"Democratic" propaganda:
American deception:
American economists, even Nobel laureates, are deceiving the American working people.
Economists managed to impose on the delegates of the American workers the pseudoscientific theory of "Neoliberalism" - deregulation + reduction in the progressivity of taxation.
Why is US economic growth lagging behind China 's ?
Researchers from Yale University called the cause - "The Curse of Democracy"
(https://arxiv.org/pdf/2104.07617.pdf)
But in fact, the reason for the low economic growth in the United States is the low mass effective demand.
The reason for the latter, in turn, is economic inequality.
“The 1920s have returned to the United States - but “new technologies” in the field of economics have come to the rescue - the Fed is printing dollars.
There is no inflation, because they leave the "top" 20% of society.
China, on the other hand, cannot afford stagnation in the incomes of the majority against the backdrop of a growing wealthy minority. Otherwise, its population will feel the separation of the words of their supposedly communist leadership from their deeds.
The "Democratic" decline in investment is a symptom, not a cause, of slow growth."
(https://slidetodoc.com/presentation_image_h/dd84466f11d105d71eb0e9cba8f6d705/image-25.jpg)
The reason for economic inequality is mainly the deception of workers.
True, the deception of the Americans is far from 100% - conscious.
1. Many so-called "scientists" "economists" are sponsor-oriented - subconsciously - a significant proportion of the income of universities and "Think Tanks" in the United States is precisely sponsorship. And sponsorship comes from rich Americans.
2. In addition, the "best" economists, or rather the best falsifiers-demagogues communicate, mainly in the circles of the same rich "elite", and for this reason they are guided - by it.
“During the Great Depression, it was believed that it was enough to give power to specialists in order for things to improve in the economy.
The current economic situation in the United States shows: American specialists will not bring things to the Great Depression. But you shouldn't expect growth rates from them either."
The US government is not interested in the progress of democracy, what it says about protecting democracy is propaganda.
Independent activity is necessary, and it is necessary not to persuade saboteur politicians to "do something", but to demand that they carry out specific decisions that were not worked out by them.
The West is a delicate matter:
The scale of demagogy in the "Democratic World" is greater than in the authoritarian world - including in terms of money.
Just as in Russia up to 50% of military spending is hidden in "peaceful" orders, so up to 50% of the financing of demagogy in the West is hidden in "scientific" programs.
The indicator - the prevalence of political myths in the 1st world is not inferior to that in the 2nd world.
Examples:
- myths about communism, not about - "liberalism", Intellectual "property",
- myths about the effectiveness of professional politicians, numerous myths about democracy.
The only difference between "democratic" demagogy is that it:
- less cynical
- less cheeky
- uses less censorship,
- not associated with intimidation - physical, although quite successfully intimidates mentally, for example, with the Chinese threat - to justify military spending.
The difference between "democratic" demagogy is that it is more subtle, deeper, more stable, since it uses feedback much more. - Freethinking is allowed in the universities of the "free" world.
Instead of prohibitive measures are used greed and vanity - the desire to make a "career". -
"Harmful" research is simply not funded.
And this mechanism has been working until now - until the cost of communication means, the improvement of social networks and the same distributed AI.
Artificial difficulty:
On the 2nd side, everything is simple - If a group of people has power, then it monetizes it - one way or another.
The more power (authoritarianism), the more opportunities for monetization and the greater the economic polarization. The Money > Power > Money mechanism works.
The complication of the political system and government - this is the method of monetization of power.
- People protest against external negative manifestations, but they cannot understand their underlying causes, just as they cannot offer an alternative system.
The rulers imitate a violent struggle with problems - on the surface, earning popularity, and ... money.
There is really little difference between the "left" Macron (President of France) and the "right" Le Pen.
- Both groups are fighting for power in the same political system, which suits both.
USA and Germany are corrupt states:
It's just that corruption in them is different than in Africa - indirect, hidden.
The term "corruption" is adequate, since, by definition, corruption is an abuse of power (" abuse power for one's personal gain "). Abuse does not necessarily take the form of bribes.
Bribes are not the main means of corruption when there is power.
There are many other ways to gain personal benefits from power.
Politicians in the US and Germany do not receive direct payment from commercial entities.
But the incomes of the political class are formed mainly - thanks to commercial structures. A legal system of high salaries, etc., has been created.
High positions - up to the President - are occupied by businessmen who pursue a policy that is beneficial to businessmen.
Political corruption in the USA is not about direct bribes, but about obtaining political and career benefits from actions that are not the most beneficial for the people of the USA.
An integral feature of the state is the presence of a political class.
An integral feature of a political class is its corruption.
Facebook is an accomplice of terrorists:
http://dw2020.narod.ru/2021_Rus/81Facebook_an_accomplice_of_terrorists.htm
"Silicon Valley is helping Putin win the information war":
The Ukrainian TV channel Formula has lost 90% of its Facebook audience since they started covering the war in Ukraine.
The Formula TV channel has made countless attempts to contact Meta , but to no avail.
The drop in audience came as a result of a warning received from Facebook after their algorithm flagged a quote from Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky as "hate speech".
"When Tbilisi's opposition TV channel Mtavari published a story about the Azov Battalion, Mtavari 's involvement dropped from 22 million in March to 6 million in April.
The team has good reason to believe that this is an act of the Kremlin's propaganda machine."
"Your account has been blocked."
"List of Facebook restrictions on Afghan journalist Shafi Karimi , you can go on ad infinitum."
"There are countless cases like this. From Afghanistan to Ukraine and much of the non-English-speaking world, journalists are losing their voice."
“And we don’t know how Facebook is going to say this because it’s impossible to talk to them directly.”
Facebook 's systems are totally unsuited for all-out information warfare."
( www.codastory.com/authoritarian-tech/facebook-authoritarians-information-war/ )
Putinist gas blackmail :
Putin holds the Europeans for the same fools as the Russians.
Putin claims that "capitalism has outlived itself" because the market has not adjusted gas prices.
Of course, the "market" will not regulate gas prices if it is monopolized by Putin himself.
Putin is right that the Europeans really turned out to be suckers - the Europeans themselves are to blame for the energy crisis - they did not take into account the presence of Putin's mafia on the "market".
European rulers knew the economy would bounce back from the pandemic, they knew the demand for natural gas would rise, they knew the rising share of renewable energy would also increase the demand for “peak” energy sources, which are mostly gas-fired power plants.
And, most importantly, the Europeans knew about the presence on the market of the extremist Putin, who would not increase "market" gas supplies - through Ukraine.
The Europeans should not have hoped for exchange trading in gas, but should have sharply increased the purchase of gas under contracts.
European rulers, like the Russians, care not about the result not for their "clients", but about the result for themselves.
Gas practice has shown that white Europeans are really fools and suckers too. -
They hope their governments will take care of them.
They accept the extreme inefficiency of state and scientific institutions as inevitable.
They do not see the play of interests within the political class and effective alternative solutions.
The USSR was doomed:
USSR became doomed already when "liberated", nomenklatura managerial workers appeared. That is, the USSR was doomed - from the very beginning.
- Earnings of "liberated" workers were lower than the earnings of politicians in "capitalist" countries, in which commercial funds formed party funds.
The betrayal of the main "communists" was a matter of time. -
As soon as the popular popularity of communism fell, communism fell.
Communism lost – ideologically:
By the end of the 1980s, the number of Democratic fanatics in the United States exceeded the number of communist fanatics in the USSR .
The fanaticism of the democrats from the West began to be transmitted to the USSR not thanks to the professionalism and rational arguments of the Voice of America and Radio Liberty, but - in itself - as feelings. - People in the USSR felt the conviction of the democrats.
At the same time, disillusionment with communism grew.
Moreover, people in the USSR became disillusioned with communism, not because the rational arguments of communist propaganda were weak, and not because "communists" = nomenklatura workers had privileges, but because people felt falsity and deceit in what these nomenklatura workers said.
- People stopped believing in rational arguments , not because they learned logical counterarguments, but because they realized that they were somehow being deceived, but it didn’t matter how exactly.
Censorship and repression did not help the ideology of communism, but, on the contrary, let it down. “People have distrusted things that are based on hiding information and eliminating those who say the opposite instead of openly arguing with them.
And Putin's propaganda took into account these mistakes rather spontaneously, as censorship and repression as a support of power are gaining strength again.
The growth of AI efficiency may simply not have time to save the RF regime.
That is, "democracy" defeated "communism" not rationally, but emotionally.
Moreover, she won - spontaneously, and not thanks to the targeted actions of Western politicians.
However, democracy as an ideology defeated communism only relatively.
- Among the people who carry the "democratic" ideology, there are also quite a few hypocrites who only pretend to be convinced people.
AI demagogy will be - emotional:
With the help of AI, propagandists will be able to emulate bigotry and conviction.
The "professionalism" and acting skills of the Solovyov-Kiselevs do not lie in the strength of their arguments, but in their ability to pretend to be convinced people.
However, people don't trust the 3rd artists on TV. People need to see living fanatics they know personally.
AI is dangerous precisely because it can provide it.
Moreover, emotional demagogy can be highly effectively used not only and not even so much in Russia, which may simply not live to see it, but in the same USA.
At the same time, the law on the prohibition of propaganda in the United States will not be formally violated. Today the West is thinner than Russia and than the East.
"Utopias" are more important than counter-propaganda in the fight against dystopia=USA:
The main direction of the fight against the AI threat should not be counter-propaganda, but the positive construction of alternative Communities, in which the very need for demagogy and the use of AI by a person against a person, more precisely, by an ugly person against other people, will be minimized.
The era of quality excellence has arrived. Today, 1 American can defeat a billion American enemies - with the help of AI.
Profitability of counter-propaganda:
American rulers - ideological, potential killers of a billion people - convinced Americans that nuclear weapons are necessary to deter enemies.
The problem is that nuclear weapons are beneficial to the military-industrial complex and, accordingly, to the US rulers.
However, anti-war activists are not able to convey to the Americans a simple argument - counter-propaganda is cheaper and more effective than containment.
- Not to mention the riskiness of nuclear deterrence. - There is a race to improve weapons - the advantage is given to those who are more risk-averse and the first to use, for example, AI to control nuclear weapons. If you take risks for a long time, then sooner or later the weapon will work.
For example, the United States spends $700 billion a year on military defense.
billion /year is effectively spent on Russian counter-propaganda and democratization of Russia, then the US nuclear arsenal can be reduced by 5 times, and military spending by 2 times.
What to do?:
1. Create the institute "Servants of the People" - direct financing of economists only from working people - "marginals"
That is, to create a kind of intellectual analogue of the trade union.
- Trade unions balance the natural market monopoly advantages of centralized big capital over scattered workers.
This does not apply to 90% of the sciences. But where "class" interests work, in the economic and political sciences, a compensatory mechanism must work.
2. Create an institute CSS ("Deliberative Network") - an alternative analytical scientific network of the workers themselves.
The "curse of democracy" suggests a lack of legal regulation of the economy.
In fact, there is no "Curse of Democracy", but there is a lack, a lack of democracy - an unequal representation of the interests of rich and poor groups of the population, and a lack of liberalism - freedom from "class" interests.
Simplifications by Adam Smith and Marx:
The denial of "surplus value" and the exploitation of man under capitalism is propaganda.
Yes, Marx did not give the most successful and adequate explanation of exploitation.
There is a simpler and at the same time more effective explanation of exploitation. -
Counter-propaganda is simpler than propaganda, because simplicity is a sign of adequacy.
Adam Smith was wrong, and generations of bought-in "democratic" propagandists used his erroneous theory.
The market theory is correct only for the "ideal gas" - people and society that do not exist in nature.
It's not even about the irrationality of people - this is a factor of 2-degree, but - in violence.
Violence distorts the market in the first place.
Yes, if it were not for violence that creates institutional advantages for rich people, then so many people would become "capitalists" and cooperators that the average "surplus value" would simply be zeroed.
However, real "free societies" are not free at all. Under the pretext of protecting private property, rich "capitalists" create monopoly preferential conditions for it, which is quite natural - profit should be spent, first of all, on its preservation.
Monopoly rested almost exclusively on violence.
In order for the market to work "fairly", there must be NO violence in it.
But for the market to work at all in a real society with real people, there must be violence in it.
You just have to admit that the world is unfair and not deceive people.
Anarchism is a society without violence.
Yes, there can be no ideal anarchism, just as there can be no ideal "capitalism".
Nevertheless, there are real reserves for reducing violence in society.
Hybrid anarchism must, first of all, be calculated - theoretically, and not abstractly, but in relation to real historical conditions.
For example, it is necessary to calculate the options for symbiosis with the most democratic modern states. -
For example, a federation of non-hierarchical anarchist communities can be located in the sea, and the participants can also physically live in the sea - "hybridly" - only to conduct the parts of the activity necessary for this.
Spheres of activity, they can take - "hybrid" - selective, remote, "creative".
To expel offenders - by agreement with the help of democratic states.
Anarchy = salvation of mankind:
However, our goal is not justice, but the survival of mankind.
Justice is, of course, good, but survival is more important.
However, justice is a side effect of survival, because survival is threatened by intellectual polarization, which is associated with economic polarization.
We are anarchists - utilitarian, only because anarchism is today optimal for the survival of mankind.
The concentration of power is the main threat to the existence of mankind, since the tool of man - AI becomes smarter than the man himself.
In the natural selection of the struggle for power, those in power will win who will use the main tool of people against the people themselves more fully and more cynically.
Anarchy is the absence of concentration of power and capital.
Consequently, Anarchy is the only possibility for the survival of humanity.
Monopoly is the cause of "exploitation":
Almost the only factor of exploitation is monopoly.
For example, I worked in a design bureau.
Some official created monopoly favorable conditions for his entrepreneurial director.
If "approvals" were publicly available, then other entrepreneurial directors would create competition and reduce the monopoly profit that the official shares with this entrepreneur to the level of their professional skill.
The reason for exploitation is not the relation to the means of production.
If the design bureau used expensive means of production, then competitors could take the same means of production on credit and again reduce monopoly profits.
Monopoly is also almost the only factor in the high interest rate on loans.
Monopolies are created in places that are most convenient for government control, such as border customs, subsoil use rights, even ecology.
You will say that the abuse of these monopolies is a sign of a corrupt, illegitimate, undemocratic state.
Yes, however, even the most "democratic" Switzerland has created legal conditions for itself, under which the salary of the Swiss is not only higher than in the Central African Republic, but even higher than in neighboring Italy.
A sign of monopoly is the excess of price over cost.
A sign of monopoly in the production of drugs that save from death is the excess of price over cost - a record in history, because of which millions of people die.
Manipulation in social science:
Initially, during the French Revolution, "leftists" were considered anti-monopolists who opposed class privileges, for freedom and equal conditions.
Today "democratic" propaganda has distorted, turned the meaning of the "left" as a champion of the equalization of privileges, and of the "right" as a champion of freedom.
"Democratic" propaganda presents taxes as the only way to redistribute wealth.
Like communist propaganda, "democratic" propaganda glosses over the existence of anti-monopoly as a trend even in theory.
"Democratic" propaganda leads the discussion to the area of equalizing privileges, not their elimination, since it is more profitable for those in power to share privileges than to lose them.
"Democratic" demagogues deceive people by saying that the pursuit of profit increases the productivity of labor and thus the general income.
In fact, the monopolization of the conditions of production is an easier way to increase profits - at the expense of other people.
That is, in fact, 2 trends are fighting - increasing and decreasing the incomes of workers.
And, unfortunately, downgrading has better prospects - thanks to the success of propaganda technologies.
The mechanism of inequality is simple:
"Democratic" rulers provide monopolistic conditions of production, and production monopolists sponsor bureaucratic monopolists.
Bureaucratic monopoly:
It is a monopoly on decision making.
The "free" 1st world is far from being free.
The main function of officials in it is to make some decisions.
That is, these decisions can only be made by a specific official - monopoly.
The meaning of protecting "private" property:
"Democratic" propaganda has dragged the defense of "private" property into market freedom.
She explains this by the fact that the freedom of subjects presupposes their security.
Indeed, under the conditions of monarchical absolutism, including modern Russia, entrepreneurs were not protected from the arbitrariness of the authorities.
However, in "democratic" states today, under the pretext of protecting the freedom of enterprise, it is not clear from whom the large monopoly abuses by the "class" of large "entrepreneurs" originate.
At the same time, the main monopoly conditions in "democratic" countries are patent law.
The meaning of the protection of "private" property is protection from monopoly.
"Liberal" demagogues-propagandists confuse 2 defenses of "private" property:
1. Protection - from larger monopolies - from kings, the state, from other monopolists, and
2. Protection - from their own monopoly aspirations, from the desire to become local kings themselves.
The protection of "private" property is the protection, first of all , of the direct creators of value - workers.
And, above all - protection - from the monopoly Patent right.
Values should not be alienated from their direct creators for the purpose of monopolization.
The meaning of "liberalism" is the defense of freedom - from monopoly aspirations.
The border of "freedom" runs - between the worker and the "employer" = "benefactor" - a racketeer who occupied the territory.
The most solid democratic press is not inferior to the propaganda of the Kremlin. It only calls disinformation propaganda but uses demagoguery to deliberately mislead. Demagogy is worse than disinformation because it is harder to fight. Demagogy is also propaganda, since propaganda is the dissemination of views, facts, arguments and other information with the aim of forming public opinion or other goals pursued by propagandists.
Deception "Democratic propaganda" - see : Property and power.docx
Oxford, Cambridge, Harvard = Pseudoscience:
Pseudo- "scientific" pseudo- "non-governmental", but dependent on both governments and "sponsors" centralized - "Think tanks" - not only do not engage in research favoring the trends described in Ownership and Power.docx - Technological De -concentration , Reducing the costs of connectivity , but they do not even analyze these most important phenomena at all.
And if they do, then they are pseudo- "scientists", who in reality are rather "democratic", pseudo-liberal propagandists.
It is the "Think Tanks" that are the true generators of propaganda - the media only use the ideas that they develop there.
Moreover, they use false ideas - completely freely and voluntarily.
It's just that these ideas are really - very high quality, deeply thought out and highly competitive .
- Philosophy, political science, even political economy are not exact sciences. “They have huge spaces for distortion and myth building.
What then drives this super-complex machine of distortions?
- She uses the ancient vices of people like the world - greed and ambition.
"Scientists" quite voluntarily choose directions that promise them the greatest fame and money.
The distortion of the truth by "scientists" is just as ancient.
- Only 500 years later, and even then they do not always pay tribute to the Copernicans.
And in the current time of Copernicus, for 1 Copernicus there are always 100 supporters of official = beneficial doctrines.
And in the current time of Copernicus, politics is determined not by Copernicus, but by 100 of his opponents.
Understatement is Putin's weapon:
Moscow's propaganda depicts injustice. -
Like, the United States can do anything - the invasion of Yugoslavia, the Arab Spring, the overthrow of governments and the following endless wars, NATO expansion, the capture of Morales' plane .
Washington, in turn, focuses on the need to distinguish between just aggression and unjust aggression . -
Like, the invasion of Yugoslavia, the Arab Spring, the overthrow of dictators are fundamentally different from the wars of authoritarian, corrupt regimes in that they protect the rights, freedoms and security of people, including the local population.
However , Washington does have other interests as well. Although speaking of the country as a subject, not a phenomenon, attributing feelings to it, implying unity, is wrong.
In a democratic country, the United States, both the interests of the military-industrial complex and the desires of ordinary Americans are expressed in foreign policy. The desires of Russia are the desires of Putin and his group, and the fact that ordinary Russians express the same desires to their own detriment is simply the result of fooling the latter.
If Moscow only hides behind concern for people, then the democratic mechanisms of Western countries really implement such care.
The best response to the Kremlin's insinuations is to improve democracy in the West.
Deliberative network:
In a quasi -democratic world, the main thing is not making decisions, but making them.
- Today, no one openly advocates war, for the exploitation of workers, for the infringement of the rights of minorities. However, in fact, all this is implemented - with the help of sabotage, with the help of . decision -making mechanisms - at a subtle level.
With the use of AI, this process will become disastrous.
Therefore, before it is too late, it is necessary to simplify the mechanisms for developing decisions - to make sure that decisions are made by people - directly.
It is necessary that if people use the services of "professionals", they should not transfer powers to them, but only openly use them.
Redemption model:
It is bad if "capitalist socialism" is not an automatic merit of democracy, but a way for the "capitalist" governments to maintain social stability.
In the conditions of competition with communism, Western governments were forced to redistribute income in favor of the poor, propagandistically explaining this by the internal mechanisms and virtues of liberal democracy.
This is bad because with an increase in the effectiveness of AI manipulations, it will be cheaper to maintain the same social stability - with its help, increasing economic polarization, and, in a circle - the social opportunities of "capitalists".
The Bidenites gave money to the people, but they will take it back - with the help of inflation.
Rulers are afraid of deflation because the anti-deflation mechanism is the interest rate <0.
Conspiracy theory:
The communist theory of war was a conspiracy theory. -
Soviet communist propaganda asserted that wars are organized by big "capitalists " - beneficiaries who want and expect to expand the scope of their monopolies at the expense of the "capitalists" of other states.
But in fact, there have been no global conspiracies so far in history.
– There were only spontaneous processes.
If there were conspiracies, then only - tactical, situational. - There were intrigues between individuals, but not "class" against another social "class".
Ordinary people joined a more successful and aggressive ruler - in the hope of getting out of poverty at the expense of a neighbor, and also, because if you do not kill a neighbor, then a neighbor will kill you.
People, even rulers, were simply not able to make reliable conspiracies simply because they were not able to make reliable calculations, they did not have information, they could only use the services of "astrologers", including abstract theorists like Marx, and hope.
Outstanding leaders could create a large organization like the CPSU. However, the members of such organizations have never been unanimous.
Hitler's fascist Germany was a democratic state.
Yes, the Hitler Party was financed by some big "capitalists".
However, they did not actually order politics.
- Natural selection kicked in. -
The German, like the Russian, was glad to be deceived.
The "capitalists", like the communist bosses, only adapted to the situation, just like the ordinary people of Germany and the USSR.
Our theory of the use of AI and "big data" in politics is not a conspiracy theory only in the sense that from now on there is no need for a global conspiracy to influence, in fact, control global processes.
From now on, more precisely, from the 2050s, small rulers will be able to model social processes relatively cheaply and reliably and, most importantly, manipulate them.
The first, of course, will be taken advantage of by the authoritarian rulers of China and Russia (if authoritarianism in the latter survives to a "singularity").
However, the rulers of "democratic" states will also have enough opportunities, despite all the legal "checks and balances".
Yes, it will be more difficult for them, but nothing more.
Manipulation and propaganda:
Social manipulation is not limited to propaganda.
Propaganda is the manipulation of a person's consciousness, what he pays attention to and the attention itself.
However, propaganda is not even the main tool for achieving the desired social result.
The main methods are hidden from attention.
A simple example is indirect taxes.
In authoritarian states, virtually all aspects of social life have "commercial secrets" - departmental Instructions, "telephone law".
Opacity, non-openness of social mechanisms is one of the main differences between non-democratic societies.
However, in "democratic" states there are also quite a few mechanisms that are difficult for public control. As a rule, these mechanisms are at the intersection of "private", corporate and public spheres.
Examples are the use of personal data, the withdrawal of money to offshore companies.
The threat is that, for example, the cost of a journalistic investigation will become more expensive than calculation, for example, using "big data" lobbying methods.
And even if a journalistic investigation achieves something, its results will be too complex and uninteresting for 99% of the public.
And even if journalists can attract the attention of this public - by sensational distortion and simplification of increasingly complex social phenomena, then the "guilty" will still be able to get out with the help of cheaper calculation of intrigues.
Worst Profession:
Prostitutes are saints compared to propagandists.
At least prostitutes are not required to give up their souls, which is required of propagandists.
Anti-globalism and monopoly:
Putin correctly says - "themselves like that."
- Putinism is Western "democracy" brought to the point of absurdity.
Both have the same methods - for example - sabotage - the perversion of progressive requirements and phenomena, exploitation and twisting them in a way that is beneficial to them, since the mechanisms for implementation are in their power.
A good example is globalization.
It was replaced - Not about "liberalism" and the exploitation of poor countries.
With the help of deep economic mechanisms , using political dominance and inequality, they take away trillions, and then, for propaganda, hypocritically, provide assistance only for billions.
Anti-globalists need to fight not against globalism, which can be very useful to them, but for the balance and equality of freedom.
Consistency is one of the most significant factors of monopoly.
Economic monopoly is associated with political monopoly.
Political monopoly is based on violence.
War is a property of a state, even a democratic one.
"Competition" comes down to " protection protection " from other racketeer robbers.
Flat economy:
The 2nd direction should be - constructive, positive development of the Flat economy and de-concentration of production.
The negative effect of globalization stems from its scale - the larger the scale of the economy, the greater the level of economic hierarchy.
Reducing the size of production today is profitable.
see: Autonomous Economy.docx
Without taxes:
The existence of taxes is justified by the need to care for the poor and the social sphere.
But this imposed, paternalistic concern is similar to the "care" of the racketeers .
If people allegedly attract intermediaries for care through their representatives, then they are able to take care of the social sphere without intermediaries.
Intermediaries always charge a fee. But in the case of state, powerful intermediaries, the fee becomes unacceptable. -
Today, intermediaries manipulate people non-violently, but at the same time, more dangerously.
Only an experiment can show whether social polarization will be greater in a society without compulsory taxes. - In a truly liberal society - in which the border of freedom is in the middle between people, in which rich owners are no more free than other people.
But such a social experiment is the most important today.
Training programs for the unemployed are useless:
There is a "conservation law". - There will be only unemployed scientists.
The cause of unemployment is profit.
To eliminate the unemployed, it is not their retraining that is needed, but demonopolization.
Political economy is almost a religion.
- It is very politicized, and it is almost impossible to make accurate calculations in it.
Non-monopoly restriction of information monopoly:
Previously, I considered it unacceptable to restrict freedom of speech in the form of blocking propaganda TV channels.
He believed that propaganda should be fought with the help of counter-propaganda.
He believed that any restriction of freedom of speech is dangerous.
However , freedom of speech is only a means of survival.
- Propaganda and political manipulations are the greatest and real threat to the existence of mankind - today.
For the purpose of the survival of mankind, the optimal is not unconditional freedom of speech, but the assumption of freedom of speech - under the condition of free information competition.
It is necessary to create mechanisms and institutions for non-monopoly restriction of information monopoly.
For example, the mechanisms for banning Kremlin broadcasts in Europe are quite democratic.
But they are not entirely sufficient for the existence of real freedom of speech. They need to be developed further.
However, they are expedient - if we weigh their imperfection and their benefits,
This is not a restriction of freedom of speech, but the provision of its necessary conditions - for the existence of real, and not formal, freedom of speech.
Mechanisms and institutions of non-monopoly restriction of information monopolism are most effectively developed and implemented with the help of a distributed Deliberative Network.
Yes, the proposed measure has limited effectiveness - Using AI, " symbiotes " will be able to fool people even in conditions of complete information competition.
However, it is precisely in order to prevent development in this negative direction that an imaginary "restriction of freedom of speech" is required - now.
Lie Criteria:
In the context of growing sophistication of political technologies , simple criteria for their effectiveness are needed - for people.
For example, with the growth of the productivity of social labor, at the same time, absolute impoverishment of the working people is observed - in the "democratic" world too.
"Experts" in the free media "explain" this by the effects of Covid , the war in Ukraine, etc.
However , perhaps these explanations are propaganda and demagogy too, since, on the 1st side, there are more effective solutions, and on the 2nd side, there is a conflict of interests among the rulers.
In 1987, I proposed to transfer government leaders to piecework wages with a wide range - from billions of dollars to negative values - with a pledge of property - with free positions. To develop for this a system of criteria related to the final results - the ratio of prices and wages, etc.
War itself is a crime:
European propagandists are quite satisfied with war as a way of political coercion.
They are not satisfied only with the cruelty of war.
But there is no war without war crimes.
It is necessary to de-legalize war and coercion - as such. -
The US has no right to coerce anyone even under the most plausible pretext.
The law must be one, not two:
If a police officer kills an armed man just because he does not obey, then this is considered a crime.
But if 1,000 such people are killed, then this is not considered a crime, since this is done under a different law, by order of the President of the United States.
No need to demonize the Russians.
It is necessary to demonize war and violence.
When al-Qaeda blew up 3,000 people in 2 high-rise buildings in New York - the US declared war on al-Qaeda.
When the Kremlin blew up 30,000 people in high-rise buildings in Mariupol, the United States did not even provide planes with "vacationers".
Why is war cruel?
Putin does not order rape and torture.
But this does not reduce the guilt of the Putinists , since the Putinists understand what they are forcing the soldiers to do.
The war is cruel because the jurisdiction of the aggressor state does not operate on the conquered territory.
International war crimes laws ratified by the aggressor state do not work, because they reduce military effectiveness in the conditions of "competition" - either you kill us or we kill you.
Democratic propagandists deceive Europeans with the illusion that organized mass murder of men by each other can be humane.
Probably the only way to end war as a phenomenon is to replace pseudo-democracies with Hybrid Anarchy.
Execute, you can not pardon:
go to jail for fighting .
For wounding random people with a knife, they are declared terrorists and, in case of resistance, they are killed during detention, including the organizers.
For the murders of tens of thousands of random men - in a particularly cruel way - the organizers of the murders are tried only in the presence of war crimes.
At the 1st stage, it is necessary to accept a moral obligation for any honest person - to destroy the organizers of mass terrorism - by any means.
At the 2nd stage, it is necessary to legalize at the international level the absence of responsibility for any actions in relation to such a person.
A hangman-terrorist cannot lead a state, and automatically becomes an outlaw, regardless of his support from IT zombies.
The entire terrorist leadership of the mentioned state becomes sentenced to destruction - automatically. No trial or investigation. No statute of limitations.
There is no need to prove guilt in war crimes.
It is enough to remotely prove involvement in the organization of a military operation.
I am an anarchist because I am against the state.
I am an opponent of the state, first of all, because I am against wars, and war is the main and most disgusting property of a state, even a democratic one .
The US government also fights only where it is profitable:
Iraq may have intended to get a nuclear weapon sometime.
But the Russian Federation already has more of it than the United States, and is already threatening the United States.
Baghdad was occupied. Ukrainians don't even want to rent planes.
Red line of power:
If the lumpen rob - should they shoot to kill?
The essence of democracy is the organization of a non-violent "showdown" between the "lumpen" and other social groups.
Bringing the lumpens to robberies is not the fault of the lumpens, but only the authorities, who are interested not in a "social contract", but in a legalized robbery, incomparably larger than the robberies of the lumpens. Moreover, the authorities themselves created the lumpen.
More precisely, the fault is robbery, since the robbery of the ruling group is carried out - with the use of massacres.
They blocked the freedom of organization - they got an unorganized explosion. - Guilt 100% on the terrorists (terror) from the authorities.
And we could agree.
Power can only protect citizens from citizens.
But the government has no right to protect the government from the citizens.
Power itself cannot be a social group.
F * t is right - "they must be killed", but - a particularly dangerous criminal group led by f * that.
Why anarchism?
Man is selfish and insatiable.
Why do a handful of gallows (criminals who deserve the gallows) kill tens of thousands of young Russians and tens of thousands of peaceful Ukrainians?
- In order to amuse their vanity. “These criminals are already the richest people in their country and have unlimited power. But they are never enough.
Why concentration of power?
The concentration of power has always been bad - rulers have always abused their power.
The right question to ask is not "why", but "why".
- Previously, the hierarchy was competitive, but in the IT era it is not so.
However, power can move to a new steady state using the same IT .
But this stability will be the death of humanity.
Putinism is 100% a threat, but "democracy" is unstable today too.
The only sustainable way to survive today is a flat society=anarchism.
History is accelerating while remaining inert.
of work - within 10 years.
Hybrid anarchism:
The goal is not non-violence or anarchism, but survival.
The derivative goal of the 2nd level is a means to achieve the main goal - the absence of concentration of power.
The goal of the 3rd level is conditional non-violence.
Violence is continuous.
That is, it is correct to focus not on the absence of violence, but on optimal non-violence. - Not using violence for coercion, but using it for the necessary self-defense, to ensure the balance of freedom.
This is not "class self-defence", but the collective defense of the freedoms of each individual against the concentration of power.
"Democratic" lies about Afghanistan:
Western politicians care not about the Afghans, but about their own power, about control over Afghanistan.
If they took care of the Afghans, then the Afghans would not become "terrorists" and drug producers.
If Western politicians cared about terrorism, they would achieve the elimination of unemployment and corruption in Afghanistan.
This is real, contrary to the propaganda of dozens of Western "brain" brainless centers.
Just the elimination of unemployment, corruption and terrorism is not in the sphere of interests of Western politicians who control pseudo- "independent" think tanks.
Western "experts" were 10,000% wrong in predicting the timing of the Taliban's victory.
Western "experts have proven that they are not "professionals".
More precisely, they proved that the factor of political interests is the main factor in expert "professionalism".
People's Diplomacy:
Therefore, Western NGOs should interact directly with the Afghan Taliban, excluding the mediation of politicians.
They should not transfer "help" through the state. intermediaries, and to cooperate economically - with ordinary Afghans - directly, jointly.
Radicalism:
One of the first methods of mental manipulation is the deformation of terms.
In particular - "Radicalism" is identified with "extremism".
Foolish young people, dissatisfied with the futility of false reforms, see the way out in strengthening them, and not in replacing them with effective reforms - because they do not conduct an essential analysis of the causes and mechanisms of futility, and only worsen the situation.
One of the first methods of political manipulation is to redirect superficially thinking people in the wrong direction - to the detriment of themselves.
And this method is successfully used even before the use of strong AI .
Effective, deep transformations are radical, but they may not be accompanied by negative phenomena.
35904
|