Nonviolence and Survival:
Paradoxically, internal non-violence is necessary for the survival of mankind.
"Internal" - that is, within communities.
The concentration of power rests on 2 factors:
1. Propaganda, and
2. Violence .
Propaganda justifies the concentration of power and the need for violence.
Violence eliminates deviations of behavior from that prescribed by propaganda.
Today Propaganda is not yet individual and omnipotent - "wrongful" deviations of behavior are still quite common.
Accordingly, violence is still required - quite often.
A striking example is the USSR. -
This highly artificial community required very considerable violence to maintain itself.
The very possibility of the existence of communities without internal violence is already a controversial issue with very scarce experimental data.
Such data is given only by interest clubs, friendly, etc. communities.
Until now, apparently, there were no non-violent, but full-fledged communities - full-fledged in the sense of functioning in the community of all social spheres - industrial, economic, etc.
The absence of violence seems to be a necessary property of the Flat community. -
Without non-violence, the Flat community will be unsustainable.
But on the 2nd side, non-violence itself is unsustainable.
The whole problem lies in the possibility of maintaining the Flat structure - along with non-violence in it.
A flat structure is impossible without non-violence.
At the same time, non-violence is a sign of the Flat structure.
The Flat Structure is necessary for the survival of mankind, and non-violence is a necessary attribute of the Flat Structure.
That is, the achievement of non-violence can be considered a goal-a sign of survival.
A party of like-minded communists was not a bad idea.
Bad were - submission and dogmatism in the party.
Communism was n't a bad idea.
A utopia that required the use of violence to exist, but otherwise not a bad idea.
It was bad - pseudo- " democratic" centralism. -
The organization of like-minded people must be 100% free.
Communism, the social idea gave meaning to life. Only this meaning was false.
The idea of survival is not a utopia. This is the most natural idea of all.
The need for Flat organization and internal non-violence are only hypotheses, but deeply substantiated. - Offer an alternative model that guarantees the survival of a free Civilization and I will give up my ideas, which are only means, but not an end in itself .
Power is coercion, violence.
"Defending" order is deceit, demagogy.
Internal legality should be - non-violent.
Anarchists should not be subordinate to the Armed Forces of Ukraine (Ukrainian Armed Forces), but should cooperate with them.
The predominant place of anarchists is not the front, but development and production. This is where the Flat Organization has an advantage over any other organization.
Anarchists should primarily fight terrorists remotely.
A full-scale war of the Russian Federation against the Ukrainians is a much smaller threat than a full-scale nuclear war.
A full-scale nuclear war is a much smaller threat than the death of the unique Humanity and the meaning of the Universe.
However, the insidiousness of the latest threat lies in the fact that it arose - imperceptibly, not as spectacular as an ordinary war, almost without violence.
If you ask Ukrainians, do Putin's accomplices use AI -bots against people, including Russians - already now, then 100% will answer that yes, they are using it.
But when the Putinists start using super- AI , it will be too late.
Anarchism and non-violence:
In Anarchism there is a concept "Propaganda by deed (action)".
State propagandists present this "action" mainly as violence.
However, there were different ideas here:
1. Propaganda is an example.
For example, for Ukrainians, the most effective way to fight Russia is to set an example of a higher quality of life.
3. "Practice" instead of "theory".
Here the anarchists refer to the Apostle: "Let us love not in words, but in deed and in truth."
2. Anti-monopoly on violence.
The state has a monopoly on violence. This is a very controversial position.
Everything in the state rests on violence - in the final analysis. People don't notice it because they're used to it.
The "argument" of the threat of violence is present in the execution of any "lawful" demand.
It's just that in 99.9% of cases it doesn't come to violence.
Even when people agree with "logical" arguments, there is always a subconscious threat in this agreement.
Anarchism and Illegalism :
Anarchism has the concept of Illegalism .
State propagandists present this as a propensity for lawlessness and crime.
However, there were different ideas here:
1. Non-recognition of specific laws of the state, and not laws in general.
This concept is close to Gandhi's concept of "civil disobedience", salt smuggling, making colonialism economically unprofitable.
For example, for Ukrainians, the most effective method of fighting Russia is the spread of alternative payment systems in Russia.
- If the Russians would only use bitcoins and smuggling, then the Kremlin would have nothing to pay its terrorists in Ukraine.
To prevent workers from selling their product, for example, the natural gas they have produced, it is already necessary to pay the police.
"Childhood disease" of anarchism:
Indeed, in the 19th century, there was a simplistic understanding among anarchists, the idea that the right relations would be built automatically - it was enough just to remove the obstacle that fettered them, respectively, there was a tendency to negativism, an orientation towards destruction.
Anarchists have often succumbed to the lure of the easy way. Which turned out to do more harm than good.
Indeed, it is very difficult to build something positive, constructive in the environment, in conditions of total opposition.
Difficult, but possible. - Especially in the 21st century - with blockchain , etc. technologies.
A very deep analysis of social mechanisms and the construction of alternative ones are needed .
To do this, it is necessary to start with self-organization - a non-state-controlled scientific structure - the "Deliberative Network"
" Konnor "
5 200
Racism and Survival:
Why do racists kill non-whites ?
Even if the racists are smarter than the "blacks", then is there any sense in if people live on Earth, or rather, fight - racists, and not "blacks"?
It is clear why the Nazis were engaged in genocide. “Because of the simian xenophobic instinct, mostly. “Natural selection favored aggressive childbirth.
That is, it is clear - why, but not why.
We see the main meaning - in the survival of the "divine" humanity, in the preservation of freedom of choice in the conditions of the "singularity" of super-AI .
Perhaps weak-minded conditional "blacks" are easier to manipulate?
- Paradoxically, but the champions in Goebels zombies turned out to be, on the contrary - "Aryans".
The cultural-historical factor, apparently, weighs more than the biological factor here. -
In particular, anarchist communities that are independent of the power that controls different resources will be more resistant to manipulation.
The growth of humanism, empathy, compassion contributes to the unity of mankind in anticipation of the use of super-AI as a weapon against people. After all, the main method of manipulation will be the separation of people, pitting them against each other.
Degeneration is not a problem:
The increase in the number of deformities in the human genotype is not a problem:
1. This is not a problem regarding the problem of the possible death of mankind in the next 300 years.
2. The possibilities of genomic medicine using the same AI will easily eliminate this problem - Provided that people are not purposefully biologically deformed - for the convenience of the manipulators who control them.
The preservation of culture is more important than the preservation of the genotype - today.
Mankind has jumped out of the "Malthusian loop", including the fact that the growth of medical, genetic and technological capabilities is ahead of genetic degradation.
People benefit from healthy and smart children, which means that children will be healthier and smarter - genetically.
Each time has its own tasks:
In the era of cannibals, a "reasonable person" was selected, allegedly. Defective in all respects, Hitler was late.
Thanks to rationality, man jumped out of the classical loop of Malthus.
Today the task is to preserve a free Civilization. The main thing is not to delay.
Eugenics - yes. However:
Human rights must be a priority.
That is, "Eugenics" should only be:
- Gene-modifying, with high requirements for reliability - in every sense, with the prohibition of breeding methods;
- With full "Informed consent", without signs of propaganda,
Responsible generation:
We have the honor to decide whether or not to be the meaning of the Universe.
Out of 50,000 generations, if we consider a man of skill, it is our generation that is responsible.
Measuring the value of people:
I propose a simple criterion =
The ratio (division) of a person's responsibility to his capabilities - "strength" and intelligence.
The Mensa Puzzle Club is especially useless in this regard .
Overpopulation:
More people = more ideas :
Yes, 99% of people are useless .
But the more people, the more people who are able to resist AI manipulators, and the higher the level of the best ideas to counter AI .
The most valuable ideas will be able to ensure their rapid dissemination among people.
Effective altruism:
In the Exclusive Economy, high value-added goods are overpriced. -
The global "North" is indebted to the "South".
At the same time, the "North" can help - not financially, but - with the liberalization of technologies.
In the Exclusive Economy, only, for example, a monopoly on medical technology pharmaceutical companies kill millions of people every year.
Knowledge should be free.
First of all, it is necessary to sharply raise global education.
Modern satellite communication technologies + AI assistants allow you to do this - instantly.
The education of "blacks" pays off even purely economically.
"Blacks" should be involved in the process of global survival too. And for this they need to be freed from personal survival.
90% of the time of "blacks", as well as "whites" should not be spent on the production of food and materials, but on independent politics.
Modern technologies can feed even 100 billion people.
However, education also sharply reduces fertility. – 10 billion people were needed by 2050. After that, the growth of a relatively immortal population is not needed.
Unreasonable person:
On the 1st side, we are 50 times richer than people who lived 50 generations ago.
On the 2nd side, despite this, we do not adequately change our behavior - we still follow the instincts of consumerism and greed.
Even out of millions of false-intelligent scientists, no one adequately cares about the survival of Humanity. -
- Threats in the 21st century are changing rapidly, and in the 2050s it is possible to pass the point of no return.
" Konnor "
3975
The final solution to the Jewish question:
Solving the problem of hostility between Jews and Palestinians. Civilized Divorce:
In their own way, both Jews and Palestinians are right:
Jews returned to their historical homeland after 2000 years of persecution, especially in Europe in 1935-45.
Palestinians live at home. It was not they who expelled the Jews and occupied their houses 1000 years ago, and not even their distant ancestors - the descendants of the rulers who expelled the Jews from Palestine today live in other places.
The civilized decision - as much as possible suits both parties.
Solution:
1. Find, negotiate, pay the rulers of a poor African country for immigrants.
A variant of such a place is East Sudan, Eritrea, Somalia:
"+" Large proportion of the Islamic population;
"+" Poor, even hungry countries.
Local rulers will welcome the investment.
The cost of immigration will be low.
"+" Short distance to Palestine. close climate.
2. Well arrange this place.
3. Individually offer to each poor Palestinian the financing of the move.
You have to pay for everything.
The desire of the Jews not to be bombarded with rockets from the Gaza Strip should be measured in money.
The PLO fighters just need to be bought out. “The militants fight not so much for an idea as for pay—rich Arabs pay poor Palestinians to fight.
The poor Palestinians - the most aggressive, prolific and mobile - property does not hold them.
It is necessary to offer - individually. - With a public "offer" rich Arabs will pay for propaganda for the Palestinians and the price of the issue will rise significantly.
The optimal solution, however, may be - a hybrid - given the mood of the Jews. - Jews can individually warn the Palestinians that if the latter participate in terrorist activities, the refusal of the said funding will be an aggravating circumstance for them.
1515
|