Karl Marx interpreted history as a material dialectic between haves and have-nots. The Communist Manifesto of 1848 was a call to workers to usurp the capitalists. This didn’t work. Why?
Since I wrote a post on the status of capitalism, I thought this could be an informative extension. With Podemos in Spain, Syriza in Greece and conflicts in Ukraine and the Middle-East, it is interesting to speculate on what the future holds for the EU and its neighbourhood.
So, I had this idea of separating capitalism from politics, much like the separation of church and state. It’s fairly simply and although it would be very difficult to implement, I don’t see any major drawbacks. I’ve also added an old idea about a communist state below. Obviously I still prefer my neurocracy, but it’s always useful to test other ideas.
Historically, anarchism in the Americas, Spain and now Syria sprung out of war. The Russian and Chinese revolutions as well. The French revolution happened just after the U.S. revolution and major French military losses over there. The U.S. revolution is less clear to me, but the there are general tendencies to identify.
1st: The chaotic state and disorganized production, logistics, temporary housing etc allowed for an easier transmission to a new system since the old one wasn’t really present anymore.
50,000 shares on facebook – an open letter about groups of boys harassing girls highlights the deep roots of social problems in Sweden, hiding under a veneer of perfection.
The first ones to be blamed are immigrants, mainly muslims, for having a degrading view of women. The strength of that voice is consistent with the 13 % who voted for the protectionists/isolationists/nationalists/social conservatives, the Sweden Democrats.
However, the phenomenon is the same as it has been for decades and even in this specific case ethnicity was not a factor. Some men and boys, regardless of age and ethnicity, whether drunk or not, whether alone or in groups, behave deplorably towards women when nobody is around.
Because that’s what it’s really about; what we do when nobody is looking, and that’s probably why nobody knows how to fix the problem, because they don’t understand what they don’t see.
Let’s try to reason in lack of direct experience. The parents have not instilled sensible values in their kids; this is part of it. The school and the teachers have failed on this point as well; sure. Hormones turn teenagers into lunatics; ok. Peer pressure; yes.
Society is also at fault on a more general scale. The streamlined neoliberalism has no time for kids, to the point where kids at day cares are always sick because the diseases are always present at the day cares because parents can’t just not show up at work when their kids are sick. The separation of parent and child is even more fundamental. Whereas e.g. the San people allow their kids to play amongst themselves, they are always in the vicinity of the parents and a division between parent and adult is prevented by repeatedly crossing over any border before it manifests. The quality time in our culture between parent and child, and don’t even mention other adults, is artificial and isolated from reality, the kids don’t take part in the parents’ everyday activities and the parents don’t take part in the kids’ everyday activities.
In this case, the city centre is peppered with private schools and when the kids leave the school grounds to hang out on the street corners, smoking cigarettes, looking cool, smacking girls on the ass, calling them whores if they fight back, the schools give away their responsibility, a responsibility already given away to the schools by the parents.
Should men (and other women) who pass by such a scene intervene? Yes. Would the scene even take place if an adult walked past? No. Is it any different from when an adult man spies a lone woman late at night in an empty public space with no witnesses around? No.
It is no different from peeing in the shower when nobody is looking either. Or spewing vile hatred over random strangers online from behind the anonymous safety of a computer screen. There is no empathy – the Other is reduced to an object in the Self’s own theatre play called My Life.
To solve the problem, it is not enough to blame one person. The solution is to tear down walls, the walls between me and others, the walls between the schools and the rest of society, between adults and children, between job and spare time; and all of these things can exist together.
Constantly keeping an eye on each other would be counterproductive, but there should be connecting points between all these actors and stages to allow for natural flows between the adult world and the teenagers’ world and the kids’ world, between the schools, day cares, corporate offices, factories, parks, warehouses, cafés, cinemas; to the point where these borders no longer seem like borders.
If you want to fix this problem, no matter where you’re starting from, you have to reach out, talk, listen, incorporate, communicate, share, involve; everyone, sure, but most importantly, the perpetrators.
It has occurred to me that I need to relate my view on progress to other people’s for the sake of clarity. So, I’m gonna phrase this as singular, dual and plural. This is not to be confused with the dualism of a physical and metaphysical world though, as that is an issue on a separate axis relative to this categorization. Anyway, a singular view of progress is expressed by Carlyle. A dual view of progress is expressed by Hegel and Marx. These point to a goal, a forward progress and betterment. My pluralistic view is one of emergence, with no specific orientation, but just wild and uncertain growth and decline.
“For Carlyle, chaotic events demanded what he called ‘heroes’ to take control over the Read the rest of this entry »
Some 7,000 years ago, the idea of private property became institutionalized, facilitated by the appearance of monarchy and a religion of servitude. This culture has come to dominate the world, but recently the masses have become increasingly aware of the flaws in the system and the need for change.
Capitalism, or private property, fails in that it enhances the difference between those who have capital yields and those who have work wages. Although private property is not necessarily evil in itself, already from the start this inequality was maintained by a class system, with the son of god Read the rest of this entry »
Insertion: I realized I can define this rather simply, so I made this short insertion. One of the dictionary definition of property is synonymous with quality, trait, characteristic, feature and attribute. A thing or person owns these properties, but one might as well say that these properties are part of that thing or person or that a person or thing is equal to the sum of those properties. This means replacing ‘has’ with ‘is’. What the text underneath spells out is simply that what you ‘are’ I would consider to be justified property, but you can’t claim to own anything that is beyond what you are. Taking something that is external to yourself would thus be akin to stealing.
Neurocracy consists of an ontological foundation, an epistemological foundation, a moral foundation, a moral principle and an economic system.
I believe the world is entirely physical and that there is no metaphysical (free) will.
The epistemological foundation is that of relativism and that science is the best method for knowledge in lack of an absolute truth. All things grow from the bottom up, even the Big Bang might be just a local bulge in the fabric of energy. There is no objective justification for Read the rest of this entry »
Socialism arose as a struggle for equality in Europe as a combined result of protests from different layers of society against other or sometimes the same layers of society. I’d argue that Protestantism was the pre-cursor to this movement, starting with events like the burning of Jan Hus at the stake in 1415 for criticizing the power of the Pope. In 1600, Giordani Bruno was also burned at the stake for suggesting Read the rest of this entry »
Anarcho-pacifism in my view consists of two principles:
Strife against hierarchies, towards peace.
I contend that anarcho-pacifism defined this way can incorporate not only all anarchists, but also all pacifists and even all socialists and liberals and a bunch of other people. Anarcho-pacifism is a tendency within anarchism caused by several people who were both anarchists and pacifists and it is not an ideology in its own right, which is what I aim to remedy with this post. Anarcho-pacifism in its combined state goes beyond the promotion of peace and the rejection of the state. The whole is greater than the sum of its parts.
The point of departure for my thought-process is India 1,800 years ago. Read the rest of this entry »
A: Alla demokratiska statsskick gör en avvägning mellan folkviljans genomslag och möjligheten att få till ett effektivt styre av ett land. Sverige också, se bara på fyraprocentsspärren. 4,0 procent betyder “välkommen in”, 3,99 procent betyder “dig bryr vi oss inte om, inte ett skvatt faktiskt”.
OM det är så att blockpolitiken är här för att stanna och OM det finns tre block som vägrar prata med varandra så går det inte att få till ett effektivt styre. Svaret är då att införa ett valsystem som ger möjlighet att skapa just detta. Svaret är inte att tricksa och begränsa hur våra folkvalda får rösta.
This was the most well-known slogan of the French Revolution 1789 and it means freedom, equality and brotherhood.
I’ve been trying to understand #gamergate lately, thinking it’s a 21st century Western middle-class teenager grassroots protest and as such indicates where the entire world is heading. Whether that is wise or not is debatable. Either way, my idea of what needs to be done in society is centered around the notion that a lot of structures have been created, for various reasons, and that these structures are in part designed to prevent and slow down changes aimed at improving the living conditions of the general population, even including animals. In other words, those who are currently being favoured by the structures are fighting to maintain the status quo. This is not a simplistic view though, as not all structures are bad and not all progressive ideas are good. Read the rest of this entry »
Let’s first quickly summarize this. Gamers want better ethics in journalism after corruption was discovered. Games developers and gaming media rejected this criticism as an attack on women. Both sides have made mistakes, both sides blame the whole of the enemy camp for these mistakes and both sides view their own mistakes as not representative of the whole.
I’m gonna attack this issue from my own perspective which means that I am not neutral in this matter, but I think of myself as a third party and not in favour of either of the two groups and I hope you will read the whole text before passing judgment. Read the rest of this entry »
Just wanted to have it written down, to support my copyright once I publish the book online. This will therefore remain unedited. I’m not gonna sell the book, so it’s just a matter of giving me credit and I’m not sure if I can use this post as proof, but it’s better than nothing.
You can look forward to a revolutionary new view on history, genetics, metaphysics and culture later this year. Hopefully before decembre. It will be published on a different site, which I will construct for this sole purpose. Very few, if any, people read this blog, so I’ll have to figure out a way to get publicity, but Imma finish the text first.
From chapter 38 of The Man Without Qualities (my translation from the Swedish translation):
“Moral is the fixation of human behaviour within a society, but primarily their inner urges and impulses, that is their emotions and thoughts… Of course I don’t know it. But despite that I can give you a dozen explanations. The oldest being that God has revealed the order of life to us in its finest detail…”
“That would be the most wonderful,” said Agathe.
“But the most likely is,” Ulrich intoned, “that moral, like all other order, arises through force and violence. A ruling group which has succeeded in acquiring the power simply charge the others with the restrictions and basic principles through which it secures its dominion. But simultaneously it depends on those who have made it great and powerful. Simultaneously it thereby acts as a role model. Simultaneously it is itself changed through feedback. All this is of course far too complicated than can be described briefly, and while it in no way happens without intelligence (but in no way through intelligence but rather experientially), it eventually results in an incomprehensible network that stretches over everything and everyone, apparently as necessarily as God’s heaven arches above us. Now everything is attributed to this domain, but this domain is not attributed to anything. In other words: everything is moral, but moral itself is not moral!”
“That is, feeling is neither true nor false! Feeling has remained a private matter! It has been consigned to suggestion, to imagination, persuasion!”
“For centuries”, Ulrich carried on, “the world has known the truth of thought and thus through reason known, at least to a certain degree, freedom of thought. Meanwhile feeling had neither the strict schooling of truth nor freedom of movement. For every moral has in its time regulated feeling only to a strictly limited extent and only as far as certain basic principles and fundamental emotions were necessary for the actions that pleased it; but the rest it has given over to arbitrariness, to the play of personal emotions, the uncertain striving in the arts and in the academic debate. Moral has, then, adapted emotions to the needs of the moral and thus neglected to develop them, despite itself being dependent on them. For it is the order and unity of emotions… But it is only another expression of a state of passion arming itself against the whole of the world.”
“Moral was to him neither dominion nor wisdom of thought, but the infinite fullness of life’s possibilities. He believed in some potential for elevation of moral, in different levels of experiencing it, and not just, as is habitual, in stages of insight into it, as if it was something ready-made for which humans simply weren’t pure enough. By this people certainly think of police regulations, through which life is kept in order, and since life does not obey them, they give the impression of not really being possible and in this barren way is thus given a sheen of ideal. But moral must not be reduced to this plane. Moral is fantasy… And secondly: fantasy is not arbitrary.”
“He had been about to talk about the all-too-little considered difference between the way in which different times have developed reason and the way in which they have fixated and locked-in the moral fantasy.”
“Everything from the extraordinary humans’ epiphanies to the sentimental garbage that unites the people forms what Ulrich called the moral fantasy, or more simply put feeling, one slow fermentation throughout the centuries, without the brew clearing. The human is a being who cannot cope without passion. And passion is that condition, under which all her emotions and thoughts are of the same spirit. You think, almost to the contrary, that it is the condition when an emotion is overwhelmingly powerful, one single – entrancement! – which forcibly pulls all others with it?… Lasting is achieved only by emotions and thoughts in contact with each other, in their wholeness, they must in some way be aimed in the same direction and mutually pull each other along. And by any means, by intoxication, suggestion, faith, conviction, often also only by the simplifying effect of stupidity, the human longs to create a similar state [of lasting]. She believes in ideas, inte because they are many times true, but because she has to believe. Because she has to keep her emotions in order. Because with an illusion she must fill the tear between her life-walls, through which her emotions would otherwise be scattered by all [four] winds. The right thing would, instead of devoting yourself to transient illusory states, surely be to at least seek for the causes of the true passion. But despite the number of decisions that are caused by emotions being all-in-all infinitely greater than the sum of all settlements made by pure reason and despite all events that affect humanity having sprung from fantasy, only matters of reason reveal themselves as being superhumanly ordered, and for the other [the order of passion] nothing has happened that would deserve being called a collective effort or even hint at an insight into its despairing necessity.”
“We find ourselves these days facing too many possibilities of feeling and life. But is this difficulty not similar to the one that reason overcomes when face with a great deal of facts and a history of relevant theories? And for reason we have found a strict, if incomplete, approach, that I need not describe to you. I ask you now, if not something similar would be possible for feeling as well? We would without doubt yet want to clarify why we exist – this is one of the main causes of all acts of violence in the world…”
“That would mean a growing relationship with God!”
“That wouldn’t be the worst thing surely?” Ulrich said, not without a certain mocking sharpness before this hasty anxiety. “But I havn’t taken it that far!”
“How do you imagine this application of our theoretical approach to thinking in practice?”
“Ulrich knew very well that it was yet unclear. He meant neither ‘a life as researcher’ nor a life ‘in the light of science’, but a ‘search for feeling’ kind of like the search for truth, with the only difference that here there was no question of truth.”
“The fact is that while Hitler was gathering German lands he united Germany, Austria, the Sudetenland, and Memel without a single drop of blood. If Hitler stopped at that, he would be remembered in his country’s history as a politician of the highest order.”
from a Russian newspaper article April 3rd by Andranik Migranyan, head of the New York office of the “Institute for Democracy and Cooperation,” an NGO set up under President Vladimir Putin in 2007 to monitor human rights in Western countries.
This is a copy of a youtube comment I made on a video about the crisis in Ukraine. The comment section was, unsurprisingly, brimful with hatred.
“Look, everyone here has been told lies and all nations have done horrible things in the past, there’s no point in having a contest of who raped the most people, certainly not based on propaganda sources. Accept this as a starting point. Now, let’s think about this from a broader perspective. In the 1700s Europe was controlled by the British Empire, the Frankish Empire, the Russian Empire, the Read the rest of this entry »