Avatar
Leo Fernevak
23d49394612585706c72908a5e3904f95177ea087b032ddbfcd2862304c7d983
Bitcoin - Art - Liberty

#Memes #StarWars #Liberty #Guns #Government

#Memes #PoliticalSpectrum #Left #Right #Liberty #Bitcoin

#Memes #Christmas

Even if we assumed your assumption was correct:

Let's assume an average $12 fee now (probably will drop back to lower levels)

$200 - $12 = $188

If we assume your thesis that fees will increase at the same pace as the savings:

$20,000 - $1200 = $18,800

Yeah, I'd rather have $18,800 stored safely on the base layer, vs storing that amount on L2.

Long term savings.

The value of sats will increase over time. If your $200 bitcoin is worth $20k at some point, then even if fees increase you are good.

Good work. Since we already have tabs on profiles, adding an extra tab for content won't hurt. No lengthy horizontal scrolling yet on the tabs.

"If we wish to preserve a free society, it is essential that we recognize that the desirability of a particular object is not sufficient justification for the use of coercion."

---- F. A. Hayek

#Memes #Hayek #Liberty #Bitcoin

Force Meditation, 2017.

Old scene I made in 3D.

#Bitcoin #StarWars #Jedi #Art #NoAI

Replying to Avatar Leo Fernevak

Some thoughts while reading John Locke's "Two treatises of government". Let's dive in.

".. it being reasonable and just I should have a right to destroy that which threatens me with destruction." (Chapter 3.16)

Here Locke identifies the practical necessity of evaluating and responding to threats. He is primarily considering the threats of an abusive government.

".. and hence it is that he who attempts to get another man under his power does thereby put himself into a state of war with him." (3.17)

This is real talk. Locke is using logic to identify when a person or government is at war with a person. The moment this happens is when one the aggressor seeks to make another person dependent and place then under their power.

Locke continues:

"For I have reason to conclude that he who would get me into his power without my consent would use me as he pleased when he had got me there, and destroy me too when he had a fancy to it; for nobody can desire to have me in his absolute power unless it be to compel me by force to that which is against the right of my freedom -- i.e. make me a slave." (3.18)

Locke brings pure dynamite here by invoking only his reasoning. Why would a voluntarist want complete control over you? He wouldn't. A voluntarist leaves you alone, except if you abuse children, but that's a violation of consent - only adults can fully consent.

The voluntarist therefore is not a threat to any honest, moral man. But the authoritarian, he that seeks "absolut kontroll",, that is a man who is not going to respect your liberties.

Let's return to Locke:

".. so that he who makes an attempt to enslave me thereby puts himself into a state of war with me." (3.18)

Locke expands:

"This makes it lawful for a man to kill a thief who has not in the least hurt him, nor declared any design upon his life, any farther than by the use of force, so to get him in his power as to take away his money, or what he pleases, from him;

Because using force, where he has no right to get me into his power, let his pretense be what it will, I have no reason to suppose that he who would take away my liberty would not, when he had me in his power, take away everything else.

And, therefore, it is lawful for me to treat him as one who has put himself into a state of war with me -- i.e. kill him if I can; for that hazard does he justly expose himself whoever introduces a state of war, and is aggressor in it." (3.19)

My reflections.

Lockes logic is extraordinarily true when applied to Agenda 21 and Agenda 2030. These policies requires the State to implement CBDC's, digital ID and social credit scores. When these are implemented, that regime is, following Lockes reasoning, in a state of war against every individual, since it seeks absolute power over every individual. Logic together with history informs us that such power will be abused -- it is at most a matter of time until it is abused.

The worst criminals are expert at gaining a high rank in a totalitarian society: they have no values and can therefore parrot every official doctrine of a regime with the convincing belief of a trained actor, regardless how immoral or absurd that doctrine is. We know therefore that the worst humans will always end up leading a totalitarian society. Therefore, a totalitarian society is by its own essence of absolute control, at war with liberty.

Thank you for an interesting read, Rune.

The price we pay for freedom depends on our response to slavery.

The risks of slavery should be clear enough to provoke a backlash in healthy, moral individuals.

Sovereignty is necessary for life; from galaxies, star systems, planets, regions, to nations, families, individuals and atoms. Attraction + separation in balance. When civilizations are incongruent with one another, individuals fight to have local jurisdictions that are aligned with the values and beliefs of the locals living there.

The Earth requires a particular distance from the Sun for higher life-forms to exist and survive. Our existence depends on a carefully weighted balance between attraction and separation.

Life is sovereign. Free agency requires a separation of powers, so that your reasoning is intact and truthful to your judgement, unassailed by external forces that seek to shape your values and ideas.

All instances of force have a horizon and fade via distance; all forms of control are local phenomena. This is why separation and sovereignty overlap. We want our planet close enough to the Sun to benefit our diverse species for the purpose of life and liberty, but we have no interest in joining with the Sun. Not all unions are beneficial.

Integrity and autonomy go hand in hand. A computer virus corrupts data by replacing local code with foreign, hostile executables. Tolkien made a similar analogy with Gollum; his internal values were corrupted by the ring. His previously sovereign mind was infected by the will of another, centralizing force, thus imprisoning him to that influence in a manner of dependency. His sovereignty of mind was sapped from him.

Centralization of power is anti-thetical to life at scale. The universe is a vast seeding-ground for a plethora of sovereign life-forms to come into existence. There is no centralized chain of command, just emergent, local spread of life. There are no bureaucrats dictating how life should be arranged via centralized edicts. If a creator exists, he is on the side of liberty and individual autonomy. Otherwise he would arrange the world very differently and we would have no free will of our own.

The creator didn't trap us forever in a paradise where we were completely safe, yet without full consciousness. We chose consciousness and individual sovereignty and the doors of a perfectly safe paradise were closed to us. That is the price of freedom. Every freedom comes with risks. When we choose liberty, we accept the accompanying risks because the tradeoff is worth it. We were not designed to become mindless automatons controlled by a corrupt managerial class.

I will end with referencing John Locke's position on defending freedom:

nostr:nevent1qqsxzu0n84dentet44zjv0e6salld898w4f0k385ha7vtgx7pce2cvgppamhxue69uhkummnw3ezumt0d5pzqg75jw2xzfv9wpk89yy2tcusf723wl4qs7cr9hdle55xyvzv0kvrqvzqqqqqqyyk3dj2

#Memes #Democracy

It will be beautiful. ☀️🌟⭐️✨️

Agreed.

The Martian is good although not comparable. There are a few decent movies, they just don't have the same impact.

When calling a police state by its real name becomes a hate crime against that police state.

#Memes #Liberty #Orwell #GeorgeOrwell #Orwellian #1984