My friend once posed this question to me…
“What if we can’t have a libertarian society unless everyone is 130+ IQ?”
I didn’t have a good answer, because I think he’s right. 
Discussion
😐
Most people like to travel in herds, they choose saftey in numbers
The bane of my existence is the bottom quintile.
NGU is the trojan horse for the bottom quintile to respect private property.
🥹 happy friday hodl
I'd say that liberty isn't possible without personal responsibility, and that doesn't require an IQ.
Less or no jabs and better nutrition during pregnancy is our best bet to raise gen pops IQ
I think unfortunately the best bet for this kind of intervention is Crispr style eugenics. (Uncomfortable thought)
But that raises other questions. Could we even affect total IQ with tech?
And even if we did what are the second order effects. Increase in psychopathy for instance? There are no free lunches in nature.
Or are we just doomed to be anchored by the bottom quintile forever?
I think there’s a really tall ceiling for societal accountability improvement via prenatal optimization and early childhood development focus. Regardless of genetic impact on IQ.
I’d like to see those things optimized as well, but imo genetics are often destiny.
Likely, but we can level up the bottom quintile over time with simple levers like nutrition and less toxicity from environment and pharma.
TLDR?
At risk of missing the mark since I'm not watching the video right now, Rand was very critical of the label "libertarian" as in "Hayek/Friedman" because she said they had a purely economic theory with no roots on a coherent moral and ethical ideology. Rand's Objectivism on the other hand is a philosophical system from which the rest is derived.
Yep: nostr:note1qskushdj46tstg4dhe7fahmq5ekzvmh2autgf04r4m7pxfhaa7mqs4uxtx
Why is the basis for the success merely on the level of IQ of those choosing to be ruled? People with high IQ’s aren’t necessarily all good people so I respectfully disagree with your interpretation of this concept.
So imagine you have a retarded sister (i don’t). Imagine she is functional in a sense but she won’t be able to grasp most subjects that you find important. You tell her it’s her fault you can’t have a nice libertarian paradise.
Why would you do that? Seems unnecessarily cruel.
If everyone if IQ 130 then that will rebase as IQ 100. My understanding is that IQ 100 represents the base average. Going to check if I have this right now.
Yes, also it mostly measures how can you perform math and logic problem solving under TIME pressure aka if I get same solution but 10%slower im 10%dummer 🤣 (which I am, i got a 🐢IQ)
Yes you’re right. That’s how it works.
That's an exponential increase right there! We are now having visions of humans achieving singularity.
I’d be also more than curious what would result be if you make a list of 100ppl that do most harm to the society (in your opinion) and see if they’re so low IQ
Yeah unfortunatly most people are NPCs. Maybe it's good this way, but it made me question the liberterian vision aswell.
The worst part is that i guess this thinking arrises from thought “dumb people wont vote for smart things” libertarianism my ass
For me personally it arises from the thought that dumb people are unable to responsibly manage their own lives.
I know I’m acting triggered as F but look at this wisdom nostr:note1fyjz7scq7ad0x5v0mfx59qsr7ct8azsn90664ggganf7gkhy6gusttru7h
I agree with that sentiment
The remnant..... Not the masses
I'm starting to think we don't have a libertarian utopia BC enough/lots of people are greedy and lazy enough to band together to rob the productive
Doesn't IQ level just indicate a person's capacity for knowledge and how quickly their brain can bring it from storage to active use?
Also, would you agree that there has been a purposeful and wholesale dumbing down of the general popluation in the educational system? Would you put the general intelligence of the population of 60 years ago higher or lower than the current population?
Not knowledge, math and logic skills
And I think statistics put it higher noooo ? But it doesn’t say anything about ppls self determination or whatever just math and logic skills
Depends on how you look at it bro. They were certainly a sturdier and more pragmatic folk. They bash us because we never adjusted a carb but they can't log in to their email.
I don't know what the solution is but it's not democracy.
I don't think it's lack of intelligence so much as righteousness that dictates the need for authoritarianism.
Bingo. Libertarianism is as utopian as socialism in that it presupposes a kind of uniform personality that does not exist in aggregate. We appear to be too stupid and selfish for such systems, and so it's not a reasonable prescription in practice. A crypto-maxarchy that seeks to create as many digital sovereigns as possible may be the only solution by carving out a cyber Galt's Gluch for the inventive low time preference minds to congregate and build.
Intelligence isn't the problem. Emotional maturity is. It's your mind that stands in the way of your ability to embrace your emotions. It's the over-thinkers that are the problem. The people who are convinced their thoughts are them. Always has been.
It has nothing to do with IQ or bottom quintile.
It has everything to do with the social acceptability of telling others what to do.
If society formed a taboo around telling other adults what to do, we could have a libertarian society.
“Society” is shaped in (larger than appropriate) parts by low IQ people and is forming other taboos than the one you’re intending. That’s the whole point of the note.
There may not be an overarching universal Libertarian society, there definitely will be pockets of Libertarian societies of various sizes. To say we have to live with Authoritarians dictating our lives is a losing mentality.
What if 130+ is the bottom quintile not too far away in the future?
Then always build for that quintile in mind.
“Bottom quintile” lol. Those are rookie numbers.
What if most people around you (with rare exceptions) are 130 IQ+ but they're all worn down by decades of fiat stress, conditioning, malnutrition, addiction, daily psychological attacks via media and ads, having dedicated little to no time for finding their top inner voice and best self?
I would say to them “if you’re so fucking smart why aren’t you happy?”
FIAT is not the sole reason people are unhappy. People are unhappy because of the inability to accept things as they are in reality. free yourself from the cravings, clinging and aversion to people, things and situations to get liberated and enjoy real peace and happiness.
“Never forget the power of stupid people in large numbers.”
Morality follows cognition, I believe, so I think this may be correct.
A few random points/opinions:
I think the USA did pretty darn good when they got independence and I doubt everyone had an IQ above 130. Now imagine what can be done with the internet and bitcoin.
Isn't Dubai like 90% foreigners? It's basically a city that was built up in the middle of nowhere, populated by people with different backgrounds from around the world. The low amount of government economic interference and low taxes did wonders to attract them. I believe the world is actually becoming more decentralized and competitive, I see smaller countries forming in the future and that sounds like a spark of hope for the libertarian types. A world full of hundreds of Liechtensteins competing for labor and brainpower, doing what is best to improve their wealth and position in the world. Then everyone copying the methods that work best.
When the high IQ people invent new gadgets that improve quality of life, people adopt them in mass, dumb or smart. I think property rights is another one of these gadgets/tools, but it's a gadget being held back by many governments around the world. Once allowed to be unleashed, the masses will follow, they don't have to understand how it works, only that it works.
So yeah, maybe anarcho capitalism or libertarianism is not possible (for now) but it's a great bar to aim for, history favors those geographic locations that have embraced free markets and property rights to the highest extent. Ultimately, anarcho capitalism doesn't promise utopia, it simply offers the best possible mechanism to mitigate the formation of authoritarian controls upon a population. Bitcoin and the internet allows the productive modern man to vote with his feet and to help shape and foster communities of like minded people around the world.
nostr:npub1uw6lgv5qyexx68fwgdmwt3w7v3dwv679sray2ncpkug70ad7a8gqut3tay any thoughts? I'd like to hear your take on this.
I would also add that it looks like monarchies are good enough at keeping the lower quintile at bay as long as they don't f up. If you take democracy away, it seems you take politics and activism out of the average lay mans mind and leave all the plotting and colluding to the royal family and nobles.
> competing for [...] brainpower
There would have to be some sort of advanced civilization out there that produces that brainpower.
Because brainpower isn't endowed from birth. It has to be developed. Dubai doesn't have that capability. It's a society of camel herders leeching from the rest of the world.
I root for the civilized world out there that produces brain power and has the stamina to resist the call of sirens like Dubai or Singapore.
What I tried to explain was that you can attract productive people to a place in today's day and age. Bukele and San Salvador are also trying to do the same, Argentina might also try by bringing down their socialism meter in order to attract money and brains.
It's easier to attract the big brains than produce them, that's what nations/communities will compete for.
I totally understood that. A world of leeches is not one I want to live in.
I think the "big brains" understand that too. No one moves to Dubai to raise a family.
Singapore doesn't have property rights btw and is doing just fine.
If you're referring to the state owning all the land, then yes, but it's the same case everywhere. Once you've signed your deal with the state, there's pretty robust property right protection laws. Basically, the only thug in town is the Singapore government but they'll let you carry about your economic business and you don't have to worry about other thugs coming in and destroying/stealing everything.
Some governments protect property rights better than others. Those that do it best and allow decent amount of economic freedom tend to boom.
It's not the same everywhere. In Singapore you can only rent property from the government on a 49 or up to 99 year lease. Everywhere else you buy it you own it for eternity.
It seems to be working for Singapore.
You don't own it for eternity if you stop paying taxes on it, so the main difference is that in Singapore it's a lease with a set time limit, and everywhere else it's a lease without a time limit, try not paying your taxes in either system and you can say goodbye to your property no matter how long you've had it.
The big difference though is that Singapore will protect your property rights better than in other cities such as London, Chicago, etc. Nonetheless Singapore didn't just boom because of better protection of property rights but also because of it's looser economic policies and the government not trying to centrally plan absolutely everything. Did they do this? Yes, like every governmemt to different extents, but the intervention here was less than in most other countries. My point being, the more libertarian/free market leaning a geographic area is, the better the economic outcome is, generally.
Correct what with the taxes but they're generally very low. In some jurisdictions you don't pay property tax on your primary residence.
Property taxes don't usually represent the economic value of the property, rent does. So you can buy it and rent it out and profit from the difference.
It's not utopian, functional societies without a state have existed throughout time... the men of before with respect to today's level of intelligence are very inferior... I also add that we have had to live in the probably most centralized era that has ever existed in history... It isn’t an easy task to decentralize it but we try always
game theory? A self-sovrein individual is someone who reserve for himself more optionality. A slave is a slave, and will end damaging himself. So, after this socialist fiat world, we will see libertarian survive and reproduce, and the slaves perish. Simple.