Topic: Economic Totalitarianism - page 105. (Read 345758 times)

But how to do it right? That's the big question.

Next step is that they fear the same also in private, encrypted communication, because they can not trust their own friends or relatives not to flag them.

"tates" (generalizethis), as well, are not "physical" (generalizethis) and, therefore, cannot, within the real, "wield physical force" (generalizethis): those subject to the "virtual reality" (i.e., hyperreality [i.e., any network of symbols that, exclusively, references symbols]) do so (in reality, not in effect [for their collective delusions about the constitution of Real]).

I have problems understanding this. Removing myself from the discussion.

Hark, “the pious or holy” (Plato) “the capital or money” (qtd. in username18333) is “a yoke” (Jer. 28.14).

(Red colorization mine.)


Tribe is hyperreal and begets possession. Possession is [hyper]real and begets money. Money is hyperreal and begets state. State is [hyper]real and begets hyperreality.

I have never wished to cater to the crowd; for what I know they do not approve, and what they approve I do not know.

(Perhaps I have not been clear?)



It would seem to me that, under postmodern Epicureanism, "[v]alue" (Erdogan), an element of the hyperreal (as indicated by its definition in terms of "the individual" [Erdogan], which references an undefined group wherefrom "the individual" [Erdogan] constitutes such), exists for "the individual valuer" because they are both symbols of a network thereof (exclusively). "[H]is life" (Erdogan), as an element of the real ("his" can be understood to reference any male human physically extant), does not relate to value in any tangiable way. Instead (again, under postmodern Epicureanism), it (i.e., fear) is "the sum of all fears" as they are manifest for a given stimulus (i.e., "capital"). As fear mounts, value does so in turn.



An extrinsic assessment of this "sum of fears" would constitute "price" (Erdogan).

username18333; Nietzches analysis of value was interesting. Must read him (at some point in the distant future ).

Value depends on the individual valuer (the subject), according to what supports his life best, everything (in his life) taken into account.

The (historical) price of something is a guideline for every trader. If he knows the price of yesterday, he knows the approximate value that others placed on the thing in the past. Therefore he can calculate, and it is also quicker to find the bid or ask point that is likely to succeed with an executed trade.

When each valuing individual starts to trade, the result of each trade is a price. The price is historical only, because the valuations change instantly and partly inconcient (using fast thinking). A price is expressed as a pair, apples can be priced in cows, and cows in apples. Money is also such a thing that is valued individually by everyone. Since money is practical for exchange (that is why those things are called money anyway), we see prices expressed in money a lot. And with many traders in the same arena, we have a market.

(Germaneness mine.)

My point is how does the way we value physical things transfer or change--what becomes valued? Do states that only wield physical force get lowered on the totem as digital worlds creep into our lives. But thanks for the lecture, dad, but remember context next time.

1.  “[E]ach step in the chain” (r3wt) strips a subconscious pattern of behavior of its primitivism. (E.g., nations “close the border” whereas [chimp] colonies “improve[] a male chimp’s access to resources”.)

2.

“[V]alue” (generalizethis) is not “physical” (generalizethis); therefore, “physical value” (generalizethis) does not exist (in the real) to have something (thereof) “happen[] to [it]” (generalizethis).

The combination of government spying on individuals, loss of freedom of expression, loss of the rule of law, means the overthrough of freedom, and rule by fear.

Today, a normal person tries to avoid writing things on open media including nonencrypted messages, because they fear being targeted, wrongly, as a terrorist. Next step is that they fear the same also in private, encrypted communication, because they can not trust their own friends or relatives not to flag them.

Nietzsche’s philosophy contemplates the meaning of values and their significance to human existence. Given that no absolute values exist, in Nietzsche’s worldview, the evolution of values on earth must be measured by some other means. How then shall they be understood? The existence of a value presupposes a value-positing perspective, and values are created by human beings (and perhaps other value-positing agents) as aids for survival and growth. Because values are important for the well being of the human animal, because belief in them is essential to our existence, we oftentimes prefer to forget that values are our own creations and to live through them as if they were absolute. For these reasons, social institutions enforcing adherence to inherited values are permitted to create self-serving economies of power, so long as individuals living through them are thereby made more secure and their possibilities for life enhanced. Nevertheless, from time to time the values we inherit are deemed no longer suitable and the continued enforcement of them no longer stands in the service of life. To maintain allegiance to such values, even when they no longer seem practicable, turns what once served the advantage to individuals to a disadvantage, and what was once the prudent deployment of values into a life denying abuse of power. When this happens the human being must reactivate its creative, value-positing capacities and construct new values.

As summary Kant named four kinds of government:
1. Law and freedom without force (anarchy).
2. Law and force without freedom (despotism).
3. Force without freedom and law (barbarism).
4. Force with freedom and law (republic).

[Epicurus] regarded the unacknowledged fear of death and punishment as the primary cause of anxiety among human beings, and anxiety in turn as the source of extreme and irrational desires.

...

Hats off to you, trollercoaster, two scary (totalitarian) articles.  Bravo.

I yesterday read the NY Post one about the various databases that O's team is preparing.  Forced desegregation, coercion on towns to ruin themselves.  Preparation to go after whomever they choose.  What kind of liberty is that?

And I smiled when I saw the crooksandliars.com name of their site.  Then I read the piece on Wesley Clark's proposal.  Scary!  Gen. Clark has proposed some weird shit since he retired, may we now see "The Real Wesley Clark" now that he no longer is in the military.

As capitalism marches off the plank of zero marginal costs, what happens to physical value?

(Red colorization mine.)

Possession is to the hyperreal what control is to the real.

Epicurus believed that, on the basis of a radical materialism which dispensed with transcendent entities such as the Platonic Ideas or Forms…

The block chain is a central component, but (afaik) everyone has been doing it (slightly but thus catastrophically) wrong.

Assume this is correct--i do.   The question becomes, "Where are the fringes? Where is the new growth happening from below? How can I gauge these reteritorializations?

I would say that governments that keep going to corporations to solve problems: prisons, hospitals, education, ect,  are sidestepping and allowing the  more efficient link from corporation to consumer (how parasitic is this link would need some benchmark analysis to answer less philosophically, more analytically). How long does this transference last? Can the state survive? Was the idea of a physical border (the physical state) keeping us safe(r) demolished on 9/11?

@generalisethis - parasite is accurate. The mathematics of the financial system is
very similar to the parasite-host, and that of the predator-prey systems. There
are some important additional factors: whether the parasite adds any survival
advantage to the system; and whether the system we have converges to a bad
equilibrium.

The present financial system resembles "Monopoly" too closely. Society relies
too much on the ability and sophistication of the political system as arbiters of
coercion. When the political system is pwned by the monetary system the parasite
becomes the host. We rely on the kindness of sociopaths, of the kakistocracy,
as promoted by this system, for our survival.

So, do not rush to judge Greece, or Germany. Had the Greek parliament decided
that chaos was better than the prospects of a "bailout" we might have gained
some insights and answers while watching from what we hope is a safe distance.
As for the eternal question Qui Bono? see also this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=xu5sTyAXyAo#t=526

It is interesting that Ireland will pay billions for decades in a modern form of
Danegeld and only a select few insiders aware of the flow. Expect the flow to increase
until it can no longer be hid.  

There is no voice calling for liberty in Greece. Give us more, is the call, both from the political class and the people. (or else...you go down too).