygen, so conventional combustion of methane or hydrogen would be possible on site, creating useful molecular byproducts for cargo transport, and the energy could be beamed straight to a receiver array close to home with minimal loss.
But this notion was just to conceptually delimit the material and energy inputs of the human economy so that its limits are not indefinitely confined to the planet, but with the collapse I don’t expect there’ll be resources to spare for space exploration for the remainder of the century, maybe never again if global peak energy and peak technology are substantiated and become irreversible declines.
I also wanted to mention the idea that economic activity may be definable in a way that does not require moving masses, so avoiding irreducible thermal friction and thermal waste. The economy could otherwise never become infinite in activity in a finite space, since the thermal waste, even if infinitecimal per movement, would heat up the planets atmosphere, or the universe, to infinite temperatures. And this thermal waste cannot itself be captured or dissipated by any apparatus within the economy which does not itself create thermal waste of equal magnitude in the process. If economic activity requires moveable mass it cannot become infinite at all then.
So maybe information alone, defined in some format of usable wisdom, can somehow be traded around and counted as value-energy without requiring any external matter or energy inputs attributable to price fluctuations, assuming infinitecimal waste factors, no value externalisations and the usual gravitational heuristic of singular dimension.
The other possible economic delimiter besides expanding to the cosmic scale, stellar expansion, would be expansion into the subatomic scale of economy. A new fermion particle has been isolated recently, manipulation of which should eventually lead to breakthroughs in the field of quantum spintronics and advance computation a millionfold, they say.
As Reverse Engineer reminds us, if it is theoretically possible for neutrinos to interact at all with masses like the earths core, they should also be harvestable for energy someday.
I was interested in the dark rift idea some time ago. But Ash’ arguments are probably correct; the galactic plane, although relatively thin compared to the core, is at least dozens of lightyears thick at its thinnest part, focused particle streams, x-ray or gamma spikes channeled from the active galactic nucleus should nowhere become intense enough to pose any significant harm to the planets core or biosphere.
According to the fossil record, the periodicity of this transit across the rift, which has presumably happened many times for our solar system, is not correlated with disruptions to life on earth. Geomagnetic polarity shifts are also not correlated to mass extinctions in this way, no indications of periodic surface bombardment by cosmic rays wiping out all muticellular life on this planet, which would be expected in the prolonged absense of a geomagnetic field, but apparently this damage is prevented somehow, likely because the field never drops to zero for very long during any shift.
There is a rumor about a deep space probe which was sent into the leading edge of the dark rift and was instantly fried by the intense proton streams, supposedly indicating that this dark rift zone is superdeadly, but its only a vague rumor. Its about as likely as the rogue brown dwarf planet-x slingshotting through the inner solar system and ejecting planets from orbit. Millions of people believe that one, without astrophysical evidence to back it up.
Gamma ray bursts are altogether more lethal and more certain to exist, if one ever goes off within 200 lightyears the planets surface will be thoroughly sterilised. Fortunately no stars in the vicinity seem capable of producing one.
Then again, a combination of exotic physical interactions may influence the Earth’s structural stability on rare ocassions.
I suppose that the Earths mantle could fluctuate in density, it may have changed over time by the solarmagnetic field attenuating the cores angular momentum, or phaseshifting solar neutrinos may interact with the earths interior by changing the rate of radiometric decay of mantle isotopes somehow.
In addition, I have this theory that the prolonged operation of a misalligned planetary electric grid may accidentally trigger a geomagnetic polarity reversal by compressing field lines or somesuch, why not.
NASA is underfunded to death, but perhaps there are more advanced private space programs up and running in secret, maybe employing those technological advances in propulsion which should have occurred by now, which must have occured by now.
If you’ve noticed, there’s been suspiciously little activity in official space exploration since the moonlanding, too little to make sense even if the initial phase of resource exploitation is highly unprofitable for commercial purposes.
The uses of the hugely expensive ISS seem limited to zero-G science experiments, now there’s plans to incinerate the whole station on re-entry around 2015 after it was just recently completed short a few modules. Its as if they’re not really trying, deliberately sabotaging all endeavours to space exploration.
Stellar expansion of the human economy may truly absolve all energetic and material limits to resource consumption and human population someday, limits of ingenuity notwithstanding. And this seems the only thing which would absolve absolute limits to planetary growth, having more planets to exploit/care for.
I find these dreams better than memorising that antihumanist rubbish plastered over the georgia killstones, such a limited vision.
I’ve come to vehemently despise all neo-malthusian proposals to population control, but there are eventual limits to how many people this planet could sustain without biosphere denaturation, maybe around 12-15 billion with zero waste factors and another century of technological advance, but for now the species may have overshot carrying capacity as related to the growth of cities at 7.2 billion people strong.
I’m just thinking ahead as to where all these surplus people should emigrate to, rather than plotting to kill them off. It does require space exploration to become energetically profitable, so tapping hydrogen from local gas giants would be a logical stepping stone.
Also, it should become perfectly possible to harness solar neutrinos for energy, give it a few centuries.
And considering the veracity of cosmogenic catastrophes, projects for interplanetary colonisation would be required for the species to avoid going extinct by a random gamma-ray burst or to eventually outlive the solar system at its death. The probability of natural extinction only approaches 0% by stellar expansion, whereas the ever-increasing probability of technotrophic autoextinction for this species as confined to this planet should vastly decrease in the epoch of stellar expansion.
There was a moment in 2009 when I had similar feelings that TAE’s view couldn’t sufficiently integrate conspiratorial big picture elements, but I’ve reconciled those discrepancies. TAE and financially centered blogs have valuable system analysis of socioeconomic phenomenon which haven’t been consciously orchestated by anyone, or may perturb existent agenda’s.
I was still reading the Oildrum back in 2008 during the price spike, and most of the blog there was convinced that the price level was a direct function of scarcity and could never go down again. Then it dropped by two-thirds when the speculative bubble burst, and I started paying more attention to Stoneleighs financial blog, who had just departed the Oildrum for having an alternative view on the oil market.
I found TAE’s analysis of the interaction between the oil market and the financial economy to be more accurate, so I stuck with it.
Many people who frequent outlets of conspiratorial narratives oversimplify matters and tend to incorporate all kinds of events into a singular criminal superstructure, which is inpractical for much economic analysis. I must admit that most of Alex Jones’ material on infowars and prisonplanet is verifiably true whenever I check up on those stories, although sometimes extrapolated with subsets of unverified facts.
However, AJ’s economic coverage is limited to a view of controlled collapse by crony capitalism and the malicious monopoly on money, and misses much of the automatic socioeconomic mechanisms which don’t require conscious design or active agendas. His economic guests on the radio show have useful insights sometimes, but I’ve never seen a pronounced deflationist there, all have fast hyperinflationary-dollar-death-by-design expectations.
For relevant market analysis I’ll go with the economic and financial blogs, which are more comprehensive and focused on that topic than conspiracy-based outlets.
El Gs departure is awkward, Ill miss his writing here, but I’ll occasionally visit that conspiracy-oriented blog to read his contributions there.
I was suprised he took offense over Ash’s trashing the constitution, but if one assumes a plot to overthrow the republic and sees this as more relevant than economic collapse itself, the value of the constitution and the rule of law might be a sensitive subject, and the relevancy of this blog would be in question if it would ignore such concerns or dismiss the veracity of conspiracy. I would think a conspiracy thread to appease the demand for economotive conspiracism would suffice.
I’ve been reading about these raids, and I sympathize completely. Its a horrible mistake to designate traditional livestock as an invasive species, to forcibly destroy them in this way, these raids are unconstitutional and highly likely criminal. I assume its no misunderstanding or inappropriate legislation, but that the michigan gov is committing this crime on purpose to consolidate the livestock industry.
The cowardly DNR avoids the dirty work to shoot those pigs themselves, they let the farmers do it under threat of arrest.
I might consider an act of civil disobedience and get the pigs off my property by offloading them in front of the michigan capitol building to run wild in the streets, let the politicians deal with them.
I’ve had to reconfigure my view of the structure of reality in recent years, as I observed some phenomenon which my previous worldview could not account for.
I now run several parallel world models, some of which contain incompatibilities concerning meta-narratives.
I might include those outlandish narratives where transphasic orgone leeches inhabit human beings to feed off fear, if such notions could explain observable phenomenon better than baseline realities. Never had a use for the reptoids so far to explain anything, but the universe is expansive enough to incorporate such realities, providing the physical laws would not disallow it.
I use most of the economic content presented by outlets as TAE for refining models of socioeconomic reality based on matter/energy flows and human behavior, but I’ll also incorporate Infowars material, fact-based conspiratorial subsets, as I’ve found those criminological narratives have unique predictive function for some events. Alex Jones did predict 9/11 two months before, but not by his vast knowledge of markets.
I discovered the existence of the mystery schools in 2007, which was of an institutional type I couldn’t classify. I learned of freemasonry and occult hierarchies. I had never encountered their techniques of memetic induction and was suprised that an institutional structure of secret societies, seemingly embedded in the history of civilization, could be so inconspicuous and unknown to me.
The occult ‘sciences’ contain more esoteric data than can be assimilated in a lifetime, but I didn’t think much of the philosophical meta-geometries and considered the various institutional manifestations to be a racket.
Apparently, the mystery racket is the underlying foundation of most organised religion, the ritual process of initiation greatly accelerated the progagation of specialised urban skillsets along the geometry of hierarchy and may have consolidated oligarchy as a dominant form of rule.
Then in 2008, when Paulson unveiled the financial abyss in the sight of congress, I saw things happen in those weeks which I though were impossible. I have since constructed a modular worldview containing parallel conspiratorial and esoteric meta-narratives to account for organisational patterns which are not logically placeable in financial profit mechanisms alone.
Financial oligarchy does exhibit some abberant ideological components which allign with the known organisational workings of occult hierarchies and esoteric knowledge, and don’t seem to fit in anywhere else. Hence the illuminist symbolism on the dollar bill, there’s no other explanation than that parties involved with the monopoly on money are inspired by this body of knowledge. A symbol like the allseeing eye orginates by memetic induction of classic esoteric archetypes and has no other known artistic source.
If one were searching for some grand overarching conspiratorial meta-narrative originating in the growth of cities and subtly influencing or controlling the economotive development of urban civilization, the institutional manifestations of the mystery schools would be the only possible candidate to allow for the organisational framework required for a multimillenial continuity of agenda.
I don’t see another way to account for any proposed coherency of oligarchical purpose spanning the lifetime of a dozen empires, if such an agenda could exist. Some occult historians seem to reference a purposeful political narrative of considerable antiquity concering the mysteries, but they could be full of it.
For most of the nefarious plotting and small-scale scheming the usual financial motivations will do, interlaced with the complex socioeconomic reality of urban civilization and its emergent behaviors, not requiring an institutional structure or conscious plan to organise self-similar behavior in many people at once. I also use a theory of clustered sociopathy to account for unusual criminal coherency in the financial superstructure and in government, asserting that a disproportionate number of executives, politicians, mediacrats and bureacrats are professional psychopaths, and that their insanity is a self-selective institutional property.
The legal origins theory makes the distinction between civil and common law to investigate what economic effects it has on a country to follow either. Both systems should also have distinct but diverse effects on the ease of economic power grabs or on declaring states of [economic] emergency, how to specify the grounds and procedures for declaring and maintaining said state.
Article 103 in the dutch constitution is a bit dubious to that end, it references the possibility, by decree of the monarch, to suspend laws and several constitutional rights for emergency reasons of internal and external security.
Its not necessarily dangerous, maybe, if such constitutional emergency exemption clauses are transparent and democratically negotiable, if the applicable grounds for such emergencies are constricted and no legal components are secret. The US COG doctrine is seditious because it is alien to the constitution and the structure of common law, and completely shrouded in secrecy.
In any country the phrase of ‘national security’ is enough to supend or subvert most important protections and state structure, and to void rational thought in the political and legal realms. Im not sure whether common law structures are inherently less vulnerable to abuse when it comes to ‘national security’ or evil emergencies.
He’s not only ineligible, he’s not even a citizen.
Barry Soetoro has no legal immigration status.
He’s still a ‘foreign exchange student from Indonesia’, except that he’s not currently a citizen of that country, or of Kenia, or of the US by any admissible evidence of legal status [excluding obvious forgeries].
He was not born a citizen and was never naturalised.
Therefore the person currently impersonating the POTUS, having previously impersonated a US senator, is in fact a stateless combatant, an unpriviledged enemy belligerent and hostile agent, so engaged in espionage, sabotage, subversion, terrorism and various acts of war against the US, as well as identity fraud.
He cannot be criminally convicted of treason for misauthorising the Libya war if he’s not a citizen, it would be a warcrime or terrorism instead, but he can be readily impeached for it.
Every legal document which carries the signature of ‘Barack Obama’ is legally void and is criminal evidence of signature fraud.
28 U.S.C. § 1361 : US Code – Section 1361: Action to compel an officer of the United States to perform his duty-
This statute may be employed to obtain a court order to force congress to impeach this person and enemy infiltrator impersonating the POTUS for any of the impeachable offenses committed so far, especially for the Libya treason and for opening the UN security council, under penalty of felonious dereliction of congressional duty.
“Expressing the sense of Congress that the use of offensive military force by a President without prior and clear authorization of an Act of Congress constitutes an impeachable high crime and misdemeanor under article II, section 4 of the Constitution.”
Its treason, then, and concurrently misprision of treason if congress does not impeach.
Ash, I see you have learned little from our previous engagements on constitutionality. Its troubling to me that a bright and eloquent person can have such a blind spot for reason.
A simple premise; if government is an emergent property of complex society, if government would naturally emerge in any urban society, then it becomes necessary to lawfully restrain the powers of such a government once it appears. Otherwise its just organised crime deserving to be killed off, making violent revolution inevitable.
A social contract would mediate this restraint by constitutionality, no other system yet conceived can restrain the powers of government once established, not without violence upon violence and violent revolution.
The constitution is simply a lawful restraint on government power, and on the peoples propensity, not their power, to overthrow it. It logically enumerates certain rights which delineate those powers by the principle that individual liberty is reciprocal property, which must be owned privately to be shared publicly.
The concepts of property and ownership are not created by government but are properties of the human mind and body. Only certain forms of enforced ownership can be socially unjust, while other kinds of property rights are elementary to free will itself.
Certain kinds of private property are absolutely necessary to maintain human dignity and the freedom from slavery, such as the personal ownership of the body and the products of labor in most affairs. Those who think that ownership is always a social evil are somewhat amiss, if such private property is derived from a natural state of the individual mind or body that can only be altered by violence.
Back to that premise, if you believe that a society can do without government or any institutional structures, then the constitution is just another form of control. However, If you believe that government is an emergent property in any complex society, and will inevitably emerge in urban civilization, then a constitution will become necessary for that society to rise above barbarism.
I said that the US constitution is the most logically consistent and socially adaptive document of its kind, when comparing it to every other constitution ever written and when comparing it to barbarism.
Some of the administrative framework is deficient, not much more than in the others I’ve read, but the BoR and the declaration of independence are rare jewels, never improved upon as far as I know.
The configuration of representative organs is not perfectly alligned, I’ve found some checks and balances missing, and its said that the electoral college system is largely unrepresentative, but the document as a whole is still better than most, and it has unique elements that are refreshingly honest and self-conscious. it actually specifies the procedure to impeach the POTUS for treason. Most constitutions never mention the idea that an elected representative might be engaged in a crime.
The declaration of independence is the only legal document in history explicity stating that the sovereignty of the people precedes that of their government, and that the people must reserve the right to alter or abolish any government that becomes destructive of those ends of life, liberty/property and the pursuit of happiness. This is truly a revolutionary idea to formulate in a legal document, and vitally important to oppose tyranny. But any good constitution entails the concept of private property also, not always well balanced, but such things as the BoR formulate the ideal of such balance. The justice of private property is a balance; too little and the state can only create collectivist hell; too much and its crony capitalism or corporatism.
But Ash, I believe that every aspect of the constitution you consider destructive of liberty can be encompassed in the concept of political statism, Ive mentioned this before.
If a given constitution is only a statist tool, then its worthless, but the US constitution actually makes a conscious effort to minimise goverment statism. It doesn’t accomplish this well, but it acknowledges that this phenomenon of runaway statism exists, better than any other I’ve read.
If you think we can do without government or large institutions then fine, we would not need lawful restrainst on powers that do not exist, but if these do exist, then we should need such a tool to restrain them with. If instead this tool of constitution would be used only to restrain the people while the rulers rob them, as you fear, it would be a tool of statism, but it doesn’t have to be that way.
Public debt keeps people in state-sanctioned debt servitude without them personally being in debt, insofar as that the cause of taxes is love of the deficit. A whole country can be thrown in a forced labor market for its inextinguishable debt, with bureaucracies such as the IMF as sadistic warden.
Usually, wage-based purchasing power is continuously inflated away as a function of malicious monetarism and the exploitation of the money supply for private profit, creating a collective indentured servitude to the corporate-financial complex, and providing the cumulative conditions for accruing private debt and poverty-based crime.February 18, 2012 at 5:03 pm in reply to: World oil supply debate between ex-Shell chief and ASPO-USA professor #807
Hofmeister spends some minutes denouncing OPEC as the most evil cartel in the history of evil, but then utterly fails to identify the Fed as a cartel. According to him, the Fed is an ‘independent regulatory agency’, and he mentions how it effectively solved the small problem back in 2008, hilarious dissonance.
Central planning of energy should dictate the flow of innovation for the industry, he says. I always assumed that innovation cannot be planned at all.
My grandpa was from Poland.
Its said he joined the polish resistance when the germans invaded, and that most of his home village was killed or deported, but also that the locals didn’t protest or resist much when the jews were taken first.
He moved to germany as a laborer, then was ratted out by a colleague, either for being polish or for being in the resistance. He was captured, tortured by the gestapo and sent to Dachau, and somehow survived there until the camp was liberated at the end of the war.
I used to get letters from family in Poland, but couldn’t read a word.
Normative Gravitism postulates that Gravity is a recursive algorithm bounding a maximally spatially open universe, wherefore only massfulness yields choice. Providing also that the cause of time is relativistic mass, a moral heuristic may be compiled wherein good is voluntary, or of its own accord, and evil is involuntary, or against its will. As a derivative function Capital is subject to Gravity in any market geometry, if not at fair value.
Also, since our contemporary money is a debt derivative leveraged off bankable assets at some absurd ratio, these assets cannot be liquidated in mass without collapsing the money supply and depressing the price of those assets.
This monetary system yields fractional reserve assets which cannot be fully redeemed during deflation, one asset leveraged on another, is that right?
Would this wage deflation environment make Germany more vulnerable to imported oil price shocks, driving the cost of living past critical mass?
Mutual knowledge of economic values is also supposed to be gained by the process of price discovery, but this isn’t working so well lately, common realisation of the exact worthlessness of housing bubbles, sovereign debt and banking institutions is being prevented and leveraged away.
OWS seems to not have acknowledged that free markets of exchange dont exist under these conditions of rampant criminality and corporate control. Most of their voiced concerns over economic disparities make the assumption that a free market is unfair, and naturally produces these exact conditions.
I’ve seen the anti-capitalist sentiments there turn towards an appeal to state socialism to enable forced redistribution of wealth, and I’ve heard rumors of incitement to harass bankers by OWS people, but there’s no pronounced violent tendency yet. Even so, [OWS] protestors are already being broadly classified as ‘low level terrorists’ by some agencies, not for any violence but for peacefully protesting as political activism, which does present a dilemma in that if the opportunity for peaceful mass protests to consolidate this social movement is taken away, it may be left only with random or organised violence to express itself, or self-defence against open persecution.
Of course violence cannot be used to fight violence of a greater magnitude, but some might not know this.
I agree with the good elements of the movement mentioned, its better than apathy, if it carries the promise of democratic process, it may function almost as a political party is supposed to, for disseminating mutual knowledge of desirable social change.