Churches and castles in medieval Europe have been built by people that knew they wouldn't see the buildings' completion. Nowadays, we suffer from high time preference. We can witness this all around us. There may be quick fixes, but real solutions always take time.
It is revelatory how well you can describe the development of a civilization through the lens of time preference. Further, it is equally amazing that you hear so seldomly about this concept.
I first learned about this concept when listening to Robert Breedlove who I’m gonna go ahead and assume you know already. And then in reading Jeff Booth’s The Price of Tomorrow. Really connected the dots for me.
Always fun to hear how people learn about money and, as an extension, civilization through magic internet money. For me, it was The Bitcoin Standard. (And your assumption is correct.)
It's only reasonable, if your currency is inflating, to want to spend whatever money you've got before it becomes worthless. Inevitably, that will pollute your psyche in other ways. If currency is deflating (or you have some other reliable way of earning from savings), you have a direct incentive to keep your wealth parked, and that's bound to spill over to other habits.
Inflation instigates a scarcity mindset based on a need for immediate survival.
In eras of low time preference, we build beautiful things made to last and we make art that is reflective of our abundant mindset. True renaissance periods.
I am partway through and loving it. Full-blown anacap fiction. Another good one is "Freehold" by Michael Williamson. And the Heorot trilogy by Niven/Pournelle/Barnes.
Luckily there's groups, collectives and other organized people's who share this view and are taking steps to either reform or abandon the current system.
I personally chose abandonment of the failing society of greed and over reaching government/corporate control.
Having just finished the excellent read you recommended in an earlier post--Paul-Emile de Puydt's "Panarchy" ( https://panarchy.org/depuydt/1860.eng.html )--I'm impressed by how well you express the same spirit, in almost (updated) the same voice. In other words, cutting to the chase, articulating a baseline of freedom. Hats off! ;)
Yes, absolutely; thank you! Just trying to stay ahead of the wave and keep these things coming, so there are bound to be typos here and there. I really appreciate the second set of eyes!
Every hero needs that pithy line before the destroy the complex:
“This is your power source. And feeble though it is, I can use it to blow this whole room if I see one thing that I don't like. And that includes karaoke and mimes, so take no chances.”
I stole that from Doctor Who, Deep Breath. First Peter Capaldi episode. He’s the Doctor I identify with the most. It’s a Scottish and being a pain in the ass Capricorn thing.
Hey Christopher — a heads up that adding something along the lines of “Previous Chapter” “Next Chapter” at the very top of each section, and “Next Chapter” at the bottom of every section — would be helpful to the overall navigation of this quite fascinating endeavor.
At the top, I have navigation to everything that came before. Will that work well enough for what is previous?
When I publish these, I do not yet have a link to the next installment, because that isn't done yet. (I am writing this particular book on the fly.) Though I can start adding links retroactively to previously published posts…
Previous links at the top the way you have it should work for going backward just fine. You could have “Back” “Next” at the top for a simple speedy way to go quickly between published sections, but not necessary.
For continuity in reading forward/linearly, especially for those new to this particular work, a link to the next chapter at the bottom of each would definitely be beneficial.
I hear you on not having forward links for chapters as yet unpublished; I deal with that myself and usually just have “next chapter” at the bottom in regular unlinked text, and update it whenever the next one is published.
Jesus started our project. It will continue with all that believe and maybe it is the end time. For myself I look at the last generation and more than 50% are lost souls. A shame in itself.
We keep going forward with the Armour of God.i like your writings. Marvelous. Thank you.
I just watched this video and what Angela Small has uncovered is immense! In less than 30 minutes she unpacks a wealth of information and proof it exists on the UN’s Agenda 2030 and the land grab/property grab that is being ramped up by every city in the US. All major cities have the plan in place already and with a little digging into your major city’s planning documents you will find it. This is a must watch!
I think if they try stuff like that, they are going to get a lot of resistance. Especially in the U.S. I am not going to watch this; I already believe that it will get that bad. But good for you for raising awareness. The more people whop know, the better!
Yes, I figured you wouldn’t watch it and obviously, that’s okay! The more sources I list with the same information, the more eyes will be open to believe!
In one sense there is a "quick fix": we can cast aside the fantasies and illusions pushed by the government and the media and see things as they really are. Having taken that one step, we immediately become transmitters, without even willing it and without (necessarily) standing on a soapbox, of healthy ideas. Seen from this perspective, it matters much less whether the entire process does not come to fruition within one particular person's lifetime; what matters is the energy each person radiates while here.
The do nothing approach is what got us in this mess. I really appreciate this, as despair is such a real reaction but it will sink us like a stone. We have to process and move forward. One bite at a time, like you eat an elephant. Thank you. I've felt pretty powerless since the system has rejected me, but I have survived. So I know there is another way.
You know I’m not pushing back against an anarchistic agenda, but being just a bit critical here because - deja vu. This is starting to remind me of the Free State project. Not saying that’s the kind of goal you have, but there is a sense of collectivism. My pronouns of choice are I & me, not us/we.
Collectivism is forced. Community is chosen. Collectivism is evil. Voluntary community is good for the people who want it. I think it is pretty clear thus far that I am not advocating collectivism (and if it isn't, it will be soon). Is there verbiage in the preface or introduction to suggest otherwise?
Also, what is wrong with the Free State Project? IIUC, they are asking people voluntarily to choose to try to create overwhelming numbers in a single location. Yes, they want to use that within the system at first. I have mixed feelings about that aspect, though if they use it eventually for full secession to something anarchic, then maybe it was a reasonable temporary compromise.
But from what I am hearing, your critique of it lies elsewhere? Like with some collective aspect? Can you elaborate on that for me?
I would suppose that before trying to create a new world, we might disengage from the current crop of imbeciles (government) as much as possible. At least that might buy us time and stifle their plans to finally destroy us.
Lol. The solution is fast and simple. Identify enemy, delete enemy. The best way to get around these problems is ignore them. Every idea they have is stupid. So look up to God.
Delete can mean ignore or cancel. Or delete can mean something else. People say, violence doesn't work. It does work or the state wouldn't constantly threaten you with it. They use it quite effectively.
Governments impose force upon non-violent people. That makes it coercive force, not protective force. So we know governments are violent and thus morally impermissible.
This means that technically, protective force is justified in response. Technically, in a sense, it is justified in response to all of it. From the most egregious corruption to conscription to the taxation that is taken to pay a city bus driver.
But what form ought that protective force to take?
Would open, bloody revolution actually work?
Would it be the most effective choice?
Would it be the most moral choice?
I do not mean that last question in a pacifist sense. Protective force IS justified in response to coercive force, and government is fundamentally coercive. But there are many complicating factors in this case…
We have had government a long time. It is presumed to be morally legitimate by most people. It is solidly established in human life. Is dislodging it by violence the best choice? Would most people appreciate that, or would they side against the revolutionaries? The historical record shows that many people in the general populace quickly come to resent the revolutionaries.
Who would the targets be? Just the architects at the top? Politicians? The cop who lives next door and is just doing his job? (He works for a coercive institution and is paid by stolen money (taxes), but he still spends most of his time trying to protect people from the bad guys.) How about that city bus driver? After all, he too is paid by stolen money…
And then what would the revolutionaries do if successful? They have managed to dislodge the people running a fundamentally coercive system. Do they simply replace those people with themselves and start running their own fundamentally coercive operation?
Or let's say they don't. Let's say they tell everyone, "You're free now" and then go on their way. That's obviously somewhat better than just becoming the new oppressors. (Or even the much milder oppressors, the way the American Founders did.) So then what happens? Do the revolutionaries leave everything in chaos? Or does a new oppressor fill the vacuum? Or both?
Coercive force deserves protective force in response. But is it the best choice in this case? Is there a scenario in which the outcome is better as the result of a revolution? Does it just perpetuate the cycle of violence?
Obviously there is a point at which people will respond to oppression with bloody revolution. But when does that point come, exactly? At what point will the outcome be better than the alternative? I do not know. But it certainly seems like, given all the problems enumerated above, people ought to try to forestall such an eventuality and seek all possible peaceful options.
Please note, I am not trying to browbeat you here. I am just playing all this out—if you have good answers, I really want to hear them.
But if there is no good answer to these issues, then it seems like attempting a more peaceful transition would be a better choice. So let's play with what that might look like…
Negotiation. Yes, I know, that is pretty much worthy of a spit-take. Government won't just say, "Sure, have fun" and let anyone secede. But maybe you don't start negotiating for that right away. Maybe you start by negotiating for more autonomy. Special status (like the ZEDEs and SEZs in Central America, Asia, etc.). Or like the Amish. Maybe you start living a more independent life and then, after years of policing your own, start negotiating to formally use your own security instead of the police. Maybe you lay down a marker that secession is the ultimate goal, but that you are negotiating for it peacefully. (Kind of like the way Club 75 wants to do in New Hampshire.) Maybe if 50 different secession movements all start negotiating, it changes the whole conversation. Maybe it wears them down eventually.
De facto secession. Start living as independently as possible, as individuals and in small groups. There are intentional communities and areas that do that now. In a lot of cases, government's footprint IS reduced as a result. Do cops come onto Amish farms all the time?
Declare independence peacefully. Make it clear that no scenario in which government remains in charge is actually morally permissible, and that you by right ought to be free to chart a new course. Don't antagonize them, don't start refusing to pay taxes, etc. Just lay down the marker and start living that way. Build numbers. Build clout. Make it worldwide. Make it decentralized and leaderless, so they cannot decapitate it. Think of what the world would look like if there were a worldwide movement of people simply making the statement that they are, and of right ought to be, independent and free.
Prepare for collapse. There are a lot of factors (most of them economic) that could bring governments tumbling down. Be ready for those.
Adopt alternate currencies. Nothing brings a government down faster than the collapse of its money. It is harder to to tax a currency over which they do not have control.
Those are just a few thoughts thrown out on this Saturday morning. Protective force IS justified. And it does sometimes become the only remaining resort. And if a polity were to claim the "right" to secede and yet not actually disobey any laws and government were to try to Waco them, then all bets would be off. But just up and launching a revolution is fraught with so many practical and moral problems, that it seems like other options should be preferred.
Well thought out. Where does the line of recipricative violence begin? Currently in more than one western country, economic collapse is close, if not already there.
Morality in government/legal system has taken a serious hit.
Criminals are released into the public to create fear crying for more government.
Health care is no linger health but has become big Pharma profit centers.
Industry continues to deny culpability and point fingers at the public.
So where and when does utopia start? Because they own the media. They own the miss education system, the hospitals and direct the cops to enforce injustice.
In Canada and Europe they weaponize the legal system against the common man. Placing extreme financial hardship and legal tricks to delay rightful legislation.
They have chosen a path of violence. Wars, 911, 2008 financial collapse, COVID, Libya, and I could go on.
There may be a utopia, some time, somewhere. A serious reset of this mess is required. Hopefully, it doesn't come to anarchy, war and chaos. But it probably will.
You have some very utopian solutions. I would defintely go along with them. They will never agree.
Thank you. For clarity’s sake, I would caution that I believe these ideas we are discussing will definitely work better…but actual utopia is impossible. I think we can make fast improvements, though.
All the points you raise are valid. All of these things constitute an attack, and seem morally actionable as such.
But who would be the targets of such an action? In this piece (https://christophercook.substack.com/p/architects-operatives-cheerleadersoh) I observe that even in totalitarian societies, there is a hierarchy of involvement and culpability. If we could target just the architects of oppression, great! But it quickly gets muddy beyond that, and it always ends up having to go beyond that when there is violence.
This is part of the great tragedy of totalitarianism. The IRS agent who comes to your house to do an audit is an operative of totalitarian oppression. But he is also just some nerdy guy with a nerdy wife and two nerdy kids. Does one treat him as an operative of oppression? Or does one treat him as the nerdy dad doing a job that he should know is evil, but does not? Not an easy question!
I cannot say what WILL happen. All I can say is that I think that we ought to try to bring this about peacefully.
I hate to use a lefty term, but I believe that “raising the consciousness” of a large number of people will go a long way. It’s not the only step, but it is an essential first step. We outnumber the architects and their operatives many times over. If we can wake enough people up, we’ll-begun will truly be half-done!
I absolutely agree with higher consciousness. As a collective getting involved on a higher plane creates a vibe. On a recent trip to Columbia, I was exploring a city. Walking past a cathedral, I could hear singing.
A congregation were at mass singing. In Spanish. The door was open. The sound went right inside me. It felt great. The love was real. The design of the cathedral made me feel the presence of their expression of love. A beautiful experience.
The world needs more of that. This is really what wins.
However, our leaders don't want this. They want control.
We want to be in the cathedral. A group of humans with a collective thought of love and giving. Not in their wars.
Churches and castles in medieval Europe have been built by people that knew they wouldn't see the buildings' completion. Nowadays, we suffer from high time preference. We can witness this all around us. There may be quick fixes, but real solutions always take time.
Low time preferences FTW!
I marvel at the connection between time preferences and currencies. Deflationary = low, inflationary = high. 🔥
It is revelatory how well you can describe the development of a civilization through the lens of time preference. Further, it is equally amazing that you hear so seldomly about this concept.
It is both revelatory and amazing! 😉
I first learned about this concept when listening to Robert Breedlove who I’m gonna go ahead and assume you know already. And then in reading Jeff Booth’s The Price of Tomorrow. Really connected the dots for me.
Always fun to hear how people learn about money and, as an extension, civilization through magic internet money. For me, it was The Bitcoin Standard. (And your assumption is correct.)
The Bitcoin Standard was huge for me as well!! Great book! Have a wonderful day, David. :)
Likewise :)
It's only reasonable, if your currency is inflating, to want to spend whatever money you've got before it becomes worthless. Inevitably, that will pollute your psyche in other ways. If currency is deflating (or you have some other reliable way of earning from savings), you have a direct incentive to keep your wealth parked, and that's bound to spill over to other habits.
Absolutely! It all makes so much sense.
Inflation instigates a scarcity mindset based on a need for immediate survival.
In eras of low time preference, we build beautiful things made to last and we make art that is reflective of our abundant mindset. True renaissance periods.
Have you read "Enemy of the State" by F. Paul Wilson?
No, but looking on amazon, it appears that people who have read it like it.
I am partway through and loving it. Full-blown anacap fiction. Another good one is "Freehold" by Michael Williamson. And the Heorot trilogy by Niven/Pournelle/Barnes.
Luckily there's groups, collectives and other organized people's who share this view and are taking steps to either reform or abandon the current system.
I personally chose abandonment of the failing society of greed and over reaching government/corporate control.
100 percent. We need all of these experiments to keep chugging down the tracks towards FreedomTown!
Having just finished the excellent read you recommended in an earlier post--Paul-Emile de Puydt's "Panarchy" ( https://panarchy.org/depuydt/1860.eng.html )--I'm impressed by how well you express the same spirit, in almost (updated) the same voice. In other words, cutting to the chase, articulating a baseline of freedom. Hats off! ;)
Thank you! I will keep it rolling…
Thanks for the reference.
"The best time to plant a tree is twenty years ago. The next best time is now."
- old Chinese proverb.
That is a wise proverb!
Christopher, when we see typo type errors would you like them flagged in the comments?
ie,
But it it what it is
Yes, absolutely; thank you! Just trying to stay ahead of the wave and keep these things coming, so there are bound to be typos here and there. I really appreciate the second set of eyes!
Every hero needs that pithy line before the destroy the complex:
“This is your power source. And feeble though it is, I can use it to blow this whole room if I see one thing that I don't like. And that includes karaoke and mimes, so take no chances.”
🤣
I stole that from Doctor Who, Deep Breath. First Peter Capaldi episode. He’s the Doctor I identify with the most. It’s a Scottish and being a pain in the ass Capricorn thing.
I've known more than one pain-in-the-ass Scot in my day! 🤣
Hey Christopher — a heads up that adding something along the lines of “Previous Chapter” “Next Chapter” at the very top of each section, and “Next Chapter” at the bottom of every section — would be helpful to the overall navigation of this quite fascinating endeavor.
At the top, I have navigation to everything that came before. Will that work well enough for what is previous?
When I publish these, I do not yet have a link to the next installment, because that isn't done yet. (I am writing this particular book on the fly.) Though I can start adding links retroactively to previously published posts…
Previous links at the top the way you have it should work for going backward just fine. You could have “Back” “Next” at the top for a simple speedy way to go quickly between published sections, but not necessary.
For continuity in reading forward/linearly, especially for those new to this particular work, a link to the next chapter at the bottom of each would definitely be beneficial.
I hear you on not having forward links for chapters as yet unpublished; I deal with that myself and usually just have “next chapter” at the bottom in regular unlinked text, and update it whenever the next one is published.
I really ought to do it!
Despair gets us nowhere. 💯
❤️🔥❤️
Jesus started our project. It will continue with all that believe and maybe it is the end time. For myself I look at the last generation and more than 50% are lost souls. A shame in itself.
We keep going forward with the Armour of God.i like your writings. Marvelous. Thank you.
I will keep doing my best. Thank you, Walter.
I just watched this video and what Angela Small has uncovered is immense! In less than 30 minutes she unpacks a wealth of information and proof it exists on the UN’s Agenda 2030 and the land grab/property grab that is being ramped up by every city in the US. All major cities have the plan in place already and with a little digging into your major city’s planning documents you will find it. This is a must watch!
https://rumble.com/v5b35pt-united-nations-land-grab.html
I think if they try stuff like that, they are going to get a lot of resistance. Especially in the U.S. I am not going to watch this; I already believe that it will get that bad. But good for you for raising awareness. The more people whop know, the better!
Yes, I figured you wouldn’t watch it and obviously, that’s okay! The more sources I list with the same information, the more eyes will be open to believe!
I appreciate you taking the bullet for me and so many others!
I live to serve!!😇
Your service honors us. 🖖
In one sense there is a "quick fix": we can cast aside the fantasies and illusions pushed by the government and the media and see things as they really are. Having taken that one step, we immediately become transmitters, without even willing it and without (necessarily) standing on a soapbox, of healthy ideas. Seen from this perspective, it matters much less whether the entire process does not come to fruition within one particular person's lifetime; what matters is the energy each person radiates while here.
Are you living inside my mind, bro? That describes much of my thinking as well.
The do nothing approach is what got us in this mess. I really appreciate this, as despair is such a real reaction but it will sink us like a stone. We have to process and move forward. One bite at a time, like you eat an elephant. Thank you. I've felt pretty powerless since the system has rejected me, but I have survived. So I know there is another way.
“Eat an elephant”—how have I gone 56 years without ever hearing that expression before?
Though I don’t want to eat a poor elephant, the expression is entirely apropos. “Despair will sink us like a stone.” Well said.
And I am already encountering a little of it. Which I totally understand—the situation is FUBAR! But we can turn things around if we act!
Well said, it is a very old expression 😂 You know you'd have to be very hungry to eat an elephant. They are majestic indeed.
You know I’m not pushing back against an anarchistic agenda, but being just a bit critical here because - deja vu. This is starting to remind me of the Free State project. Not saying that’s the kind of goal you have, but there is a sense of collectivism. My pronouns of choice are I & me, not us/we.
I understand the objection. But I have questions…
Collectivism is forced. Community is chosen. Collectivism is evil. Voluntary community is good for the people who want it. I think it is pretty clear thus far that I am not advocating collectivism (and if it isn't, it will be soon). Is there verbiage in the preface or introduction to suggest otherwise?
Also, what is wrong with the Free State Project? IIUC, they are asking people voluntarily to choose to try to create overwhelming numbers in a single location. Yes, they want to use that within the system at first. I have mixed feelings about that aspect, though if they use it eventually for full secession to something anarchic, then maybe it was a reasonable temporary compromise.
But from what I am hearing, your critique of it lies elsewhere? Like with some collective aspect? Can you elaborate on that for me?
I would suppose that before trying to create a new world, we might disengage from the current crop of imbeciles (government) as much as possible. At least that might buy us time and stifle their plans to finally destroy us.
I think that just might be one of the steps ;-)
I'm all for your point Christopher to:
Do something and change our fate.
The hour is late and the choice is ours. Let’s get started.
With a sense of URGENCY!
Right on!
Lol. The solution is fast and simple. Identify enemy, delete enemy. The best way to get around these problems is ignore them. Every idea they have is stupid. So look up to God.
By "delete," do you mean "ignore"?
Delete can mean ignore or cancel. Or delete can mean something else. People say, violence doesn't work. It does work or the state wouldn't constantly threaten you with it. They use it quite effectively.
Let's play with this a bit…
Governments impose force upon non-violent people. That makes it coercive force, not protective force. So we know governments are violent and thus morally impermissible.
This means that technically, protective force is justified in response. Technically, in a sense, it is justified in response to all of it. From the most egregious corruption to conscription to the taxation that is taken to pay a city bus driver.
But what form ought that protective force to take?
Would open, bloody revolution actually work?
Would it be the most effective choice?
Would it be the most moral choice?
I do not mean that last question in a pacifist sense. Protective force IS justified in response to coercive force, and government is fundamentally coercive. But there are many complicating factors in this case…
We have had government a long time. It is presumed to be morally legitimate by most people. It is solidly established in human life. Is dislodging it by violence the best choice? Would most people appreciate that, or would they side against the revolutionaries? The historical record shows that many people in the general populace quickly come to resent the revolutionaries.
Who would the targets be? Just the architects at the top? Politicians? The cop who lives next door and is just doing his job? (He works for a coercive institution and is paid by stolen money (taxes), but he still spends most of his time trying to protect people from the bad guys.) How about that city bus driver? After all, he too is paid by stolen money…
And then what would the revolutionaries do if successful? They have managed to dislodge the people running a fundamentally coercive system. Do they simply replace those people with themselves and start running their own fundamentally coercive operation?
Or let's say they don't. Let's say they tell everyone, "You're free now" and then go on their way. That's obviously somewhat better than just becoming the new oppressors. (Or even the much milder oppressors, the way the American Founders did.) So then what happens? Do the revolutionaries leave everything in chaos? Or does a new oppressor fill the vacuum? Or both?
Coercive force deserves protective force in response. But is it the best choice in this case? Is there a scenario in which the outcome is better as the result of a revolution? Does it just perpetuate the cycle of violence?
Obviously there is a point at which people will respond to oppression with bloody revolution. But when does that point come, exactly? At what point will the outcome be better than the alternative? I do not know. But it certainly seems like, given all the problems enumerated above, people ought to try to forestall such an eventuality and seek all possible peaceful options.
Please note, I am not trying to browbeat you here. I am just playing all this out—if you have good answers, I really want to hear them.
But if there is no good answer to these issues, then it seems like attempting a more peaceful transition would be a better choice. So let's play with what that might look like…
Negotiation. Yes, I know, that is pretty much worthy of a spit-take. Government won't just say, "Sure, have fun" and let anyone secede. But maybe you don't start negotiating for that right away. Maybe you start by negotiating for more autonomy. Special status (like the ZEDEs and SEZs in Central America, Asia, etc.). Or like the Amish. Maybe you start living a more independent life and then, after years of policing your own, start negotiating to formally use your own security instead of the police. Maybe you lay down a marker that secession is the ultimate goal, but that you are negotiating for it peacefully. (Kind of like the way Club 75 wants to do in New Hampshire.) Maybe if 50 different secession movements all start negotiating, it changes the whole conversation. Maybe it wears them down eventually.
De facto secession. Start living as independently as possible, as individuals and in small groups. There are intentional communities and areas that do that now. In a lot of cases, government's footprint IS reduced as a result. Do cops come onto Amish farms all the time?
Declare independence peacefully. Make it clear that no scenario in which government remains in charge is actually morally permissible, and that you by right ought to be free to chart a new course. Don't antagonize them, don't start refusing to pay taxes, etc. Just lay down the marker and start living that way. Build numbers. Build clout. Make it worldwide. Make it decentralized and leaderless, so they cannot decapitate it. Think of what the world would look like if there were a worldwide movement of people simply making the statement that they are, and of right ought to be, independent and free.
Prepare for collapse. There are a lot of factors (most of them economic) that could bring governments tumbling down. Be ready for those.
Adopt alternate currencies. Nothing brings a government down faster than the collapse of its money. It is harder to to tax a currency over which they do not have control.
Those are just a few thoughts thrown out on this Saturday morning. Protective force IS justified. And it does sometimes become the only remaining resort. And if a polity were to claim the "right" to secede and yet not actually disobey any laws and government were to try to Waco them, then all bets would be off. But just up and launching a revolution is fraught with so many practical and moral problems, that it seems like other options should be preferred.
Thoughts?
Well thought out. Where does the line of recipricative violence begin? Currently in more than one western country, economic collapse is close, if not already there.
Morality in government/legal system has taken a serious hit.
Criminals are released into the public to create fear crying for more government.
Health care is no linger health but has become big Pharma profit centers.
Industry continues to deny culpability and point fingers at the public.
So where and when does utopia start? Because they own the media. They own the miss education system, the hospitals and direct the cops to enforce injustice.
In Canada and Europe they weaponize the legal system against the common man. Placing extreme financial hardship and legal tricks to delay rightful legislation.
They have chosen a path of violence. Wars, 911, 2008 financial collapse, COVID, Libya, and I could go on.
There may be a utopia, some time, somewhere. A serious reset of this mess is required. Hopefully, it doesn't come to anarchy, war and chaos. But it probably will.
You have some very utopian solutions. I would defintely go along with them. They will never agree.
Thank you. For clarity’s sake, I would caution that I believe these ideas we are discussing will definitely work better…but actual utopia is impossible. I think we can make fast improvements, though.
All the points you raise are valid. All of these things constitute an attack, and seem morally actionable as such.
But who would be the targets of such an action? In this piece (https://christophercook.substack.com/p/architects-operatives-cheerleadersoh) I observe that even in totalitarian societies, there is a hierarchy of involvement and culpability. If we could target just the architects of oppression, great! But it quickly gets muddy beyond that, and it always ends up having to go beyond that when there is violence.
This is part of the great tragedy of totalitarianism. The IRS agent who comes to your house to do an audit is an operative of totalitarian oppression. But he is also just some nerdy guy with a nerdy wife and two nerdy kids. Does one treat him as an operative of oppression? Or does one treat him as the nerdy dad doing a job that he should know is evil, but does not? Not an easy question!
I cannot say what WILL happen. All I can say is that I think that we ought to try to bring this about peacefully.
I hate to use a lefty term, but I believe that “raising the consciousness” of a large number of people will go a long way. It’s not the only step, but it is an essential first step. We outnumber the architects and their operatives many times over. If we can wake enough people up, we’ll-begun will truly be half-done!
I absolutely agree with higher consciousness. As a collective getting involved on a higher plane creates a vibe. On a recent trip to Columbia, I was exploring a city. Walking past a cathedral, I could hear singing.
A congregation were at mass singing. In Spanish. The door was open. The sound went right inside me. It felt great. The love was real. The design of the cathedral made me feel the presence of their expression of love. A beautiful experience.
The world needs more of that. This is really what wins.
However, our leaders don't want this. They want control.
We want to be in the cathedral. A group of humans with a collective thought of love and giving. Not in their wars.
Lets win this.