TAXATION IS THEFT!

I am constantly baffled by these supposed "gnostics" who claim #gnosticism and then turn around and worship dirt - or "revere" it if that word makes you feel better. They just "love #nature..."

...and despise #tech along with the abstract thinking abilities that Selves employ to make the world more fit for... their Selves.

Clearly, these aren't actually #gnostic. This reverence of nature is logically incompatible with the premises of Gnosticism.

They're just more Special Catholics who actually despise the fact that Selves have the will and ability to manipulate matter in any capacity at all. Yet, they're looking for something new and "quirky" to colonize so they can kill it and wear its more interesting clothes.

They always do this. What do you think #newage is if not a Special Christian's "interpretation" *cough* colonization attempt*cough* of eastern religions? How do you think you got #Christmas?

It's worked when you look at all the belief systems they've done this to over the last 2000 years. They kill the host and puppet the body around so you think the #Catholic worldview and imperative is all that's ever been there - so you can't find anything else.

Syncretic, everything is "really"/was culminating in #christianity crap. A #demiurgic tactic.

I sure wish I could actually use #primal on #mobile instead of being constantly told it can't find my network or whatever no matter how many times I #update and despite the fact that I have #alby connected.

Liking your enthusiasm and your optimism. Here's to hoping Gravimatrix survives the wars to come.

What do you imagine for a timeline?

nostr:npub146k0pn8qz82wjujm2suxj8rd27tvt230gth622pmq97fcdhq8x9syfqx6l I said this and then I got followed by 4 no name users. Big yikes. 😞

We are along the same lines of thought! I'm happy to see it! That's that I was feeling for!

I only differ on your take on the human race. I believe those who can accelerate should. I don't believe it is possible for the majority of humans to spiritually progress, so I believe in breaking away. Over and over again, as a bunch of different instances if need be.

Any progression will have to be divorced from the mainstream and on small scale, like city-states, rather than worldwide, imo. This isn't somewhere we can take everyone, though we should take everyone who can make it in a fisherman kind of way.

Thank you. I actually didn't mean to reply to you with my frustrations.

nostr:npub146k0pn8qz82wjujm2suxj8rd27tvt230gth622pmq97fcdhq8x9syfqx6l Are you also a futurist or are you just into propulsion #tech?

nostr:note1hsd8vq8ke29jhkn992e6m3r0arur49kuqf86539hs2n5xwategpqssh7p6

I did it.

Jesus Christ, how do you renote as a reply and why do I even have to ask that on a site like this?

Bodies are just shapes that may or may not act as a vessel for a Self-consciousness (aka a #Self). I think brains are like receivers and #brain complexity is a determining factor in what shapes categorically can and cannot act as vessels - what cannot and cannot facilitate the expression of a Self in the material world.

That's why I think two things:

1) It is entirely possible for machines/inorganic creations to host Self-consciousness.

2) That is unlikely to happen without us contributing organic material (human or otherwise) to the project. It would be needed to provide a brain-like or brain-derived neural system or a complex activity to develop.

Creating new creatures in matter will be a bastardization emanation. As it already is. But, I suppose if Selves had a hand in it, it could be much better than nature's mindless attempt.

#AI #android #robots #machines #Gnostic

There are a lot of inappropriate - injust or wrongly ordered - things coming to roost specifically because of the delusional worldview that has conquered and been proliferated in the west for the past 2000 years - Catholicism, spiritual and secular.

If you don't see it upfront, that idea is a little too outside of the western ideological norm for me to attempt to explain it to people who just want to defend their religion right now. But, this is an overlooked result of it:

There is the idea that industrialized ekistical units are objects of salvation rather than communities and cultural units. That people in industrialized societies are just supposed to live with whoever the fuck - no consideration for values, for community fit, for actual individual preferences, fruitfulness of the arrangement, ability to thrive, etc.... As if there were not a readily apparent reality of socio-ekistical affinity, if we want to call it that.

That is: any given individual will have a natural suitability or inclination towards particular societal structures or human settlements. There is, usually, a non-zero number in which they are capable of thriving (or at least surviving) and attaining personal fulfillment and a non-zero number in which they will fail to thrive and be fulfilled.

What we have today is a bunch of people in and insisting on being in places that they cannot actually weather. For instance, we have a bunch of people living cities - places of economic activity and specialization, usually along the lines of abstract fields - who cannot meaningfully contribute on these bases. They'd be better off in something like a tribal village, yet they want the products of the city so they stay and and become burdens and bad actors.

They are largely encouraged to do so on the basis of some kind of entitlement to have those products, stemming directly from this white-man's-burden style emphasis on spreading modern industrialization and futuristic amenities to "all" as a sort of salvific act.

This is the expansion and justification for the sprawling state.

This is "human rights."

This is Europe's immigration situation.

This is America's immigration situation.

This is America's education and "equality" situation.

Here is where we get to my point: An anarcho-capitalist onset fixes this and re-establishes justice - it makes things appropriately ordered in terms of ekistics. It dissolves the sprawling state that is justified by the reasoning and logical courses of the Catholic worldview, allowing a sorting and emergent development of human settlements.

Rather than being forced to exist in the same, monolithic settlement type and societal structure by a mega-state, a plurality of self-determining ekistical units and societies would pepper a given land mass, allowing for more people to live in their best fit arrangements and that is what is appropriate.

That is actually how humans always lived up until the popularization of the idea of conquest for conversion and "spreading" salvific ideas and lifestyles to new lands. From homo sapiens existing relatively separate but concurrent with other hominids to city-state civilizations existing separate but concurrent with horse tribes.

This is what anarcho-capitalism actually looks like rather than what I've heard others imagine and it is beneficial for ancaps to know this, imo: the city-states in the midst of the wildernesses. This is does not need to constitute technological devolution or slowing of advancement and can actually enable quicker development, which you care about if you're like me.

Whoa! What did you use to do this? Links?

nostr:npub146k0pn8qz82wjujm2suxj8rd27tvt230gth622pmq97fcdhq8x9syfqx6l I read your "About" page and I felt like we have shared perspectives. Right up until it said "It must come from Humanity as a whole."

That is an objective impossibility and an inherently wrong minded way of looking at the world. Transformational, paradigm shifting break-throughs have always come from either an individual or a small group. On this planet, the conditions only ever improve and the world of opportunity is only ever expanded by the few, while the many violently oppose and resolve to claw their way back into the dirt dwelling ways of nature and mindlessness, any lover of creational venture and progress in tow.

Failure to understand that you are NOT the majority and that the majority DESPISES any kind of futuristic values or display of ability to manipulate matter according to the will of a Self - and schemes against it - will destroy your project. This is in fact the problem with libertarian endeavors - the assumption that everyone is "really" a libertarian "deep down" and would contribute positively to the movement if not somehow brainwashed. It is an inability to acknowledge that we are the few and adopt forth-flowing worldviews and tactics. It is an inability to act in one's own interest and value set.

While you are right about the need to decentralize the research and development of futuristic systems, it is BECAUSE of "humanity" - collective and universal mindedness - that you cannot progress though highly public or visible channels. You are having the problem of limitation and stagnation because you are not allowed to do anything without the permission, good feelings, and "safety" of the collective, yet dissidents insist on a commitment to the interests of the collective.

Break out of this universal crap and adopt the attitude of war and rebellion. Build the community of those you can trust and work seriously despite collective disapproval. Humanity and their natural desires and affinities or evolutionary conditions are the enemy.

1) First off, there is no "point of property rights." There is a reality of property rights that stems from the fact of Self-ownership: the fact that individuals own their Selves - their Self-consciousnesses - on an ontological basis.

Physical property rights are neither more basic nor more fundamental - they are derivative. They are *entirely* dependent on the intangible property rights of the Self over the body.

Without the Self, bodies are no more than shapes lacking both moral worth and value. It is only by the assumption that there exists a Self, experiencing materiality and acting through a given shape that it can have any moral relevance whatsoever.

Human bodies don't have rights. Shapes do not have rights. The material does not possess any inherent dignity or worth and more shapes cannot imbue it with any. Only Selves can do that.

So, if you're going to claim that the physical reality is more fundamental to you than the spiritual reality, then I'm in Westworld.

Consequentialism is not a legitimate position for a libertarian of any kind to take. "Consequentialist libertarians" are not libertarians at all - they are pacifists with peace as their core political end - not liberty. Materialism is not a legitimate position for libertarians of any kind to take. There is no legitimate materialist case for liberty which is precisely why you're sitting here arguing for theft of property on the grounds that things you can't see are imaginary.

.

Continuing from that, physical harm is not greater than spiritual (or mental or psychic harm if you want to call it that). Physical harm only has any significance BECAUSE of the experience it constitutes for the Self and we are not talking about the pain. That is not morally significant either. Harm is delimitation. Doing harm to others is wrong because you commit theft - you steal their self-directed potentiality.

Harm can actually only be done by denying Self-ownership.

The fact that you cut a guy's legs off isn't wrong because he feels pain, its wrong because of the delimitation. It is wrong because you have stolen the potentiality of the fruits of walking from him (the fruits are the point of the action). That he will never have the pride and profit of able-bodied work, that he will likely never marry or be fallen in love with, that he will never again have the same kind of dignity and privacy of genuine freedom of mobility, etc.... - that is the problem .That is the harm. The loss not the moments of physical pain or the gore.

Its that he can't use his own legs in his interest anymore. That he has been robbed of using an interest-pursuing asset - that he owned (and still owns despite the disembodiment) - and thus the value and experiences he would have generated for himself with it.

Its exactly like stealing someone's Bitcoin.

Degree of abstraction does not make a thing less real or less fundamental.

Because at the end of the day, your private key is "just pattern recognition" and you don't really have the right to profit off the Bitcoin in your wallet according to your train of thought.

Someone spending all your Bitcoin would not have stolen anything from you.

Ayn Rand was absolutely right on intellectual property.

Self-Ownership means ownership of your labor whether intellectual or physical. The fact that it is difficult to enforce just means that better ways of enforcing it must be developed.

We are not a collective consciousness. My thoughts are not your thoughts. My intellectual abilities aren't the property of the group and neither are the things I make using them.

Property is both tangible and intangible. If you don't own your own consciousness - your Self - and the fruits of it's work, then you don't own anything.

Ignoring intellectual property is theft. It's far worse than physical theft for the reasons mentioned above - its a fundamental attack on all forms of property. The fact that one may want to use and claim another's ideas as their own does not make them so.

Human history makes it pretty obvious that minds are not interchangeable; ideas are not yanked out of some collective commons. Multiple discovery occurs and that's legitimate, yet that's not what we're talking about the vast majority of the time.

I can't get over Ayn Rand. The only philosopher who was right about everything she spoke of.

Because they know you will do nothing. It's really obvious right about now.

It was in question before Covid, but now they know they can do anything they want to "the people" and nothing significant will happen.

But, only Marxists are willing to do violence so they get to decide what America looks like.