65
John Galt
65a9c0c5ef009ed7dbf81f29e0b67d49c021417322fa26a6410e2d26544328b3
Replying to Avatar johnkvallis

I sometimes use it as a stand-in or catch-all for those people who act dishonestly, unfairly, or immorally at the expense of others, knowingly or not. There are perhaps many ways Gigi’s ‘Us’ answer could be interpreted, but I see one as the inevitability of everyone being a ‘they’ (pejoratively) to someone, mostly by ignorance. For example, I might consider those who knowingly and selfishly perpetuate an unfair monetary system, at the expense of those coerced (legal tender laws) to use it, to be a ‘they’. Similarly, the mother of a young boy ‘forced’ to work in cobalt mines in response to my demand for the phone I’m writing this on, may consider me a ‘they’. Ultimately, though I sometimes (lazily) use it myself, I think if we are to criticize anyone or anything, it is not only more accurate, but far more useful, to be as specific as possible when we do so. This allows us to isolate the issue, and devise a solution, without catching in the net of our condemnation those who aren’t deserving of it, and de-legitimizing our capacity and reliability for identifying the true cause and culprits of problems in the process. Of course, one may go even further and simply come to the conclusion that even being specific with one’s criticisms is a sub-optimal (and again, lazy) approach, and one ought to focus entirely on the solutions (to perceived problems) which are within one’s capacity or control - basically just adhering to Bucky Fullers advice regarding building solutions which make problems (be they people or systems) obsolete. I see the latter as being the most legitimate and effective, and try to use the former less and less.

"They" are the ones who, unlike us, when they become aware of the exploitation that people have been living under via socialism/fiat/inflation, choose to participate in it for their own gain - rather than have the courage to speak up openly against it and do all they can to break free from it and peacefully build against it (which is different to fighting against it).

Wild things will be done in fiat world in 2024 to justify more money printing, social credit scores, regulation, control and surveilance. Wild things will be done in 2024q4/2025q1 to bring on the next bear market in the bitcoin space.

And like the late 60ties, sending people to the moon in 2024q4 is again serving the dual purpose of printing money and providing circus. It was followed by the 1971 gold decision. Get ready for another massive default in 2025/2026.

USA killed it's own people on a ship so they could get involved in WW2

Apparently going to the moon again in about 11 months

Dont agree with moon, agree with 911.

Have you watched channel four's "In the shadow of the moon?"

Governments work with religions to get followers to view people in other countries as enemies to go to war against. That way, they don't look up the hierarchy and realize that their own ruler is their enemy. Senior religious leaders from "opposite" sides work together with elites and mess with the heads of much of the public. This keeps fiat money and the military-industrial complex alive.

Debt and leverage in the fiat system means bonds and thus pensions are at their end. By aping in to btc and then having a shocker of a drawdown at the end of the next bull in 2024/25, they can blame a bond and pension collapse on btc and come out smelling of roses - while destroying a lot of people's lives. Quite clever

Yep. That was my first bear. Never touched an altcoin. And i have no interest in selling yet. Not even close. Will skim 5-10% when I need to - circa Oct'24 onwards for a few months. But that's it