Inter arma silent musae said Cicero once. But although the muses go silent during wars, the music keeps playing.
We are in times of war now. A war against humanity, made even worst by governs, which became more and more hungry for personal data and for enslaving - in various forms - their people.
This topic of nullius is one of the most educative and thorough I read so far on this matter: anarchism. And it is just a prequel the another one, regarding crypto-anarchism, as he wrote at the end - "Forthcoming: [...] the intersection of this line of thought with crypto-anarchism". Nullius' words from this topic are as precious as gold, for those reading and understanding them. And maybe a salvation for those which embrace anarchism.
Unfortunately, similar to Tim May's Crypto Anarchist Manifesto, whose vision is also embraced by nullius, as far as I know, this topic went almost unnoticed, being read only by 159 times. And, as a consequence, it went unmerited until a few days ago.
The times are hard for us, who live in these days. Anarchism and crypto-anarchism may be a cure for many of us. Therefore, an advice: "Arise, you have nothing to lose but your barbed wire fences!".
I will end here, with a quote from Wei Dai:
"I am fascinated by Tim May's crypto-anarchy. Unlike the communities traditionally associated with the word "anarchy", in a crypto-anarchy the government is not temporarily destroyed but permanently forbidden and permanently unnecessary. It's a community where the threat of violence is impotent because violence is impossible, and violence is impossible because its participants cannot be linked to their true names or physical locations".
Topic: The Anarchy of Authoritarian Autarchy: Be Your Own Authority (Read 520 times)
legendary
Activity: 1680
Merit: 6524
Fully-fledged Merit Cycler|Spambuster'23|Pie Baker
So the premise is basically to justify personal anarchistic actions, based on the fact that the voters empowering governments are mostly a flock of NPC propaganda eating sheep of whom their is no hope for embetterment, so one can morally absolve themselves of guilt for not obeying their laws, because they and their laws are stupid/for the stupid, and if I may myself also opine possibly immoral to follow their laws at all..
For example: It is illegal in China right now to spread information about the current situation of the spread of the coronavirus.. People are being arrested for disseminating information online.. I would consider this an immoral law that should not be followed..
A line from Theymos I like related to this subject is..
"the premise that purely statutory crimes are directly unethical, which I don't agree with at all"
For example: It is illegal in China right now to spread information about the current situation of the spread of the coronavirus.. People are being arrested for disseminating information online.. I would consider this an immoral law that should not be followed..
A line from Theymos I like related to this subject is..
"the premise that purely statutory crimes are directly unethical, which I don't agree with at all"
Translations
- Română: Anarhia Autarhiei Autoritare: Fii Propria Ta Autoritate, translation by GazetaBitcoin.
Although I do, strictly speaking, call for anarchy, I explicitly reject the anarchy of the rabble.
Mine is the anarchy of the few, of the natural aristocrats who were not born to be slaves. It is by individual anarchy that they must escape the tyranny which the mob, with its innate slave-mentality, has freely chosen and voted into existence by the dead weight of numeric majorities.
It is the anarchy of those who love order, and impose order first on themselves: They who live by honour and not law. They must become laws unto themselves.
It is the anarchy of amoralists who rise beyond good and evil to shatter the table of values of the mob’s slave-morality, and thus clear the way for their own tables of values.
It is the anarchy of the good who, being good, hold fast to honour out of pride: For the most sincere morality is the self-glorification of the proud, whose judgments of others honour the best of what they see in themselves. It is they who would embrace death before the self-negation of dishonour—not as a sacrifice, but as a supreme act of pure selfishness: Humility is dishonour per se;—humiliation is to be dishonourable and dishonoured;—“death before dishonour” is the rule of the self-glorifying morality embodied by one so devoid of humility that he values his pride more than his life. (And indeed, it is only the humble, the meek, the weak who fear death: The cowardly.) For those whose honour is pride and whose pride is self-honour, law is at best superfluous; and the law of the mob must be explicitly rejected.
Wherefore it is “authoritarian autarchy” as to yourself. Don’t reject authority: Be your own authority.
Mine is not the anarchy of the petty, the weak-willed, the vicious, the spiteful, the despicable, the criminal, the jealous masses of those who would tear down anything better than themselves to assuage the implicit insult to their own inferiority.
It is not the anarchy of those who simply wish to escape all rules, such that they may do whatever they find most convenient at any particular moment. It is not the anarchy of a “rebel without a cause”.
Indeed, such a disordered mass-anarchy is unsustainable and self-defeating in practice. History shows that when the mob is loosed from all bands of authority, it starts with an orgy of mass violent crime. It then snaps back and demands order, for no greater motive than want of the personal comfort and safety which are impossible for members of an uncontrolled rabble. The goodness of the outcome is commensurate to the wisdom of whatever systems and systemic leaders may so happen to arise in such a situation.
Because a headless mob makes no wise choices, the mob will tend to embrace whatever system and leadership best appeal to the ego of the small-minded. This tendency can be actively exploited by wise leaders who obtain power for noble purposes, by pragmatically hacking the stupidity of the masses. However, the mass-tendency is much more likely to empower those who genuinely best exemplify it. And in practice, the system with the best mob-appeal is, of course, democracy on the principle of “one sheep, one vote”. Thereupon do the sheep choose as shepherds those who are most adept at pandering to the masses, playing petty politics, and manipulating majority opinion with cunning propaganda.
As a feature and not a bug, by design, democracy guarantees that the dregs at the bottom will rise to be the scum floating on top. The new order of tyrants wreathed in democratic platitudes will then proceed to bind the whole world in whatever chains the slave-mentality mob finds most soothing: Mass-surveillance and militarized police to “keep people safe” from popular bogeys, slave-level taxation for the “economic justice” of “wealth redistribution”, thoughtcrime laws to “stop hate”, terrorist wars to bring the blessings of the same “freedom” to others who don’t want it, and, to the flipside, facetwit.tv entertainments which actively, immersively propagandize and surveil the masses throughout all their waking moments.
Am I mistaken? Look around you! Look with open eyes, an iron heart, and a freethinking mind which ruthlessly questions all unexamined premises it has been told are categorically unquestionable.
Are so many millions of people, in so many democratic countries around the world, all voting for leaders and policies which they actually don’t want? Really? Or do you simply disagree with what they want, and project your own desires onto them through your unexamined assumption that they must be just like you?
If you start with the premise that “all men are created equal”, you thus start by implicitly assuming that your own subjective desires are objectively the lowest common denominator of what all people everywhere must want. It is a fundamental error. Mean mediocrities (and worse) do not care about anything other than safety, basic comfort, cheap entertainment, and emotionalist dogmata which they will blindly defend to their deaths.
They do not disagree with your higher principles: They have no higher principles, and moreover, they lack the mental ability to have higher principles. They make individual decisions based on herd mentality and the dogmata which they have learned by rote—dogmata ingrained with emotions, and thence defended with the blind passions of the mass-mind. This is an innate limitation, and an empirically observed reality which cannot be wished away by fantasies about “educating” the ineducable. Sheep can no more be taught to think than dogs can be taught to sing opera. Indeed, for the intended readers of this essay (others are hereby irrelevant), sheep can no more be taught to be you than you can be taught to be a mindless sheep; and it is all at once absurd, delusional, and fantastically arrogant to assume that you can remake the masses in your own image. They are what they are. Be what you are, even if that means you must renounce the mass-worshipping dogma and become a law unto yourself.
And lo, what a dogma that is!
A dogma may be beneficially descended from a higher principle; but sound higher principles are neither necessary for efficient production of a dogma, nor sufficient to impress it on the mass-mind. Thus to the mass, “freedom” and “liberty” are but vapid buzzwords which only become important either as an excuse to self-righteously bomb a foreign country into “liberation”, or as cause for self-righteous indignation if you dare to question their “right to an opinion”. Everybody is entitled to an opinion! No matter if the opinion is thoughtlessly copied from the opinion-factories of the mainstream media and democratic government propagandists: The facially absurd notion that everybody is entitled to an opinion is a learned dogma, with the added benefit of appealing to the petty egos of those least capable of independently forming their own opinions. Wherefore let none dare any heresy against the “one sheep, one vote” principle of governance, a sacred relic that you must worship at the altar of the masses. Of course, this state of affairs is entirely convenient for the priests of the opinion-factories.
Democracy is not three wolves and a sheep voting on dinner: It is the flock obediently voting on the shepherd’s opinion of wolves. Wherefore wolves are an endangered species.
What are you to do, when you are outnumbered, outgunned, and outvoted by numeric majorities who, per Goethe, falsely believe themselves “free” because they are entitled to express the opinions of professional opinion-makers, and thus go beyond Voltaire not only by defending the chains which bind them, but by actively demanding that you must love those chains, too?
Free yourself first from the moral authority of the mob. You owe nothing to mass opinion; therefore, the laws which rise on mass opinion have no proper authority over you. You do not consent to be governed by the votes of millions of anthropoid livestock who want to be bound in chains—who eagerly embrace those chains just as long as they remain warm, fed, and adequately entertained. You are a law unto yourself.
Wherefore “anarchy” as to the masses and their so-called “governments”, which are in truth no more than the largest, most well-armed organized criminal gangs. Don’t reject authority: Be your own authority.
The foregoing is Part 0. When further parts are posted, I will edit this with a link downthread. Forthcoming: Distiguishing of my analysis from other existing political philosophies; the intersection of this line of thought with crypto-anarchism; and more...
This is my “anarchy” thread. Moderation will be authoritarian and elitist.
Mine is the anarchy of the few, of the natural aristocrats who were not born to be slaves. It is by individual anarchy that they must escape the tyranny which the mob, with its innate slave-mentality, has freely chosen and voted into existence by the dead weight of numeric majorities.
It is the anarchy of those who love order, and impose order first on themselves: They who live by honour and not law. They must become laws unto themselves.
It is the anarchy of amoralists who rise beyond good and evil to shatter the table of values of the mob’s slave-morality, and thus clear the way for their own tables of values.
It is the anarchy of the good who, being good, hold fast to honour out of pride: For the most sincere morality is the self-glorification of the proud, whose judgments of others honour the best of what they see in themselves. It is they who would embrace death before the self-negation of dishonour—not as a sacrifice, but as a supreme act of pure selfishness: Humility is dishonour per se;—humiliation is to be dishonourable and dishonoured;—“death before dishonour” is the rule of the self-glorifying morality embodied by one so devoid of humility that he values his pride more than his life. (And indeed, it is only the humble, the meek, the weak who fear death: The cowardly.) For those whose honour is pride and whose pride is self-honour, law is at best superfluous; and the law of the mob must be explicitly rejected.
Wherefore it is “authoritarian autarchy” as to yourself. Don’t reject authority: Be your own authority.
Mine is not the anarchy of the petty, the weak-willed, the vicious, the spiteful, the despicable, the criminal, the jealous masses of those who would tear down anything better than themselves to assuage the implicit insult to their own inferiority.
It is not the anarchy of those who simply wish to escape all rules, such that they may do whatever they find most convenient at any particular moment. It is not the anarchy of a “rebel without a cause”.
Indeed, such a disordered mass-anarchy is unsustainable and self-defeating in practice. History shows that when the mob is loosed from all bands of authority, it starts with an orgy of mass violent crime. It then snaps back and demands order, for no greater motive than want of the personal comfort and safety which are impossible for members of an uncontrolled rabble. The goodness of the outcome is commensurate to the wisdom of whatever systems and systemic leaders may so happen to arise in such a situation.
Because a headless mob makes no wise choices, the mob will tend to embrace whatever system and leadership best appeal to the ego of the small-minded. This tendency can be actively exploited by wise leaders who obtain power for noble purposes, by pragmatically hacking the stupidity of the masses. However, the mass-tendency is much more likely to empower those who genuinely best exemplify it. And in practice, the system with the best mob-appeal is, of course, democracy on the principle of “one sheep, one vote”. Thereupon do the sheep choose as shepherds those who are most adept at pandering to the masses, playing petty politics, and manipulating majority opinion with cunning propaganda.
As a feature and not a bug, by design, democracy guarantees that the dregs at the bottom will rise to be the scum floating on top. The new order of tyrants wreathed in democratic platitudes will then proceed to bind the whole world in whatever chains the slave-mentality mob finds most soothing: Mass-surveillance and militarized police to “keep people safe” from popular bogeys, slave-level taxation for the “economic justice” of “wealth redistribution”, thoughtcrime laws to “stop hate”, terrorist wars to bring the blessings of the same “freedom” to others who don’t want it, and, to the flipside, facetwit.tv entertainments which actively, immersively propagandize and surveil the masses throughout all their waking moments.
Am I mistaken? Look around you! Look with open eyes, an iron heart, and a freethinking mind which ruthlessly questions all unexamined premises it has been told are categorically unquestionable.
Are so many millions of people, in so many democratic countries around the world, all voting for leaders and policies which they actually don’t want? Really? Or do you simply disagree with what they want, and project your own desires onto them through your unexamined assumption that they must be just like you?
If you start with the premise that “all men are created equal”, you thus start by implicitly assuming that your own subjective desires are objectively the lowest common denominator of what all people everywhere must want. It is a fundamental error. Mean mediocrities (and worse) do not care about anything other than safety, basic comfort, cheap entertainment, and emotionalist dogmata which they will blindly defend to their deaths.
They do not disagree with your higher principles: They have no higher principles, and moreover, they lack the mental ability to have higher principles. They make individual decisions based on herd mentality and the dogmata which they have learned by rote—dogmata ingrained with emotions, and thence defended with the blind passions of the mass-mind. This is an innate limitation, and an empirically observed reality which cannot be wished away by fantasies about “educating” the ineducable. Sheep can no more be taught to think than dogs can be taught to sing opera. Indeed, for the intended readers of this essay (others are hereby irrelevant), sheep can no more be taught to be you than you can be taught to be a mindless sheep; and it is all at once absurd, delusional, and fantastically arrogant to assume that you can remake the masses in your own image. They are what they are. Be what you are, even if that means you must renounce the mass-worshipping dogma and become a law unto yourself.
And lo, what a dogma that is!
A dogma may be beneficially descended from a higher principle; but sound higher principles are neither necessary for efficient production of a dogma, nor sufficient to impress it on the mass-mind. Thus to the mass, “freedom” and “liberty” are but vapid buzzwords which only become important either as an excuse to self-righteously bomb a foreign country into “liberation”, or as cause for self-righteous indignation if you dare to question their “right to an opinion”. Everybody is entitled to an opinion! No matter if the opinion is thoughtlessly copied from the opinion-factories of the mainstream media and democratic government propagandists: The facially absurd notion that everybody is entitled to an opinion is a learned dogma, with the added benefit of appealing to the petty egos of those least capable of independently forming their own opinions. Wherefore let none dare any heresy against the “one sheep, one vote” principle of governance, a sacred relic that you must worship at the altar of the masses. Of course, this state of affairs is entirely convenient for the priests of the opinion-factories.
Democracy is not three wolves and a sheep voting on dinner: It is the flock obediently voting on the shepherd’s opinion of wolves. Wherefore wolves are an endangered species.
What are you to do, when you are outnumbered, outgunned, and outvoted by numeric majorities who, per Goethe, falsely believe themselves “free” because they are entitled to express the opinions of professional opinion-makers, and thus go beyond Voltaire not only by defending the chains which bind them, but by actively demanding that you must love those chains, too?
Free yourself first from the moral authority of the mob. You owe nothing to mass opinion; therefore, the laws which rise on mass opinion have no proper authority over you. You do not consent to be governed by the votes of millions of anthropoid livestock who want to be bound in chains—who eagerly embrace those chains just as long as they remain warm, fed, and adequately entertained. You are a law unto yourself.
Wherefore “anarchy” as to the masses and their so-called “governments”, which are in truth no more than the largest, most well-armed organized criminal gangs. Don’t reject authority: Be your own authority.
My 1000th post.
The foregoing is Part 0. When further parts are posted, I will edit this with a link downthread. Forthcoming: Distiguishing of my analysis from other existing political philosophies; the intersection of this line of thought with crypto-anarchism; and more...
This is my “anarchy” thread. Moderation will be authoritarian and elitist.
Jump to: