Topic: Money is an imaginary concept, but humanity is enslaved by it - page 6. (Read 17723 times)

Well with or without free will, the decisions you make are impacted by genetics and the environment that you're in.  Without free will, it is pure cause and effect.  So what we are talking about really is the environment, which will impact the decisions that everyone makes.

Think about how heavily conditioned kids are - from their parents, family, friends, from their school system, from media and advertising.  If we don't have free will and are just a distant echo of the big bang, wouldn't it be beneficial to back off on the intense conditioning?  With or without free will it will still change society.

So given the importance of the environment we are in, how does our current monetary system and government affect our environment?  Are resources distributed appropriately?  Do the most intelligent and benevolent and selfless people become leaders?  Not really.  But of the infinite possibilities, there is an environment where it would be so.

All of your reasoning is based around the assumption that physical determinism isn't true. If physical determinism ever got proven, the whole system would basically collapse, since it basically means there is no such thing as free will.

The thing, it's extremely naive and a coping mechanism, to think we have 100% free will. Someone born in a shitty place with no money and average genetics is most likely going to be stuck on their economical class for life, statistically it's a fact. If you get paid low and you can't barely make any savings because it goes to basic expenses such as food, electricity, etc, you are fucked and destined to remain poor. Thinking otherwise is just self delusion to sleep better at night.

Spoken like a true douchebag

The central bank will never be elected, right or wrong. 

The defining feature of this system is a grand alliance between the political and financial elites to jointly take wealth from everyone else by issuing financial assets and using public power to prop up their values.  Since these two groups don't trust each other, central banks are set up to institutionalize the terms of the alliance, to keep everyone honest.

If the central bank were fully elected, it might give in to populist instincts of every politician: refusing to bail banks out or to guarantee bank debt, for example.  Or it could indulge the government by allowing it to issue unlimited debt and endanger the whole system.  It's also not unheard of for governments to seize bank assets outright.

If no banker could be found to want to enter into this public/private partnership, the whole system would be seriously limited in scope, if not jeopardized.  The government needs the financial savvy of bankers to dream up assets that investors might believe in (however temporarily), and base them on government-issued assets (money and public debt), both to protect and to greatly increase the demand for those state assets.

The central bank also restrains bankers by regulating them and deciding to bail out or abandon a bank in trouble.

Of course, the very success of this system encourages the buildup of financial assets and eventually the weight of the buildup will break investor confidence, one way or another.  Major busts with serious consequences for the core country (US) happened just before the Great Depression and in 2008.

Yeah it's even very interesting to see what type of drugs are marketed by society.

Psychedelics (psilocybin mushrooms, LSD, DMT, Ayahuasca, Peyote, etc.) = mind opening and illegal all over the world except for select tribes, not addictive
Stimulants (caffeine, cocaine, meth, MDMA, etc.) - of those MDMA is mind opening and illegal, but coffee which increases productivity of workers is completely fine, decently addictive
Opiates (oxycontin, herion, morphine, etc.) - mind and pain numbing, incredibly addictive - this is mostly prescribed by health professionals

Even look at what point does society acknowledge a sociopath?  These people usually have a terrible childhood and become apathetic just to get by, and until they commit some type of crime, there really isn't any help.  Even then, they become victim to the legal system and police, who are unable to help anyone with mental illness.


There are lots of savages, I'd guess less than 50% of the population though lol.  For the most part these are kids that grow up without love, and then turn into insecure adults, overcompensated with aggression.  It's very odd to see unreasonable aggression from a man who was loved and accepted by his father.  Without good parenting and love, there needs to be some type of therapy (doesn't have to be in the typical sense with a psychotherapist) to acknowledge traumatic events and reconcile.  It's a very difficult process for most people, but anyone can do it, it just requires more awareness and a different perspective.  Some are just unwilling to do that.


Yes, agreed.  The gazelles are just stupid, similar to our unconscious population.  With some awareness of the power they hold (which is power in numbers), the 300 gazelles wouldn't need to run from 5 lions.  But instead of awareness, they just have a fear reaction and it's every gazelle for themselves, and one of the little shits that twisted its ankle becomes lunch and none of the other gazelles give a shit.  On the flip side, look at the species of ants.  They work as a single unit for the greater good, and a single ant will give it's life for the rest to prosper.  So in that respect, ants don't need to run from say a spider that is 200X its size.


Well empathy is required to care about those that suffer.  Although there are empathetic individuals, society as a whole is not empathetic yet.  Current society definitely doesn't care about the poor, so criticizing libertarians of the same thing is really a mute point.

Well put on the second point.  Once you remove obstacles that are largely implemented by the government, then the political job is done, and it's up to the individual to seize the opportunity and contribute to society.

You can't blame people for their stupidity! There is one thing that make us all who we are, the genetic mutation that made us a social predator... we will never change, unless we mutate to something else!

This is my solution to how to restore the damages we made to our planet

Yeah its true that they will be irresponsible about what they do and they will be even go too far for this money, but the truth is not money that change their minds but the mind that is being manipulated by money. It makes their mind dont think clearly and make them do things randomly just to get what they want

Money can change people. Its influence are so great to people it can make people irresponsible and it can kill people that need money why? because people that need money are do anything to have a money even if he/she can kill a person to only have money.

Yea i agree, mental ilness, for the most part is a made up bullshit. We label them mentally ill just because they have a different world perspective. I mean an ant or an owl has a different world perspective but we dont lock them up in a white room...

Now of course there are dangerous psychotic people, but those are a minority, but these autistic people I dont think they are ill, they just have a different world view, which for obvious reasons the establishment doesnt like


I disagree, 50% of the population are just savages, i mean they can kill eachother over a football game, how more primitive-tribalish can you get after 2000 of years of supposed civilization?

I dont think you can ever get to those idiots, they will just remain the plague of society, then theres another 40% that are just conformists, they do what they are told, and not question authority, and the rest of the 10% are "enlightened" writers, philosophers, thinkers, the basic intelligent people that can drive humanity ahead.

So far society is organized in that way that those 10% drive humanity forward and the other 90% are just leeching on it.

Doesnt matter, the conformist will always get fooled by them. They are the predators of humanity. Gizelles always get hunted by lions, the same way humans will always be hunted by our own predators. It's not like the gizelles have ever stand up agains the tyrrany of lions? 



Yea but let's be honest, some leftists may say that libertarians and such dont care about the poor. And the truth is, that we actually don't. So let's be honest atleast and dont try to lie about it. Being poor in a free society is only because of ignorance.

Being poor today can be understood, but once we get rid of these vampires, there will be no more excuse to be poor because all opportunities will be opened then and only a lazy idiot would starve in that society.

Well the main challenge really is increasing the awareness of humans, but there are so many forces that benefit from having an ignorant population.  We have a bullshit education system that maintains that ignorance, where the values and grading system are almost upside down.  Look at a group of ultra successful people - it's interesting to see how many dropped out of school, likely because they didn't see value in it.  Even look at kids with ADHD.  They are usually totally obsessed with a few things in life, which are not mainstream, and that obsession allows them to be amazing at it.  Instead of seeing that talent, we start drugging them out at the age of 7 on ritalin and adderal because they don't give a shit about what their grade 2 teacher is writing on the blackboard??  That kid is the aware one.  Internet is helping a lot, as localized ignorance is being shed with exposure to other parts of the world that couldn't be accessed before.

With a conscious population, where humans are treated as humans and people don't segregate into national/racial/religious teams, there wouldn't be wars.  We're not there yet, but it's improving slowly.  Not too long ago, there were slaves and people were burned alive for "witchcraft".

Sociopaths are usually very charming.  But they lack the ability to feel or express genuine emotion.  People that communicate with emotion will feel a void there, and the rest won't suspect anything.

Decentralization just goes back to reducing the size and power of government.  It's amazing how much money and resources go to the government when it's well understood that any government entity will be the least productive.

And you will never have one, maybe perhaps 10-15% at most, most people are just born ignorants. So thats why any "majority rule" based democracy is an insane concept.



I dont think the leader itself is a good way of organizing society in peace. Now in war or emercencies it might come in handy to organize people by force for their own survival, but in peace times , which are not that many lately (central banks feed wars) a leader is generally not needed, people can organize themselves voluntarly or defend themselves from agressors.

Besides most sociopathic rulers are so charming that it can easily fool any people who is not a expert on this. I`ve seen sociopaths infiltrate in the freedom movements too just to lurk there, gain power and then become the next tyrant.



Yes but based on capitalism, where the forces would be so decentralized that really these sociopaths would not have more power than a few men.

I want a competition so big that by default prohibits anyone from gaining too much economic/political or military power.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarcho-capitalism

Well when have we ever had a majority aware/conscious population?  It goes hand in hand.

I think there are many great leaders, but they don't end up in politics, nor should they.  Their talent would be wasted in politics.  Current politics is based on manipulating the population, and chronic dishonesty is a job suited for a sociopath.  So it's the sociopath that can look into the camera and blatantly lie to millions of people, and then sleep fine at night that ends up at the top of the political chain.

All of the current lobbying and large corporations that fund government campaigns will never side with a philosopher because the game would come to an end.

The awareness of the world is increasing, but still far from being a majority.

Sounds like you are looking for an anarchy type system.  I would prefer that as well, but it needs to happen one step at a time.  Big government and centralized planning is a few major steps from anarchy.

I `m not sure our predatory species ever had a philosopher as leader. We only chose from 2-3 tyrants that are currently available, and then support the consequences. Even if voters would honestly want a great leader, the problem is there is none available. The political class if filled with warmongers and powermongers that are thirsty for more power and control. Every single law they pass reflect this.

I`m not sure what ideal leader you want but for me, I just dont want any, i want to be left alone from their silly game, and let the fools play it.

The voters do hold the power, but it's a power that goes unused because the awareness isn't there.  With a majority ignorant population, voting loses its power.  With a more aware/conscious population, you'd have more philosophers as leaders, rather than politicians.

Here's one of my favourite quotes, by a French philosopher whose name I forgot lol - "There are no political solutions, only technological ones; the rest is propaganda"  Until voters understand that, the right type of leader will never stand a chance against propaganda.

They expect the elected "public servants" tyrants to do something about it. The voters have this crazy delusion that they think the people control the government, when in reality the people are just tagged slave sheeps ruled by cunning tyrant wolfs.

Actually nowadays people have the right to elect the government, however they don't have the right to elect central bank, therefore central bank is called dictatorship by some protesters

The interesting thing is, this dictatorship is not enforced by violence, but by ignorance and no knowledge about money creation. People can think it is important to select a government that supports gay marriage, while they don't think it is important to select a central bank without printing more money (thus they become the slave)

Central bank only need to setup a Nobel price of economics and tell people: If they don't print money then economy will fall into recession.  Then people will accept it. Money creation is a topic that is too far from average Joe's life, and although long term wise he is affected by it, in a couple of years' time frame he will not feel any difference between two different monetary policy

A good example of that is the prison system. In most US prisons, possession of fiat money is not allowed (except on your books), so inmates use stamps, envelopes (with postage), and even soups as money.

Yes I agree on that people will never use something like or may be you can say that produced of thin air but how about if our era is going there and so many people are trading using bitcoin? no matter what they do people will use it as fiat money, it can't be denied in so many ways. And now the new era is coming and people must admit it they must follow if not they will be oudated

The sad truth is that if the US government didn't ally with bankers to create money and debt and enslave the world, some other government would.  In a more-or-less well managed paper money system that is well-defended by its beneficiaries, the "virtuous" cycle of financial and military power reinforcing each other and creating a global top dog can last a while (and historically this "while" has been measured in decades, if not centuries.)

The imperial system also distributes its benefits wider than we might imagine.  Every person in the imperial power (currently the US) and its close allies benefits from the exploitation.  The middle class and other productive members of the real economy in these countries benefit even more.  The elites in developing countries are also major beneficiaries by working with the empire (in effect, selling out their own people -- but who would know?)  There is an entire ecosystem of defenders of the status quo.

The real victims of the system are the masses in poor and developing countries, and those in rich countries who fall prey from the social diseases that are the natural consequences of "free" wealth -- addiction, mental illness, alienation, etc.

So what we seek is not revolution but a gradual popular awakening.  If it takes centuries, it would be fundamentally better than a violent change that would replace one set of masters with another.  We have to do all we can to facilitate this process.

The problem with paper money is that the incentives for the powerful elites to create ever more money (and associated assets) are built-in.  Since economics is not an exact science and economic signals are fairly uncertain most of the time, you can always make a case that loosening is good public policy.

The history of the unending series financial crises around the world also bears this out.  Most of the economic pain from monetary creation is ultimately borne by developing and other countries that have some kind of weakness.  Wars and terrorism are also the results, ultimately, of what is essentially a modern imperial system.