The end of democracy

...as a horny if virgin teenager you might have entertained delusions of "totally destroying cunt" once you get your true self or whatever. With any luck you did get to see that no - try as you might, cunt will be still there when you're done, and done you will be. In between these two fundamental distractions, the life of the peasant flows in a very strict servitude to the problem of scale : his work proceeds linearily, for that lovely but ultimately brief interval before fatigue kicks in ; meanwhile the land proceeds by the square. Taking one step delineates an area a quarter as large as taking two steps does. Due to this squares problem, it makes relatively little difference that Joe tires after a hundred and Moe after a hundred nine, and so it is throughout : the extra nine isn't likely to figure much in Suzy's estimation of either of them (and so the natural harem can be flattened into a very contrived "traditional marriage"), nor does the extra drop drunk make any visible difference in the barrel, and so politics proceed on a fundamental basis of equality and equanimity : have ye enough drink and then have ye enough words. And then go home.

On the other hand, bravery is exactly opposite of this. Giving a man ten coins instead of one does not make that man a hundred times as likely to stand fast ; nor even ten times, and perhaps not even as much as the one. A single, bravest knight pays more than the whole sum of his inferiors together, because of exactly inverse geometric rules involved in warfare - which is fundamentally why jousting competitions were a big deal, but speedfarming competitions never interested anyone.

This settles feudalism : on one hand each peasant's exactly fungible with each other peasant, whereas one single faithful knight's not to be traded for the whole world. As a direct result of this situation in the field, the political forms are absolutist monarchy, and the religion is monotheistic and so on.

But time goes on, and lo! The industrial revolution is upon us.

On one hand working, as opposed to farming, is still a deeply equalizing experience, but the drivers have now slightly changed. It's no longer the silent ground, stalking the lone worm, waiting for him to tire of his toil, biding its time to sneak up behind him and swallow him whole. Instead the machine now awaits a moment's inattention to chomp down just a part, while hunger and disease dance a merry jig in the corners. The reward for performance has also changed slightly - it's not quite but almost linear, a worker twice as skilled is just about twice as valuable.

On the other hand being a merchant is much less demanding than being a knight. Addition and multiplication can be learned, and so can the whole trade. It does require a lively mind and a ready capacity for attention in the knaveii, but then again these are much more common than bravery and valor are - demanding virtues most expensive and difficult to train.

This settles "modernity", or however you wish to call it, the last half millenium or so, give or take : on one hand the proletariat is slightly less fungible than the peasants were ; on the other hand merchants are slightly more fungible than the knights were. As a necessary result societal mores do allign closer to the values of the peasant, and further away from the values of the knight. More equality, less meritocracy, more "humanity", less "cruelty", more "respect", less "honor", socialism (however you would double-speak it, nazism, communism, democracy, all the same) follows necessarily.

It is important to note here that this is to no degree "revolutionary", in no sense novel, and by no measure anyone's merit. Water finding a new level should you incline the bucket does not result in identifying rando H2O molecules to credit with "having led the wave" or "discovered the new level". For one thing, they didn't discover anything, they were, like their obscure equals, randomly distributed within a spray. Some section thereof was later cemented by events, but to pretend relationship between this happenstance and the happenstancers is ridiculous. I understand you're desperate to make a name for yourself because you imagine that you may thus escape military service - please understand this makes no differenceⁱⁱⁱ.

But lo! Changes are afoot!

Industry is quite obviously well over^iv and in that process the world has changed quite substantially.

On one hand, the social media [l]user no longer has any value or utility, and with that certainly no power whatsoever. Incapable to survive on his own, let alone produce any sort of surplus, he is fungible to a degree flesh and blood peasants of yore never were : barely a row in a database somewhere, much closer to the stuff of daydreams than actual reality.

On the other hand, being a content producer^v is incredibly difficult and incredibly rare. Not only can it not be trained, not even to the modest degree bravery and valor could be trained into the knight, but it exhibits a very active antieconomy of scale! To illustrate this concept - admitting for a second that the nameless ability in question is one and measurable by a scalar - it is the case that a group of ten producers each worth 10 units of productive worth will output LESS than a group of three producers each worth 12 units of productive worth. Yes, 3 * 12 = 36 is more, much more actually, than 10 * 10, because in this field multiplication is a very different beast than the quaint operand you're used to from your merchant class. As counterintuitive as all this may sound^vi, it is nevertheless the sad state of affairs : give me three decisive men and I can overturn a world that millions of derps can't otherwise keep functioning.

And so, to keep it short and sweet : I will by my own hand abolish democracy, and through no sort of "civil war". The simple workings of economical attrition will suffice. By the blessing of the trite yet incontrovertible fact that you - all of you - can not keep up with us^vii, a precious few of us, your world will come undone. All we have to do is reject most of you, systematically, and keep working. Delusions as to how anyone could in any manner oppose this^viii, or that the evolution in question is anything but nude, rude and unavoidable historical necessity may taste sweet, but other than that taste produce no further fruit. You will go where the level goes and that's all there is to it.

Note that I take no merit in any of this. Figuring out which way the wind blows does not make one a "wind magician" or anything of the sort. I understand you're used to hearing a different melody from your traditional shamans and whatever elses, but really, wouldn't you say it's time you grew up already ?

The future will be decentralized, free, and religious.

What is actually the worst possible outcome is to have one strategy, religion, or culture adopted by everyone.

God religion is not voluntary. It is a mind control and social coercion...

I don't understand how someone can be (even partially) mind-controlled by a belief which is not falsifiable, and simultaneously claim they are free and are not centrally controlled to some extent.
...

This is the point I disagree with. I think we both agree that the optimal way to increase degrees of freedom for individuals is to allow and enable instead of controlling. A universal strategy is an essential foundation that enables freedom. Without that, we have the situation that is developing now with varying viewpoints where some sets are progressing toward destruction and others are being dragged into declining entropy. Competition can take place when there is room for growth but on a globally saturated scale, nobody wins.

Reproductive strategy is likely to become essentially irrelevant for humanity, possibly within our lifetimes. It seems inevitable that our existing biological bodies will give way to different forms that will carry us off-planet. At that point, allowing and enabling all individuals to thrive in a constructive environment becomes paramount. What then is the protocol that keeps that freedom from becoming destructive? Of course, my thinking is that the protocol is outlined in the Christian bible.

The following two (relatively) short videos may be of interest regarding previous discussion:
The moral argument for God
Why Does God Allow Evil?

If it isn't voluntary, how is it that you can choose your own or even to dismiss it?

Okay, at least for a start of the proof.

Cause and effect is scientifically understood all over the world. Newton's 3rd Law upholds it. Cause and effect is like a person playing pool (billiards). The pool player hits a ball which hits another ball which hits another ball, etc., which finally knocks a specified ball into a designated pocket.

We know from experience that there is great difficulty in tapping a cue ball in such a way so that it will cause a string of balls - through cause and effect - to finally knock a specified ball into a designated pocket. There has to be a lot of intelligent planning and skilful control, in the mind and body of the pool shark who does this.

Everything that we see in the universe operates by cause and effect. We have found nothing that does not operate by cause and effect. Rather than a simple handful of cause and effect actions as in the pool game, there are countless trillions upon trillions of cause and effect actions in the universe. Rather than simple specified pool intelligence that measures and calculates only a handful of movements to a designated end, the cause and effect movements of the universe create intelligent ends, over all the cause and effect actions of the universe.

The only thing we see in the universe that causes intelligent cause and effect actions is, greater intelligence. Consider all the machines that are made by mankind, and all the simple machines that animals use. The greater the intelligence of the animal or the man, the greater is the cause and effect action that is produced. This hasn't been shown to work any other way, anywhere on earth or in the observations we make regarding the rest of the universe.

Since the only time that we understand the "causer" of complex cause and effect activity is when it is connected to intelligence, and we have no evidence of anything not intelligent behind a string of intelligent cause and effect actions, we can conclude that there is a Great Intelligence behind the cause and effect actions that make up the universe.

Even though this isn't quite proof of God, alone, it is almost proof of God.

Now, about proof. Suppose you live in a wood frame house. Imagine that you are sitting in your home office and responding in the forum, here. Look up at one of the walls in your office. You see the surface of the wall, right. But if there aren't any holes in the wall, you don't see the studs that hold the wall up, right? Because of this, you have no real proof that the studs are there. Even if you saw the house being built, even if you saw the workers put up the studs that would become your office walls, you have no proof that there is anything beyond the paint or the wallpaper that exists now, do you? For all you know, the studs might have disappeared since you saw the workers put them up. In fact, you have no real proof that up until the exact instant of the present, you were even sitting in your office working on the computer, typing into the forum, right.

If you are going to get that nuts with the idea of proof, forget your whole life. You might as well not exist.

However, if you are the kind of person who accepts standard scientific proof that makes science laws, then the above explanation of the almost-proof of the existence of God is entirely credible. It is greater than scientific theory, even though it isn't quite enough for proof as it is expressed. The rest of the proof is expressed here:
https://bt.irlbtc.com/view/737322.msg10718395#msg10718395
https://bt.irlbtc.com/view/1355109.msg14047133#msg14047133
https://bt.irlbtc.com/view/1662153.40
https://bt.irlbtc.com/view/1054513.msg16803380#msg16803380.

Wake up, stats. All you have is hot air. And it is turning colder with every breath you take. If it weren't for the fact that political science exists, you wouldn't have any science at all behind the things you say.

Note that I don't write the above for you. Experience shows that you will barely be able to read an comprehend much of it. Rather, I have written it so that other people will have a clearer understanding that God exists, and that everything including our health and religion depends on Him through cause and effect.