It’s been several days since my last essay, and while I was planning on finishing a riff on of Russian polymath Vernadsky’s noosphere concept, I am instead nursing a hangover incurred from several hours of dancing with a group of very friendly and energetic Colombian exchange students.
Loved it! I left a comment on youtube for the algo, but I'll paste here as well : Libertarianism isn't a system that is imposed. Right brain engagement is needed to see that any shifts towards a more libertarian society will be culturally driven. The more widespread the assumption that intiating force against the innocent is immoral, the more society will thrive. Getting wrapped around the axel about how this works in specific circumstances is what the LHB is good for. These thought experiments shouldn’t be attacked as indictments of libertarian ideology as they are strawmen. The way the market will solve a problem can never be known ahead of time, this is what entreneurs are for and only some will succeed in each new speculation regardless of how skilled.
I agree that the will to fight is lacking due to a crisis of moral legitimacy within the military, this spiritual crisis is not appreciated to the extent it needs to be. I’m spending a lot of time thinking about this as it is my job to optimize human performance in the population and without a robust spiritual foundation my efforts will be met with limited success at best.
Fear of death is indeed the death of freedom. Belief in God isn’t required to identify a purpose greater than merely continuing to breath. Those of us with children and an understanding of the existential threats facing civilization will not hesitate to sacrifice our lives to secure a better future for our families, if it comes to that. I think traditional theism isn’t as powerful a motivator in this regard as it isn’t nested with biological reality (yes, I am a McConkey fanboy now).
The suspicion that the universally negative health outcomes promulgated by large corporate interests is intentional is understandable, but based on an assumption that maintaining optimal health in the industrial age is easy. It isn't easy, it is very difficult. Since we have a system that incentivizes big ag and big pharma profits with health not even being a consideration, we can expect disastrous health outcomes. You don’t have to try very hard to destroy human health, you just have to put the organism in an environment it didn’t evolve to deal with. Social media, hyperpalatable calorie dense foods, pornography, pharmaceuticals, and environmental toxins produced secondary to a myriad of products that make life more convenient all conspire to destroy the health of the unwary. The fact that our bodies and minds are able to weather such an onslaught at all is a testiment to the resilience of human beings.
I agree a teleological competition is taking place, but as a McConkeyite I like to use the perceptual, cognitive, and behavioral mechaism (PCBM) framework to explain how the battle lines are drawn. There are two distinct collections of PCBM traits that are mutually exclusive. The camps I put these collections into is American and anti-American (but libertarian and woke is just one of many possible substitutes for the names). The coalitions of individuals that express these PCBM traits employ particular strategies to spontaneously align with mutually supportive conspecifics. The result is an ongoing cold war that we are certain to win at some unknown cost. Unlike much neoreactionary commentary I’ve seen, I think this escalating into a kinetic conflict is all but impossible.
I believe what dissidents (or the hydra) will converge on is a very broad conception libertarianism with a general appreciation of the non-aggression principle (NAP) unifying an otherwise wonderfully diverse popular majority. Since woke idiots sullied the name of libertarianism this appreciation for the NAP could also be called Americanism (just look at the declaration of independence). Without a robust RHB synthetic perspective, it is difficult to see that the state is never necessary, and so it will always assert itself to the greatest extent allowed by the culture. Developing a culture of individualism with an appreciation for the value of collectives as voluntary emergent phenomenon will result in the largest possible coalition of conspecifics to supplant complete pathocratic capture. If such a culture is able to grow to a critical mass in prominence, the circulation of elite would be accelerated as they would find it much more difficult to consolidate their power using institutionally legitimized coercion.
Way too much to respond to but excellent comment as always that would frankly make the basis of a decent post. Pinned because I don't want this getting buried.
Thanks bro! I did just take one of the central ideas from the comment to write an article. Consider it my answer to the neoreactionary assumption of an inevitable kinetic civil war. https://radicalamerican.substack.com/p/the-human-singularity
Congrats on being invited onto Mind Matters! I've missed the show for a few weeks but have to listen now!!
Harrison asked me about having a discussion with them but I chickened out - I feel those guys are way too intelligent for me lol (plus I've got a distinctive voice, my own popular podcast, and I just don't want my other podcast listeners to put 2 and 2 together - need to remain incognito), so I've great respect for you having been on the show (even without hearing it yet).
Speaking of incognito - yes another squirrel - looking forward to that piece on why anonymity is an important thing in cases like yours.
Yeah, I'm looking forward to it to. It will be difficult to convince me that it isn't just inspired motivated reasoning to justify cowardice, but I maintain an open mind! Is that too harsh? If so I really don't mean to offend, I have a ton of respect for all of the anons I read on substack, I figure you can handle the candor.
I'll definitely check out the podcast. It's fascinating to me that one's thought processes really are very different while writing vs while speaking. I know that difference is obvious to anyone who's done both, but if you start digging into that distinction, you quickly find yourself confronted by deep questions about identity and the nature of the mind and all that. Even just speaking, there's even a difference between the part of your mind or personality that's activated while giving a prepared speech vs riffing off-the-cuff. Anyway, I've enjoyed pretty much everything you've written, so it'll be interesting to hear you expressing your thoughts through a different medium.
In general, I find that it's very difficult to generate new ideas or grasp new insights when writing. For me, that all happens in conversation. The insight gets generated in the interaction. Writing is basically just the crystallization. Most of my essays started as conversations.
As an example, the conversation we had on the podcast was what led to my most recent essay contrasting conspiracism and systemicism.
That's interesting. Do you think it's a right-brain vs left-brain kind of thing, where speaking/conversing facilitates right-brain synthesis while writing facilitates left-brain analysis? As for writing, I definitely notice that anything intended for someone else to read gets cramped by the inner-editor, but with journaling or something similarly open-ended and unrestrained, I feel like I have been able to form some new insights and make connections between patterns in different domains, but nowhere near as well as what happens while speaking off the cuff, either in conversation or just thinking out loud (aka, talking to myself like a loony).
It probably has to do with different brain regions being activated, yes. Similar to how your thoughts are very different if you're sitting in one place versus moving. But the role of the unexpected is absolutely crucial, too. People say things or ask questions that trigger thoughts that would never emerge otherwise.
I find that's generally the case, too. On the one hand, using one's own name lends a certain moral weight. But on the other, the freedom that comes from pseudonymity means that one is not bound by reputational concerns.
Takes on more mythical and mysterious status, as well, which is helpful when you’re fighting tyranny. At least all the comic books say so. 😆 (I definitely use a more transparent voice - but I have more of a biographical story to tell. Come what may, I suppose.)
Really enjoyed listening to the podcast. I appreciate hearing a bit of your history and writing process. The fluid exchange of ideas made the hour and forty minutes go too fast and made it easy to overlook the obvious technical sound issues.
I returned to the real world of working and no longer have the luxury of reading as much as I did. Listening to this encourages me to go back and read your substacks I have missed.
Loved it! I left a comment on youtube for the algo, but I'll paste here as well : Libertarianism isn't a system that is imposed. Right brain engagement is needed to see that any shifts towards a more libertarian society will be culturally driven. The more widespread the assumption that intiating force against the innocent is immoral, the more society will thrive. Getting wrapped around the axel about how this works in specific circumstances is what the LHB is good for. These thought experiments shouldn’t be attacked as indictments of libertarian ideology as they are strawmen. The way the market will solve a problem can never be known ahead of time, this is what entreneurs are for and only some will succeed in each new speculation regardless of how skilled.
I agree that the will to fight is lacking due to a crisis of moral legitimacy within the military, this spiritual crisis is not appreciated to the extent it needs to be. I’m spending a lot of time thinking about this as it is my job to optimize human performance in the population and without a robust spiritual foundation my efforts will be met with limited success at best.
Fear of death is indeed the death of freedom. Belief in God isn’t required to identify a purpose greater than merely continuing to breath. Those of us with children and an understanding of the existential threats facing civilization will not hesitate to sacrifice our lives to secure a better future for our families, if it comes to that. I think traditional theism isn’t as powerful a motivator in this regard as it isn’t nested with biological reality (yes, I am a McConkey fanboy now).
The suspicion that the universally negative health outcomes promulgated by large corporate interests is intentional is understandable, but based on an assumption that maintaining optimal health in the industrial age is easy. It isn't easy, it is very difficult. Since we have a system that incentivizes big ag and big pharma profits with health not even being a consideration, we can expect disastrous health outcomes. You don’t have to try very hard to destroy human health, you just have to put the organism in an environment it didn’t evolve to deal with. Social media, hyperpalatable calorie dense foods, pornography, pharmaceuticals, and environmental toxins produced secondary to a myriad of products that make life more convenient all conspire to destroy the health of the unwary. The fact that our bodies and minds are able to weather such an onslaught at all is a testiment to the resilience of human beings.
I agree a teleological competition is taking place, but as a McConkeyite I like to use the perceptual, cognitive, and behavioral mechaism (PCBM) framework to explain how the battle lines are drawn. There are two distinct collections of PCBM traits that are mutually exclusive. The camps I put these collections into is American and anti-American (but libertarian and woke is just one of many possible substitutes for the names). The coalitions of individuals that express these PCBM traits employ particular strategies to spontaneously align with mutually supportive conspecifics. The result is an ongoing cold war that we are certain to win at some unknown cost. Unlike much neoreactionary commentary I’ve seen, I think this escalating into a kinetic conflict is all but impossible.
I believe what dissidents (or the hydra) will converge on is a very broad conception libertarianism with a general appreciation of the non-aggression principle (NAP) unifying an otherwise wonderfully diverse popular majority. Since woke idiots sullied the name of libertarianism this appreciation for the NAP could also be called Americanism (just look at the declaration of independence). Without a robust RHB synthetic perspective, it is difficult to see that the state is never necessary, and so it will always assert itself to the greatest extent allowed by the culture. Developing a culture of individualism with an appreciation for the value of collectives as voluntary emergent phenomenon will result in the largest possible coalition of conspecifics to supplant complete pathocratic capture. If such a culture is able to grow to a critical mass in prominence, the circulation of elite would be accelerated as they would find it much more difficult to consolidate their power using institutionally legitimized coercion.
Way too much to respond to but excellent comment as always that would frankly make the basis of a decent post. Pinned because I don't want this getting buried.
Thanks bro! I did just take one of the central ideas from the comment to write an article. Consider it my answer to the neoreactionary assumption of an inevitable kinetic civil war. https://radicalamerican.substack.com/p/the-human-singularity
I saw! Will read, thanks!
Congrats on being invited onto Mind Matters! I've missed the show for a few weeks but have to listen now!!
Harrison asked me about having a discussion with them but I chickened out - I feel those guys are way too intelligent for me lol (plus I've got a distinctive voice, my own popular podcast, and I just don't want my other podcast listeners to put 2 and 2 together - need to remain incognito), so I've great respect for you having been on the show (even without hearing it yet).
Speaking of incognito - yes another squirrel - looking forward to that piece on why anonymity is an important thing in cases like yours.
Well now I'm intrigued. Email me the name of the secret podcast!
And yeah, need to write that anonymity piece. Oh look, another squirrel.
Yeah, I'm looking forward to it to. It will be difficult to convince me that it isn't just inspired motivated reasoning to justify cowardice, but I maintain an open mind! Is that too harsh? If so I really don't mean to offend, I have a ton of respect for all of the anons I read on substack, I figure you can handle the candor.
Time to look into some voice disguisers!
Just recommended your stack to mine, and its vast and gifted readership
Thank you!
I'll definitely check out the podcast. It's fascinating to me that one's thought processes really are very different while writing vs while speaking. I know that difference is obvious to anyone who's done both, but if you start digging into that distinction, you quickly find yourself confronted by deep questions about identity and the nature of the mind and all that. Even just speaking, there's even a difference between the part of your mind or personality that's activated while giving a prepared speech vs riffing off-the-cuff. Anyway, I've enjoyed pretty much everything you've written, so it'll be interesting to hear you expressing your thoughts through a different medium.
In general, I find that it's very difficult to generate new ideas or grasp new insights when writing. For me, that all happens in conversation. The insight gets generated in the interaction. Writing is basically just the crystallization. Most of my essays started as conversations.
As an example, the conversation we had on the podcast was what led to my most recent essay contrasting conspiracism and systemicism.
That's interesting. Do you think it's a right-brain vs left-brain kind of thing, where speaking/conversing facilitates right-brain synthesis while writing facilitates left-brain analysis? As for writing, I definitely notice that anything intended for someone else to read gets cramped by the inner-editor, but with journaling or something similarly open-ended and unrestrained, I feel like I have been able to form some new insights and make connections between patterns in different domains, but nowhere near as well as what happens while speaking off the cuff, either in conversation or just thinking out loud (aka, talking to myself like a loony).
It probably has to do with different brain regions being activated, yes. Similar to how your thoughts are very different if you're sitting in one place versus moving. But the role of the unexpected is absolutely crucial, too. People say things or ask questions that trigger thoughts that would never emerge otherwise.
Will be linking the video with Mind Matters today @https://nothingnewunderthesun2016.com/
Welcome to the "Big Time" LOL!!!!!
Sweet!
Truly, I have arrived.
The anonymous writer personalities have become my favorite. Looking forward to giving the podcast a listen!
I find that's generally the case, too. On the one hand, using one's own name lends a certain moral weight. But on the other, the freedom that comes from pseudonymity means that one is not bound by reputational concerns.
Takes on more mythical and mysterious status, as well, which is helpful when you’re fighting tyranny. At least all the comic books say so. 😆 (I definitely use a more transparent voice - but I have more of a biographical story to tell. Come what may, I suppose.)
Really enjoyed listening to the podcast. I appreciate hearing a bit of your history and writing process. The fluid exchange of ideas made the hour and forty minutes go too fast and made it easy to overlook the obvious technical sound issues.
I returned to the real world of working and no longer have the luxury of reading as much as I did. Listening to this encourages me to go back and read your substacks I have missed.
The hosts all have professional microphones. I had my laptop lol. Glad you enjoyed the podcast!
The real world of working can be a horrible place for maintaining a reading habit.
For what it's worth, I use the Samson C01, cheapo Chinese USB mic which sounds great and changed my life :)
I'll keep that in mind. Thanks!
Telegram’s stickers are wicked.
I don’t use this word. I just think the comparison is fun :-)
I prefer gnarly.
haha