In an anarchism (libertarian) world where the people must protect themselves, those heinous crimes meet their fate at the hands of men, e.g. the vigilantes here in Davao City have nearly entirely eliminated drug dealing.

The State can't protect you against most crime, e.g. the police arrive too late to stop the murderer. Recently the police arrived 7 hours too late to stop the young guys who slashed my $200 diesel SUV tires (sidewall repair isn't really viable). The solution to that is talking to my local community about why they aren't scolding the young men about mutual respect, else moving from the community to one where the elders educate correctly the youth. This notion of the State disincentivizing crime with high levels of enforcement is proven to be false with the USA having 99% conviction rate and 7X higher incarceration rate than rest of the world, yet also having one of the highest crime rates. Some claim this is because of the negro population which has a 20X higher propensity to murder, but yet we see from Howard Katz's research that before 1940 and the New Deal, negros had the same unemployment rate as whites, and now it is double. The causal relationship between large government collectives and the opposite of the intended results is patently clear in all the statistics and history of mankind. The whites in the USA are doing a more subtle but much more harmful crime and it is called Marxism. Europeans argue they have suppressed crime since Hitler with their vast socialism, but this was just a bribe "to love each other" and when that debt illusion collapses, we will see the true hate in Europe explode with vengeance and the apathetic cows will once again be mowed into the dirt. Read my quotes of Howard Katz for the history that will soon repeat.

In short, I trust nature to deal with threats to nature. And the data on crime supports my view.

Collectivism is only beneficial and necessary where it was impossible to otherwise get economies-of-scale to accomplish necessary actions such as military protection and building roads.

If via technology we can eliminate the need for those economies-of-scale, then we no longer need large-scale collectivism.

Note I didn't say we won't have a multitude of leaders with smaller communities of top-down organization. Contrast this against large morass collectives that do nothing but destroy mankind. Don't equate this with warlords in the feudal middle age, because in the Knowledge Age the capital is held by the workers, not exclusively by the leaders. We no longer have this huge fixed capital inertias to sustain warlords. Workers can change affiliations on a whim if necessary and take all their knowledge capital with them.

We will always have communities within the scale of our Dunbar number limit, because humans thrive on social interaction. Knowledge is spawned from trade of ideas. I entirely agreed with your point about diversity of views and the ability for us to express our views with differing local communities that compete and trade with each other. This is mother nature at work. What a glorious system of justice and freedom to experiment and compete.

http://blog.mpettis.com/2015/02/when-do-we-decide-that-europe-must-restructure-much-of-its-debt/#comment-123054


CoinCube, I want to work and I don't work when I am here writing. I am doing this because I genuinely want to see if I could change even just one Marxist to a libertarian (and I realize you think you are a libertarian but I don't think there are but a few westerners who actually libertarians, i.e. even Eric S Raymond appears to be a Marxist apologist with totalitarian outbursts masquerading as an anarchist, because it is what you feel in your heart about nature and tolerating discord, diversity, imperfection, and random shit that determines your true philosophical affiliation). I don't think I can do it, but you are my guinea pig. And because I really care about you and yours. I hope you can lead your family in direction of the Private wave. You've had a start to life which has thrust you deep in the dying Public wave. You have time to adjust and I hope you don't waste that scarce time.

I hope you support my efforts. As Howard Katz wrote, I know the justice of mother nature will bring humans great prosperity as it did when the Pilgrims learned to abandon their Marxism to survive starvation. And from that transformation all the greatness of the USA was spawned. I believe just maybe you can make this transformation. Maybe.

At a young age I resisted the indoctrination. Eventually this caused me to break free from the addictions to the deal with the pain that westerners are dealing with by being indoctrinated (mind programmed) that they must have perfect love and ideological nirvana. I ended up in the Philippines at age 26. And it was Herculean adjustment process, but it was my destiny. I arrived now at age 50 (recovering from a debilitating disease Multiple Sclerosis which robbed me of 9 years of my life (i.e. all of my 40s), and a blinding incident in 1999 which robbed me of my mid-30s) to be a different person than I was in the USA, but found the core values I was fighting for but didn't entirely understand with all the Marxist noise interfering with me while I was living in the West.

Note curing MS appears to be a long process (months?). My body wants to sleep all the time (and I want to force myself to work!), but when I do some sports I am functioning at a much higher energy level. And my fatigue is more on sleep instead of insomnia effect. My head has dull itchiness, dizziness, and sensations. Yeah the body is healing but it is not an instant transformation into perfect energy. I had one day which was absolutely phenomenal and I expect those days will become more frequent in the near future. My MS clearly worsened since I successfully got temporally cured from high dose vitamin D3 in 2012. Well I knew that, remember I was commenting how I felt like I was getting brain cancer, and I could clearly feel the decline had accelerated. When I couldn't jump off my left leg in basketball and my bench press faltered in past several months, I was starting to feel desperate.

Now I have a lot of catching up to do. Luckily nature blessed me with a resilient, athletic and youthful body. I get a nice ego high when a younger person says I am 28. Maybe it was because I looked like I was 16 when I was age 26 as shown below. I believe I only had to shave once every 2 weeks back then.

So maybe the only way to make the transition is to leave the comfort zone. I dunno.

Yeah sorry I think you need to entirely abandon that core value you are hanging on to. Specifically thinking that somethings just won't be fair or correct without doing something. That ideological itch has been planted in your brain and I don't think you can remove it.

OROBTC, I believe that Marxists such as I3352 talk too much about fear and self-help nonsense, and can't really get to pragmaticism because they are too mired down in feeling sorry for themselves and others. This again is this Marxist ideological disease that Katz wrote about where the medieval folks were unable to fight. Michael Jordan's "Just Do It" and "maybe you are making excuses", applies here.

http://www.coolpage.com/shelby/15.jpg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PH8nTfxwByY

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A9ZaudNTSeQ

Feeding self-pity is counter-productive. If people who are mired in that see the successful people not wasting their time on them, then maybe they will come to realize what they need to do to be part of the success.

All through my illness, I didn't want pity (perhaps a bit of empathy at the lowest points from the people closest to me) and rather I wanted solutions or positive plans. I was always trying to focus myself on concrete plans and actions (with mitigated success because MS is so physically debilitating).

There is one thing that could draw me back to the USA. Damn I miss where I was born and grew up. I was the white black kid. Right in there dancing with them totally colorblind.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1hWWVrEHaRA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HHgJFutF5vs

The prior pic of me was 1991 in the French Quarter. Note I was sitting on a New Orleans Saints emblem.

You won't find that real New Orleans where the tourists are.

Unfortunately I had gotten confused by various tax protest theories and even though I had seen the following website in the past, I didn't pay careful enough attention.

This method appears to work (doesn't get charged with "frivolous return" or other failures) and the government can't possibly prosecute in court all of the filers. Successful cumulative refunds exceeded $1 million by 2005 and $11 million currently.

http://losthorizons.com/Documents/The16th.htm




As the USA economy turns down, if more people begin to demand not to pay FICA and income taxes, the government is going to need to resort to martial law, suspension of elections, and suspension of the rule-of-law, in order to contain a popular revolt. You can see this fuming and closer to exploding:

http://armstrongeconomics.com/2015/04/09/abuse-of-contempt-of-court-far-more-common-than-people-realize/

http://pontiactribune.com/federal-ultimatum-land-innocent-michigan-woman-behind-bars/

Armstrong's political cycle models are pointing to a significant rise in 3rd party political support for 2016 national elections. TPTB are going to have to suspend elections at some point, as they've pushed about as far as they can using Boehmer to stymie the Tea Party:

http://armstrongeconomics.com/2015/03/19/the-man-destroying-the-republican-party/

Either Obama (2012) or Hillary Clinton (2016) will probably be the last duly elected POTUS:

http://armstrongeconomics.com/2015/03/25/state-department-covering-up-for-hillary/

You need to stay on these boards, no more going away. You bring about topics which are highly educational that I love reading, as i'm sure do others. You are a very intellectual man, i'm sure you can control your posting habits if you wanted to.

I've so many of these stupid core values. Whats tough is that I know they are wrong, but knowing is not enough. I'm empotionally attached to them. I dont know why. Its like they are a part of me, like a sick leg i'm too romantic to amputate. Maybe because I think they define the myself or the self I want to become/idolize. Its truly idiotic because in the end its working against me.

They are like a disease preventing us to become individuals. As long as we have them we dont differentiate that much from other people, we stay within group_think and group_action. The only purpose they serve is as a protection against tyrannical force because by conforming yourself you make yourself indistinct from the masses : you become a fungible human being.

Childish rant and rambling :

Why is the world so hostile? I want to become an individual but it seems so hard to me. Its like I have to fight the whole word and also myself. It's like I have to betray the whole world and also myself. Its like to kill the whole world and also myself. Becoming an individual feels like a sacrilege. Why isnt it easier if thats what enable us to bring our singularity to the world ? Well I'll stop there and go to bed as my brain seems apeased when it realized it was a sacrilege to the group and its rules but not to nature.

This probably depends on your core value and how it is harming you. I just finished reading through the wall Howard Katz post on the last page. They are surprisingly good. This portion is relevant and good advice.





Anyone who supports any visage of local government, laws, or rules is to some degree a collectivist. I am pretty sure I would quickly be kicked out of any Communist/Marxist meeting in the country. In comparison to Anonymint, however, I will accept that label as I am certainly to the left of him. I have never claimed to be an anarchist.  

---------------------------- Original Message ----------------------------
Subject: Westerners mired in the Stockholm Syndrome
Date:    Fri, April 10, 2015 8:08 am
To:      "Armstrong Economics" <armstrongeconomics@gmail.com>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

The only possible way they will wake up from collectivism is if a
Knowledge Age gives them irresistible individual empowerment, and this
jars them out of their emotional Stockholm Syndrome. Any way, we only need
the leaders to do this, then the herd follows into the goods and services
economy created.



I doubt it

Because I am going to give you a reason that you will feel compelled to reply.


Stirner is correct. But the "might" part should be rephrased as whoever can manage with the most efficacy, i.e. knowledge capital in the Knowledge Age (it was stored monetary capital in the fixed investment Industrial Age).

Your mistake CoinCube, is that you conflate all outcomes which can be altruist with the notion that altruism only results from involuntary (i.e. coercion) collectivized resources (a.k.a. government). The great coercion is the State and the big capitalist owners' dick up our ass. And you believe their bullshit about us supporting them to end human trafficking when they are trafficking all of us every damn day!

In fact, the only true altruism never comes from collectives and only from local relationships, creating new efficiencies (i.e. innovation), and competition for who can manage resources with the most efficacy.

Don't you realize the collectivized governments have always been managed by the Industrial Age owners of capital. Stirner has always been correct about the reality. You are living in some emotional delusion that never existed in the history of mankind.

Your emotions have been polluted with Marxist indoctrination similar to darlidada. At least he can admit it. You are deep into the delusion because you are trying to defend the indefensible with a strawmen conflation.

I am trying to help you rid yourself of that mental disease. You may not appreciate it. Most collectivists don't.

Your support is not rational. It is all emotional.

Perhaps mankind turned to this delusion to deal with (obscure) the depressive reality that they've been owned by the capitalists.

Ah yes, I realize this is a form of indirect Stockholm Syndrome, or capture-bonding, wherein you've come to point of emotionally support the paradigms which empower those who enslave you, because we were all so hopelessly enslaved. You needed to have something to feel good about, because the reality of being enslaved is so depressing. So much better to adopt the emotional ideological (bullshit!) delusion they feed you and support them.

The West is going to crash and burn! The people are emotionally destroyed thus have no capacity to be rational.

I was always fighting. Always looking for ways to be independently powerful. That is why I adopted computers, because I noted from a very early age that they made me more powerful than guys with mansions, and I didn't need a lot of fixed capital investment.


Any collectivized resource above our actual Dunbar limit at the level of deep scrutiny (which means rougly a dozen or so people) will be corrupt. Thus the only altruistic goal is to eliminate all collectives larger than that.

We gather in cities currently because of the technological economies-of-scale do so, so we currently have no choice but to deal with collective issues of the city. But technology may free us from this concentration in the future, e.g. the internet enables virtual employment from a rural location. The Knowledge Age will radically change this further.

Most importantly, note that a plurality of managers of resources competing and trading is free market. And this converges because the most efficacious will aggregate resources until they are competed against by equivalently efficacious. The free market is self-annealing. You don't trust it because the capitalists in the Industrial Age were able to game the Iron Law of Political Economics, and thus you turned to a delusion to console yourself (but your delusion doesn't change the reality). The Knowledge Age gives us hope that the natural order of competition will advance knowledge faster and thus more prosperity for all. That is altruism. There is no other reality of altruism, only your delusional fantasies which have never existed even once.
 

Oh my you have just proven how deep you in that delusional nonsense.

Justice that Katz was writing about is the justice that comes from individual empowerment. You've somehow conflated that in your mind that the State brings justice, when in fact in every instance the State bring oppression and fails horrifically on reducing crime.

In Europe the overt crime was subdued by bribing the people to steal from each other with socialized collectives (a.k.a. socialism, communism, fascism, Marxism, etc). Thus they just moved the human nature into a different form of crime.

The State doesn't help anything. Period.

You've fallen into an emotional delusion.


I could never trust you, given your emotional delusion. One day you will snap and go against me. It is analogous as not being able to trust a woman (to be rational), because they are ruled by their unpredictable emotions.


You see.

I am very astute at reading people. I knew from your Myers-Brigg result that I you were danger. And then when I saw you pandering to I3352, it made me realize that you have that same mental state.

 

What's the optimal Myers-Briggs?

Actually I expected that, and was surprised no one had called my bluff on that.

I was positing that possibly the Judging attribute of Myers-Briggs is correlated with the propensity to accept collectivism for its (false) promise of rendering (fair and effective) judgement on others (a form of Stockholm Syndrome) and not instead rail against with "Give me liberty or death!". Or just in general needing judgement to be rendered by some authority, e.g. even a business collective (you know who I am thinking of ). I am not sure if that theory of mine is true. I have only tested it anecdotally.

My hypothesis is that those who test towards Judging instead of Perception, have an emotional need for control. I surmise they feel life just couldn't be fair and meritorious if everyone didn't play by the same rules. What they miss is the fact that life is never going to be the same for any two individuals. Path dependencies of life are divergent and impossible to rationally judge any two paths by any fixed, involuntary common set of rules (one size can't fit all situations, which is why a jury of peers was the closest to "fair" (i.e. optimal outcomes) because they can weigh all the circumstances with more proximate but imperfect knowledge and understanding). What they miss on a deeper level of analysis is that life is inherently never one playing field and thus it is entirely a waste of time worrying about what others do. The goal of life is what you can do with your life. Your concerns about others should be in terms of your actual interactions with specific people, not some abstract rule or concept of people you will never meet and thus have insufficient understanding of and insufficient rationalized incentive for meddling.

I could write a book about this. I could expend a lot of time contemplating this subject matter. There is far too much to cover in forum posts...

...interesting topic.