Money is not a shared illusion. Bitcoin is better money.

Ron Paul on the American economy: "it is a bubble and an illusion built on governmental, corporate, and personal debt." And on bitcoin, he says: The government, for its own reasons, monopolized the creation of money. Money originated in the marketplace. Let people sort it out

Ron Paul on the American economy: submitted by BitcoinAllBot to BitcoinAll [link] [comments]

Bitcoin and the illusion of money

Bitcoin and the illusion of money submitted by arpaddd to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Bitcoin and libertarianism

I often hear libertarians' calling card "The government has too much power". The problem is the fundamental structure of money - it is created at zero cost by banks (through lending) and central banks (through QE), and ultimately can be used for a whole range of government spending programs that we never signed up for. Taxation alone doesn't fund this, they have to use a sly way to collect money from us without representation. This is the inflation tax - the illusion that assets prices keep increasing when in fact it is our purchasing power weakening.
So how does bitcoin fit into all this? Well bitcoin cannot be inflated by a single government entity, in fact they have no control over its monetary supply (which is capped at 21 million). If a bank wants bitcoin on its balance sheets, it has to put the work in and purchase it, rather than being given free money at low rates. Bitcoin is the roadmap for libertarian principles: it's uncensorable, permissionless, borderless and anti-inflationary. Bitcoin doesn't take the money out of the hands of the government by force, rather stops them from pilfering our pockets in the first place.
submitted by icedlemoncake to Libertarian [link] [comments]

Normie personas

As far as I can tell people just seem to pick one of these after high school and run with it. What are some others?
Corporate bossgirl
Ultra hrd workr and needs everybody to know. Virtue signals on social media about the non profits she works for. 'Too busy for a relationship' (pathetic attempt to signal a supposedly high sexual market place value). A corporate feminist, so won't stop until the injustice of not having the ruling class composed of 50% women is rectified. Secretly having a mental breakdown because she wants kids but her independent bossgirl persona doesn't allow for it.
Suburban mom
Basically an airhead probably has no passion for anything outside of breeding, nesting, facebooking, aside from some facile political issue because it makes her indignant. Married to a provider cuck. Loves home renovation shows, talks incessantly. If she works, it's in some bullshit job. Most likely a Karen.
Finance bro
Actually finds stock markets and bitcoin interesting. Has wet dreams about being his own wolf of wall street. Ends up marrying some suburban social climber Kardashian bimbo. They attend events like racing carnivals because they wanted to have their photos taken in front of those corporate sponsorship backdrops like they saw on instagram. Probably does coke a lot.
Chad
Probably ends up a professional sports player. His WAG partner leaves him because his Chad status is somewhat over post-career. Will blow all his money most likely and end up in some shitty laboring job.
The traveller
Has seen others doing it on social media and wants to do it too. Firmly believes it will enrich their lives, even though they are living the same existence of unsatisfying work and consumption albeit in another country. Eventually returns to home country when they realize what am illusion it all was and settles into some boring suburban routine.
Start up fags
Think Steve Jobs and Warren Buffet and Mr Amazon are the greatest humans in the history of the world. Just wants to be CEO really. Will probably try and market some useless piece of shit product that nobody needs. Most likely libertarian.
STEMfags
Obnoxious personality from having their egos stroked throughout school and university, always told how smart they are. Honestly believe they are owed respect because they 'building the future'. Also probably libertarian/pedophile.
Basic dad/family guy
Bereft of passion, just went with the flow and does some job he can easily do. Has never questioned anything and doesn't even know if he's happy. Is satisfied by things like having a family, watching sports, buying gadgets and the other mundane suburban bullshit. Typical wageslave.
Environmentally conscious couple/family
Managed to convince themselves that all the 'green' shit they bought for their home is helping the environment instead of just being another capitalist mind game that kept them plugged into the system. Their idea of off-grid is just a new, smug form of consumerism.
Social media wannabe
Desperately wants to become famous on youtube/tik tok/instagram, probably doesn't realize how fake the whole thing is, or doesn't care because just wants the fame and easy money.
Fitness retard
The more pain the better- gym constantly, some ridiculous diet, all so they can feel less inferior. Most likely feels horrible all the time and doesn't actually know what they are doing to themselves. Authoritarian attitude, no patience for anybody who doesn't neurotically exercise like they do.
Musician
Obsessed with fame, fashionable, uninteresting, nothing really to express, spends a lot of time cultivating a persona or fussing over their social media presence. Is not going to make it and probably knows it.
submitted by Blahfknblah to NEET [link] [comments]

Antonopoulos: "FinCen leak ...will be used against cryptocurrencies"

https://twitter.com/aantonop/status/1308026648781086720
A lot of people who are into cryptocurrencies will see this FinCen leak as vindication and proof that banks are money launderers. But, this will be used against cryptocurrencies...
See the correct analysis of this news is that AML/CTF and KYC don't work. They will never work because they try to control the *tool* not the *criminal act*. It's not the money that is illicit, it's the use of that money to commit crimes.
I've talked about this extensively. Not only is the use of money as a crime-control mechanism ineffective, it has terrible consequences that increase poverty for billions by creating economic exclusion. So it's not just useless, it is "Worse than Useless"
"Worse than Useless" is the title of a talk I gave about this topic. For the illusion of unatainable security and crime fighting we get two obvious and unavoidable results: billions cut out of the financial system and enormous corrupting power given to regulators and bankers.
But despite this obvious truth, nothing is going to change. In fact, this report will be used to *increase* the use of controls and surveillance. In govt if something doesn't work, you do MORE of it. So this will result in stricter AML/CTF rules.
These new rules will also not work. These new rules will also corrupt more bankers, regulators, cops and politicians. These new rules will destroy opportunity for millions more people. But they will offer the comfort of righteous rhetoric against evil while creating more evil
As these new rules are applied, banking will become even harder for poor people, undocumented people and people on the fringes of society. It won't stop criminals from criming. It will stop poor people from rising out of poverty. It will make banks even more competition-proof
These new rules will make government surveillance worse and will erode democratic institutions. They will make it possible for dictators to economically surveil, control, and eventually extinguish any opposition. They will use US surveillance tech to impose financial fascism
Then of course, the need and value of open financial systems based on open, private, and uncensorable cryptocurrencies will increase dramatically. When all the money in the world has been deliberately broken to serve this unachievable goal, the only money that works is crypto
More and more people will need to use cryptocurrency in order to participate in the global economy, because control-currency doesn't work as money. A medium of exchange can't also work as a medium of control. They break money to stop crime, even though it is a futile effort
That makes crypto-currency a systemic threat, not to the economic nature of national money, but to the control and surveillance system of geopolitical money. Math money doesn't play politics, which makes it automatically "rogue" money.
Open and private crypto-currencies won't comply with these regulations, because they CAN'T comply without breaking every feature and capability they have. If some try to comply they will have to compete against gov-crypto and facebook-crypto (they will lose)
Then the war on cash and the war on "illicit" money becomes an all out war on the only money that still works. The free, open, borderless, neutral, immutable, censorship resistant money that crypto-currencies like Bitcoin offer
The only type of money (crypto) that poor, undocumented, oppressed, and controlled populations can use will of course be attacked. But they will not have any choice but to continue to use cryptocurrency. Billions are already unbanked by fiat controls.
This FinCen leak is worthy of our ridicule because it reveals the hypocrisy of those who argue that crypto-currency is for money launderers. Banking *is* money laundering on a massive scale. But the solution is not to tighten controls on money. That won't work
The solution is to stop trying to use money (a tool) to fight crime (human nature). But if you think the hypocrites will back down and adopt sensible systems and laws that enable human trade and economic inclusion, you are wrong. They will double down with even more control
This isn't good news. This is the excuse they will use to double down on surveillance and control. To make money a tool of naked political power. No matter how many billions these measures condemn to poverty.
submitted by 100_Jose_Maria_001 to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Dissecting the Parasitocracy

Instead of honest democracy or free-market meritocracy, we truly live under rule by parasites. (This term is not meant to be derogatory but to be apt. I suppose many, if not most of us, would opt to be one of the parasites, if given the choice.)
Trying to describe how the financial and political elites receive unearned wealth and power can get complicated very quickly. To find a simple but rigorous theory to cover most major features of the beast requires looking at it the right way.
By and large, how it works is that:
The elites use state power to prop up the values of money, debt, and other financial assets artificially, to benefit those who issue them, i.e. themselves. When some over-valued asset eventually must crash, the entire economy suffers the loss of jobs, business and savings.
 
Example: The Bank Account
Public illusion. A commercial-bank 'deposit' is as good as money. You will get all your money back, any time you want.
Reality. 'Deposits' are really loans to the bank which lends them to borrowers, some of whom may never pay them back. Another danger is that savers may ask for their money at any time, while loans by the bank tend to have longer-term maturities.
How to bridge myth and reality. An truly free-market system would drive banks to communicate expectations openly. A simple example could be having 'depositors' expect to lose money if the bank makes bad loans. The problem with such an honest system, of course, is that top politicians and bankers wouldn't benefit much, since people would likely put much less money in banks.
The confidence trick. The government props up the illusion, while it can. Classic tools over the centuries include allowing banks to collude by rescuing each other in a crisis, bailing banks out with public money, and providing deposit insurance. If this gives bankers the incentives to take too much risk, bankers redeem themselves by being a lender to the government. Since both sets of elites benefit, what problem is there? (In recent decades investment banks and money market funds have formed a shadow banking system which plays an equivalent role. While the last US commercial-bank bust happened in the 1980s' savings-and-loan crisis, the last shadow-bank variety occurred in 2007-8.)
Analysis. While credit is indeed crucial to economic growth, to use government power to prop up the values of loans to banks, and then to rely on bureaucrats and their rules to limit risk-taking by bankers is a distortion of the credit market. It is the driver of much human misery. Central planning, somehow, always benefits the few at the expense of the many, even if it claims to do just the opposite.
 
Example: Government Bonds
Public illusion. The 'full faith and credit' of the government stands behind the IOU it issues to you. Your IOU is as good as money.
Reality. Since much public debt is almost as trusted as money, incurring this debt is almost as good as printing money. Politicians thus have an incentive to maximize the issuance of debt to receive free political capital, even if this destabilizes their own system in the long run. Public debt all over the world goes only up. Even though powerful governments can keep their debt bubbles going for a century or more, those incentives mean that their IOUs will eventually lose value, one way or another.
How to bridge myth and reality. Even aside from the moral problems of 'money' creation and putting burden on people who can't yet vote, public debt should at least be allowed to sink or swim in the capital markets. If a government incurs too much debt, savers would be incentivized to punish it by demanding a higher yield, and politicians would in turn be incentivized to cut back borrowing.
The confidence trick. When savers get too wary of public debt, the central bank steps in to buy it with freshly printed money, thus propping up the value of these IOUs. This is done in the name of 'monetary policy,' either by buying public debt directly as 'open market' operations, or, more frequently, by supplying banks with cheap new money so they will buy it. Most of the time, savers can't fight city hall, and will thus tend to buy and hold IOUs, further limiting the downside risk of their values. This entire system thus amounts to a bubble.
Analysis. It doesn't matter how powerful a government is -- Public debt always crashes eventually. The dominant global empires of Spain, the Netherlands, and Britain were destroyed by this crash in their days. (In the case of Britain the relevant 'public debt' took the form of paper pound sterling that was officially an IOU for a fixed amount of gold.) No one believes US debt is really payable with anything close to the purchasing power savers and foreign central banks used to buy it, although by the time its value can no longer be propped up, most politicians and voters who have benefited from issuing it will have been gone.
 
Example: Money
Public illusion. Central banks issue and destroy currency to manage economic output for the benefit of the public. At least in the West, proper management has resulted in low and constant inflation that has justified the public's evident trust in currency's value.
Reality. The real job description of the central bank is to safeguard the state-bank alliance. It holds power over the most central asset, money, in order to discourage both politicians and bankers from issuing assets too fast and thus endangering the system. The goal is well-paced harvesting of the fruits of real work. Over the decades, prices only move in one direction: up.
How to bridge myth and reality. Unfortunately, there is no way to remove the incentives to abuse the issuance of money while the state or a banking cartel has any role in the issuance.
The confidence trick. The problem of holding up the public's trust in currency was solved in a simple fashion by the classical gold and silver standards in their day, while the authorities had enough precious metals to back their paper. Today, the central bank needs to keep the return on 'safe' assets (e.g. short-term Treasuries, insured deposits) above the return on non-state-issued assets, i.e. gold, silver and Bitcoin. (Recent books like 'Gold Wars' and 'The Gold Cartel' have come up with good evidence of central-bank suppression of precious metal prices by trading derivatives.) In this it seems to succeed most of the time, but fail spectacularly at other times. It also needs to keep the return on 'safe' assets below the return on risky assets like stocks, over the long term. The goal of both operations is to use state power to force savers to take risks and help prop up the bubble economy. (Ever wonder why financial crisis always seems to come back?) When you hear of 'tightening' or 'loosening' the money supply, this control is what's really going on. So, it's not that the public trusts currency; most feel they have no choice.
Analysis. It's not, as most mainstream economists claim, that state-controlled money is required for modern economic growth. The Italian Renaissance and Scottish 'free-banking' era were counter-examples. It's really the other way round. The real productivity of the modern world gives value to the financial assets issued by the elites, and thus help sustain their financial inflation, at least until the perverse incentives destabilizes the system anyway. In the Middle Ages, money was physical gold and silver -- when there was no wealth to extract, the state couldn't create its financial inflation.
 
Final Thoughts
A key feature of this system is that it doesn't matter if you understand it. You still must gamble, or risk your savings being eaten away by inflation. The gamble by the public as a whole is certain to end in loss, since the elites will always destabilize asset values to the point of collapse. The lose-lose proposition works the same way as literal highway robbery -- you can certainly hold on to your money; you just can't keep your life at the same time.
That said, there are times when the elites are likely to be forced to devalue their money, and with it all other conventional assets, against gold, silver and Bitcoin, in order to hold on to power. This makes it statistically profitable to hold non-state-issued assets at those times. (An analogy would be standing at the front of the line to redeem deposits for cash during a bank run, or to redeem pound sterling for gold at the Bank of England just before Britain was forced off the gold standard.) Necessarily, only a minority will profit from this bet, but its existence is a healthy incentive that pushes the elites to minimize financial inflation.
This devaluation is conceptually the same as 'banana republics' having to devalue their currency against the dollar because they've printed too much. The typical way to do this is to strongly deny any prospect of devaluation until the very moment, devalue as fast as possible (and devalue enough to keep their system stable for a while,) and deny any further devaluations in future. So, it's perhaps no accident that the price movements of gold, silver and Bitcoin have been long and gradual declines most of the time, punctuated by sharp rises over short periods, and rising overall over the long term.
The system is an 'open conspiracy.' Instead of secrecy, it relies on a combination of state power and ignorance by the public. The only sustainable path to achieving a healthy and just system is for the public to wake up. But the devaluation of its issued money against non-state monies shows that, in a subtle but profoundly real sense, the system is a paper tiger. Since the power of the modern imperial system depends necessarily on various alliances of self-interest as well as the perception of its support for classically liberal ideals, if enough people, and people in the right places, refuse to be intimidated, or expose its nature, the system must make concessions, and make the world perhaps a little better.
This possibility of piecewise progress exists in all corners of the system, at most times. Here, then, is where our hope must be for the future. It will be a long battle indeed, and we must be prepared for the entire duration.
submitted by BobK72 to conspiracy_commons [link] [comments]

I'm making a video targeting right-wingers - Please critique and give feedback ASAP before I commit to recording? "Axiomatic Warfare and the Fatal Flaws of Modern Fascism"

[Video Essay Script] - Links will be used in video as images and segments. https://docs.google.com/document/d/12OX9TTfLhgNEfdDaMWfsHYyAMzTx9G7bSwu_0Ke1Ksc/edit?usp=sharing

Introduction to Modern Fascism

“Repeat a lie often enough and it becomes the truth”- Nazi Propagandists, Joseph Goebbels.

Axioms are our base assumptions about the world. They act as filters for new information coming into our consciousness.
In classic philosophy, an axiom is a statement that is so evident or well-established, that it is accepted without controversy or question. As used in modern logic, an axiom is a premise or starting point for reasoning.
We use these axiomatic assumptions to build our internal models of the world around us. They allow us to compare new information we receive from the outside with our internal narratives, which helps us to decide whether to reject or accept that new information. They are, for want of a better world, your "common sense" beliefs.
So how do you go about changing a relatively normal person's core beliefs and base assumptions to the point of rejecting their fellow citizens as traitors, committing acts of murderous terrorist or vigilante violence like Fascist white supremacists running down protesters in acts of terror, ISIS beheadings or mass genocide?

Shock Treatment and Slow Repetition

When I was a child I was subjected to regular mental and physical abuse from my dad. I would also see my mother repeatedly beaten up and then flee to a women's refuge where I would stay with her.
Each time my mom left, whenever I visited my dad at weekends, he would constantly try to pressure and manipulate me into convincing my mom to get back together with him.
This never worked of course. But what it did do, is make me highly sensitive to manipulation techniques.
I was fascinated by people like the magician Derren Brown and the economist Naomi Klein - who both reveal the tricks of the trade used in the advertising and marketing industries to convince people.
One way of changing people into killing machines or obedient sheep is through a big shock to the system, like how electroshock therapy allows for a clean slate to rebuild peoples intern mental models.
Psychedelics are another way, having a similar effect in the brain. Encouraged by the alt right and alt-light influencers like Jordan Peterson and Rebel Wisdom as they try to “Red Pill” people (an expression taken from the film The Matrix as a metaphor for revealing revealing the truth about the world).
They use this shock and disorientation as a way to prepare a “blank-slate” in order to rebuild peoples internal axiomatic models with different core beliefs.
Remaking people by shocking them into obedience and gas-lighting them about their existing internal models, making them seem irrational, silly or outdated. Reducing them to a mental state of a child and then rebuilding them with a new ideology and worldview, known as “shock therapy”.
As Naomi Klein explains in The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism, these techniques work on larger scales with use of trauma and shock to influence political outcomes has been used since at least Milton Friedman coined the term “Economic Shock Treatment”. He advised that politicians push through painful and unpopular policies all at once during a time of crisis, before people could regain their footing.
The technique is used in economic markets on the large scale, and also against individuals on a small scale with individuals too. Economics and politics is just human interaction on a larger scale, after all.
Regular repetition and gentle suggestions of ideas can also instil new axiomatic models and core beliefs into people's minds. As Derren Brown demonstrates how powerful subtly suggestions can be alone, without the need for hypnosis, shocks or drugs.
But used in combination, shock and repetition can shift people until they have moved their positions, perceptions and beliefs about the world, to a place they could never have imagined.
But luckily once you deconstruct the deception and understand how the trick works, the illusion falls apart.

Defining and Deconstructing Modern Fascism

Firstly, we must define Modern Fascism. Modern Fascism ticks every box of the traditional definitions in Umberto Eco’s essay Ur-Fascism, and not only does it fulfil every criteria, it reveals other motivational forces and has evolved to include new aspects, and has changed into something worse, while it’s main weakness remain the same - the fact that it is primarily motivated by weakness.
As General Franco said in a 1938 interview with Henri Massis: "Fascism presents, wherever it manifests itself, characteristics which are varied to the extent that countries and national temperaments vary. It is essentially a defensive reaction of the organism, a manifestation of the desire to live, of the desire not to die, which at certain times seizes a whole people. So each people reacts in its own way, according to its conception of life… What can it have in common with Hitlerism, which was, above all, a reaction against the state of things created by the defeat, and by the abdication and the despair that followed it?"
This quote perfectly illustrates the transient nature of the ideology, but also the core motivations of Fascism. It is an ideology based on the assumption of weakness which yearns for restoration of a past greatness or to get revenge and recognition. But the way that it manifests itself is different in each place it takes hold.
Therefore the aim of this isn’t to make the case that any particular party or country has embraced out-right fascism (plenty of other people have made that case already), the aim is to reveal the underlying motivations, highlight threats and weaknesses and analyse the less obvious negative effects of Modern Fascism.

History Doesn’t Repeat, But It Rhymes

A false equivalence that is often used is that Liberal Imperialism is just the same as Fascism. And while it is true that imperialists use fascist dictators to extract cheap labour and resources and also dominate smaller counties in a similar way to how fascist empires aspire to rule, the key difference is that the populations of those countries are not gripped by the same fear based delusions.
And therefore more Liberal democracies are better equipped to hold their imperial position of power long term because they are better able to assess risks and react accordingly, rather than over-react based on paranoia and competing egos under excessive pressure.
This false equivalence was also used in 1930’s Germany, because far-left Communists had been co opted and infiltrated by Fascists. They would repeat the mantra that “the Social Democrats were the real racists”.
Contrary to the assumptions of most people, Fascism, as an ideology and political system of government is very distinct to white supremacy. It does of course include white supremecists, but In fact includes many other groups who have been co-opted by Fascist propaganda, or who implicitly support and enable their agenda.
Examples of modern opposition which has been repeatedly infiltrated or just simply made up by Fascists include innumerable conspiracy theories, police groups like Blue Lives Matter, militant Black nationalists, the Boogaloo movement who call for a race war, the “Proud Boys” and even sometimes supposed Anarchists, far-left Communists and Left Accelerationists.

Motivations of Fascism

Fascism distilled down to its core reason for existing is the suppression of opposition who represent workers rights and economic justice. So they patently DON’T look after their own people. They con them into submission of the state by generating jingoistic fear of “the other” - whoever is convenient on that day to blame for their problems.
Fascism is is an economic shock doctrine upon the inhabitants of the country. We don't spread fascist propaganda in tip-pot dictators because we care about the indiginous people there. We install Fascist dictators in order to remove workers rights and open up access to their natural resources.
Artificial moral panics can be engineered and real disasters used to allow corrupt oligarchs and financial predators to consolidate power further by buying up small innovative businesses who don’t have the excess capital to survive the turmoil on their own without external support. Or as a way to eradicate public services by sabotaging them and building mistrust.
They are used to erode faith in public services and institutions by rich people who simply want to pay less tax and don’t see why they should subsidise other human beings who haven’t had the same luck as them. So a major motivation of fascism is to suppress the opposition left-wing party who represent workers rights and egalitarian freedoms.
Populists claim to be against free trade and to some extent they are, but whatever they do will fail because they are interfering with the markets, so they will retreat to the power of market domination. They use their threats of trade barriers as more just more shock treatment for markets, rather than protecting actual jobs or industries.
This is a trick that has been played by Neoliberals too. But while Neoliberals use fascism as a tool for opening markets to Imperialism, they differ from Libertarians, not only because they embrace guns and weed, but they are starting from different positions to achieve the same goal;
Neoliberals seek to remove already existing public services and workers rights that lift bargaining power. But Libertarians want to STOP the government from ever providing those services and investments into the poor or enshrining workers rights.

Modern Fascist Ideology has TWO Core Reasons to Exist; Fear and Freed.

I have been researching and analysing how economic systems differ, using a SWOT analysis (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threads). For each economic system I tried to be as neutral, fair and balanced as possible - which included Fascism.
I might seem strange that someone who is anti-Fascist would want to explore the strenghts and opportunities of Fascist ideologies, but in doing so it reveals the real weaknesses and threats which are too important for us to ignore.
So what exactly IS Fascism? Is it just an economic doctrine or a personal philosophy about the world? The answer is both.
The ideology has TWO core reasons to exist, and TWO distinct audiences types - with one based primarily on fear and the other greed, with each having a malignant and symbiotic relationship with each other.
Fear - Authoritarian/Conservative Fascists
Greed - Libertarian Fascists
There are very few people who actually buy into full Fascist ideology, most believe a watered down version of which resembles Conservatism or right-wing populism or accelerationism, and most of them genuinely believe they aren’t fascist, even though they are being constantly fed subtle suggestions fascist ideology or that align with their plans.
But the most ironic thing is that these groups are mostly being used by the second group of rich Libertarians globalist elites pulling a confidence trick on the host nation. Often posing “anti-establishment” conspiracists who actually uphold the establishment through misinformation. See: Russia Today and Youtube Bitcoin and Gold shills who subtly suggest fascist talking points.
With those rich Libertarians at the top more than happy for those below them, who they deem less worthy, living in even more delusional ideologies with fake enemies to fear, often resembling traditional Christian but values wrapped in modern conspiracies with added elements of “satanic panic”.
Modern Fascism has clearly inspired the modern day equivalents of Brownshirts and Blackshirts, self-styled vigilantes like QAnon, The Proud Boys and “The Boogaloo” - white nationalist violent extremists who want to accelerate towards a full-on race war.
It has also infiltrated numerous alternative groups, such as hyper-evangelical “end times” cults, alternative health scenes, internet conspiracy scenes like flat earth and occult magic.

Lockdown Conspiracies

A commonly missing hallmark of fascism that is present in history during the rise of fascism is a controlled opposition and explicit suppression of opposition. This distorts a healthy society and has unforeseen consequences and blowback.
Fantasies and political thought bubbles are self delusional custom realities resembling an episode of Black Mirror. They act as coping and escape mechanisms. Especially during the Covid 19 lock-down, these tendencies have gone into overdrive with massive events entering the real world featuring David Ike leading protesters alongside fascists as people ignore rising Fascism, climate change destruction and Covid deaths tolls.
Using disasters like Covid or irrational scare tactics such as the "Satanic Panic" style Fascist propaganda from QAnon, can shock people using their fear and disgust response, while making them distrust the news - allowing the government to evade valid criticism from experts while suggesting to people that government public services are inherently evil or Communist.
This type of propaganda is a Libertarians wet dream - making a population not only give up on tax funded public services, but actively fear them. An example is Trump trying to discredit and defund the US Postal Service and other public institutions and regulatory bodies.
Anti Semitism has been used throughout history by those in power to provoke an “us vs. them” mentality, leading to today's establishment still sanctioning and allowing Qanon on major media platforms, provoking and agitating terrorist attackers from the far-left and the far-right.
Those in power in fascist regimes allow and encourage mistrust in the mainstream media, while the long-tail niche political and interest groups keep people separated from each other, who each live in their own custom realities while the real elites continue to dominate and increase their power.
With each bubble framing realities based of identity, race, class, nationality, or even subculture special interests like alternative medicine and “gamer bro” culture, so that when they interact in real life or online, they are speaking past each other because they don’t even agree on the basic principles of how they view society.

The Fatal Flaws of Living in a Fantasy

While the main flaws and weaknesses of Fascism remain the same, they are in-fact exacerbated by this new hybrid model. It’s main weakness is the very fact that it is motivated by weaknesses, fear and greed - rather than true strength, self-confidence or heroic benevolent power, as their adherents like to believe.
A misconception of fascists themselves that it is based on strength, when it is actually based on weakness - even when the driving force is greed rather than fear. Libertarian fascists want to extract labour and materials at cheaper prices, while inflating their own asset values.
In other words; international financiers with little allegiance to any country. Ironically the very type of people who Conservative fascists claim to be opposed to.
Fascism claims to make society more successful, but it actually accelerates the destruction of the culture, country or people, rather than preserving and conserving it, because it betrays a fundamental weakness of insecurity. Competitors and rivals can easily see through the charade of and take advantage.
If anything does the exact opposite. Russian and China are clearly goading Western nations into becoming more divided and totalitarian, as they themselves benefit from becoming more Liberal and open and reap the competitive advantages that brings. See Kraut’s excellent video about Trump on China as an example.
Keynesian investment in the country and people, giving workers more rights, opportunities and a more bargaining power is what makes a country successful and innovative, rather than the faux Keynesian policy of giving kickbacks to corrupt officials for government contracts and widening inequality by supporting the already rich, rather than the ordinary people.

Who Benefits in This Memetic War?

Who is going to war with who? Who is winning? A modern adage is that tankies are just fascists because of their support of authoritarian proto-fascist leaders and regimes who often claim to be Communist.
But from my experience talking to actual fascists, they crave a more multi-polar world where other strong leaders rise up as competition and form alliances with dictators.
So to me, it looks like Fascists are the real Tankies; wishing our enemies be stronger and wanting to accelerate towards race war or civil war that weakens the society.
Not only did Donald Trump have knowledge of Russia allowing ISIS bounties on US troops and withhold that from the public while courting Putin, I have personally heard white supremacists backing extremists Islamists in Discord servers.
Trump jumped to the defense of the people who put a 17 year old with a gun against civil rights protesters and assumed the intent before saying that the outcome should be decided by the legal system.
They share common values and beliefs like Anti Semitism, accelerationist end-times fantasies, patriarchal traditional values and a fear of outside progressive cultures. In fact modern extremists white supremecist groups share recruitment and terrorist strategies and tactics with militant islamists.
You could argue that it was inflicted by Russian or Imperialist propagandists onto the German people in order to take control of larger areas of Europe after the destabilisation of war.
Hitler and Stalin came to a non agression truce called The Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact, which as was a secret non-aggression pact between Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union that enabled those two powers to partition Poland between them.
The pact, signed in Moscow on 23 August 1939 by German Foreign Minister Joachim von Ribbentrop and Soviet Foreign Minister Vyacheslav Molotov was officially known as the Treaty of Non-Aggression between Germany and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.
They divided Poland under the banner of fighting “Polish Fascism” nearly a century ago with both sides ultimately lying to their own people about spreading freedom while being authoritarian to their core and being able to blame “the other” as being the cause of all their problems.
But these days fascism seems to be a rogue meme that no longer serves any particular group. It is pathologically damaging to any society that it happens to grip.
Even the aforementioned Libertarians and accelerationists who think they are benefiting are only temporarily gaining by market price volatility. They ultimately lose through the blowback effect of the whirlpool they create.

Psychopathy, Alienation Nihilism and Insecurity

It is well established that Fascist dictators are driven by psychopathic characters and tendencies. They either don’t care about the truth, or disregard it if it’s not convenient to their narrative.
In totalitarian despotic societies facts are reversed. As George Orwell proclaimed throughout his writings; “War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength.”.
Similar to how authoritarian Starlinist Communists harnessed people’s alienation and tricked them into thinking that it’s possible for the state to fully decommodify everything without having markets, money to account for things, domination or hierarchy or try to convince people that a revolution is just around the corner.
But of course, a council representative is still the head of an organisation, for all intents and purposes, because they wield executive power over others, even if the name has changed. Markets are emergent properties when groups of humans want or need a certain commodity when it becomes available.
But while both Communist and Fascist ideologies are based on lies that harness peoples alienation, fear and envy, Fascism is also especially to the weak. It is attractive to those who want to be strong again (or were never to begin with), or those who want to have a strong leader to help them.
Fascism betrays to others the inherent weakness. Like the insecure kid in school who lashes out - others around can see that it is because of their own insecurity which makes them appear even weaker. Fascism is a psychopathy driven by insecurity.
When people become so absorbed in an ideology there is a phenomena of people to self identify as an actual ideology? This produces a phenomena called Identity Protective Cognition, where people's self worth becomes attached to a belief system or ideology. So that when new information contradicts their worldview it is seen as an attack on the person themselves.
Therefore irrational, emotional quick fix thinking is the default when there is too much pressure and they feel attacked. They no longer use their slow effortful reflective thinking. (See Daniel Kahneman - Thinking, Fast and Slow)
This approach has parallels in evolutionary biology, in which a central issue is the ability to adapt to changing environments. Competency - over-competitiveness in management causes chaos which STOPS hierarchies of competence. (Insert video clips of Sapolsky on Chaos vs Reductionism etc. timestamps linked).
Fascists try to reduce variability in culture and outcomes - causes weakness of less adaptability - because as Sapolsky explains, the variability is not just noise in that type of system CAS (Complex Adaptive Systems) - the variability IS the system. It is fractal and scale free. The noise and variability is an intrinsic part of the system.
But the system doesn’t function properly when the agreed-upon parameters that individuals believe to be true aren’t universal enough to have any form of group coherence.
Birds and swarms of animals can produce amazing complex phenomena, which are greater than the sum of their individual parts. There is a “network effect” once a certain threshold and certain conditions and rules are met.
These rules can be very simple, like repulsion or attraction, or staying a certain distance apart while traveling in a similar direction, but collectively they create patterns that emerge with complexity and I dear say, a certain amount of beauty.
So what happens when millions of people are being brainwashed and misled by cults that are leaving them with a reduced ability to make decisions?
Giving them shit-for-brains just so that some rich people at the top can pay a few percentage less tax? That is the sign of a deeply sick system that cannot continue to function effectively. It is sick on so many levels.

Emergence, Complexity and Human Evolution - A Social-Biological Analysis

The problem with viewing the world through only one lens of analysis (or bucket of knowledge) is that you can fall into unnecessarily reductive thinking. (Sapolsky clips)
I describe myself as a philosophical anarchist. Which does NOT mean I want total chaos and disorder - it means I want the optimal solution to emerge - including the influences and experiences from the bottom-up.
I also think that a bottom-up (or anarchist) lens of analysis is necessary for society to run cohesively in an optimal state. If it is repressed it distorts the overall picture of reality for everyone - similar to a CEO that doesn’t listen to employees and workers on the ground.
I interpret as constantly holding authority to account - to justify its existence and reason for dominating others. I also believe it is every citizen's responsibility to hold authority to account. This would be necessary under ANY economic system or society.
Anarchists also believe in stigmenric, rhizomatic action to make the world better, organically, not from a top-down authority, which fascism seeks to instill on society.
Human beings are collectively parts of a bigger chaotic but stable system known as a CAS (Complex Adaptive System). CAS’s are chaotic systems that can reach periodic steady states of equilibrium.
As Professor Sapolsky explains, humans uniquely exist with a mixture of both communal and individualistic tendencies; known in the scientific world as Tournament vs. pair bonding.
All the evidence suggests that this tendency has greatly improved our success as a species. But those tendencies distorted too far one way or another lead to pathologies and the worst collective misdeeds and wars.
Because as Professor Sapolsky also explains in his brilliant lecture series (which I have condensed the pertinent parts of into a 4 part YouTube video) about CAS; the signals coming from the randomness is being suppressed or repressed, it interferes with the functioning of the system.
Pressure in the system makes the patterns more complex but at a certain point of increasing pressure in the complex system, it stops being linear and the doubling of patterns and periodicity totally stops. Order completely begins to break down because of the butterfly effect.
Fascist regimes fettishise order and rigidity but in a complex adaptive system, the noise IS the phenomena, not a byproduct to be discarded, ignored or repressed.
The majority of people on the right genuinely want to help society by bringing order, using top-down draconian measures if necessary. Whereas the left generally wants to help society by proactively building from the bottom up.
I think both of these approaches are necessary to be balanced properly for a healthy functioning society to emerge.
It seems our tendency to harness both traits and to focus intently on one or the other is our greatest collective strength, while also being our greatest weakness.
And similarly, on an individual level I believe our greatest strengths and weakness are the fact that our brains work efficiently by categorising information to filter out the unimportant bits that slow us down.
As the book by Daniel Kahneman - Thinking, Fast and Slow, brilliantly explains, slow deliberate, consideration thinking takes energy and time, so our brains developed filters which come out as biases. This is an inherent weakness of the human brain.
Now imagine the butterfly effect on the life of just one person who is influenced by the brainworms of QAnon cults or conspiracies which distorts their internal models of the world which they use to filter information about the world
The sad and shocking stories on forums like QanonCasualties show the devastating effects on their close friends, family and work life - amplified by their ever increasingly disconnected lives. (insert Flat earther clip - zoom in on idiot rolling head)
Now scale that up to the level of a whole of a society, a country, or the world? This is a collective madness to cope with and avoid the reality facing us as a species.
Only collective action with agreed basic facts to work from will do to avoid the total descent into actual chaos and destruction.

TLDR; Conclusion and Final Thoughts

In this essay I will have put forward the case for the following four key arguments being true and I have present supporting evidence to explain the logical reasoning for why our current definitions need updating and the threat levels reassed, from a non-hysterical but critical perspective. The overall claims I made are:
  1. Modern Fascism has taken over right-wing populism and bears all the hallmarks of early 20th Century Fascist ideologies.
  2. The ideology has two main reasons to exist, and two distinct audiences which both have a symbiotic, pathological relationship with each other.
  3. The main flaws and weaknesses of fascist ideology remain the same as ever - that fascism is motivated by irrational fears, greed and self deception.
  4. Modern Fascism has major unforeseen damaging consequences for individuals, governments, organisational dynamics, and society at large.
This reality is something I think a lot of fascists, ultra-nationalists and people who have been influenced by the propaganda know deep down on some level already - that they are avoiding the realities of pandemics and ecological harms of ignoring science and reality as it is.
They ignore it because fantasies are simpler to understand. And a narrative based on fear of the other is a simpler way to to process a complex world.
It is also attractive to the part of us that is drawn to conflict and drama - that hunger for something genuinely interesting to happen.
But I would argue from my experience that the beautiful complexity of life in all it’s shades of grey is much more interesting, fun and genuinely fulfilling to understand and engage in, even if it might be harder to deal with and even harder to explain.
I believe doing so is also vital for the very survival of our species - we can no longer afford to live in a fantasy, we need to collectively take responsibility for the world as it exists in reality.
Thank you to my two Patrons:
Carmen Jongepier
E.V. Roske
Original Script on Patreon
submitted by Upper-Range to BreadTube [link] [comments]

Why we need to think more carefully about what money is and how it works

Most of us have overlooked a fundamental problem that is currently causing an insurmountable obstacle to building a fairer and more sustainable world. We are very familiar with the thing in question, but its problematic nature has been hidden from us by a powerful illusion. We think the problem is capitalism, but capitalism is just the logical outcome of aggregate human decisions about how to manage money. The fundamental problem is money itself, or more specifically general purpose money and the international free market which allows you to sell a chunk of rainforest and use the money to buy a soft drink factory. (You can use the same sort of money to sell anything and buy anything, anywhere in the world, and until recently there was no alternative at all. Bitcoin is now an alternative, but is not quite what we are looking for.) The illusion is that because market prices are free, and nobody is forced into a transaction, those prices must be fair – that the exchange is equitable. The truth is that the way the general money globalised free market system works means that even though the prices are freely determined, there is still an unequal flow of natural resources from poor parts of the world to rich parts. This means the poor parts will always remain poor, and resources will continue to accumulate in the large, unsustainable cities in rich countries. In other words, unless we re-invent money, we cannot overturn capitalism, and that means we can't build a sustainable civilisation.
Why does this matter? What use is it realising that general purpose money is at the root of our problems when we know that the rich and powerful people who run this world will do everything in their power to prevent the existing world system being reformed? They aren't just going to agree to get rid of general purpose money and economic globalisation. It's like asking them to stop pursuing growth: they can't even imagine how to do it, and don't want to. So how does this offer us a way forwards?
Answer: because the two things in question – our monetary system and globalisation – look like being among the first casualties of collapse. Globalisation is already going into reverse (see brexit, Trump's protectionism) and our fiat money system is heading towards a debt/inflation implosion.
It looks highly likely that the scenario going forwards will be of increasing monetary and economic chaos. Fiat money systems have collapsed many times before, but never a global system of fiat currencies floating against each other. But regardless of how may fiat currencies collapse, or how high the price of gold goes in dollars, it is not clear what the system would be replaced with. Can we just go back to the gold standard? It is possible, but people will be desperately looking for other solutions, and the people in power might also be getting desperate.
So what could replace it? What is needed is a new sort of complementary money system which both
(a) addresses the immediate economic problems of people suffering from symptoms of economic and general collapse and
(b) provides a long-term framework around which a new sort of economy can emerge – an economy which is adapted to deglobalisation and degrowth.
I have been searching for answers to this question for some time, and have now found what I was looking for. It is explained in this recently published academic book, and this paper by the same professor of economic anthropology (Alf Hornborg). The answer is the creation of a new sort of money, but it is critically important exactly how this is done. Local currencies like the Bristol Pound do not challenge globalisation. What we need is a new sort of national currency. This currency would be issued as a UBI, but only usable to buy products and services originating within an adjustable radius. This would enable a new economy to emerge. It actually resists globalisation and promotes the growth of a new sort of economy where sustainability is built on local resources and local economic activity. It would also reverse the trend of population moving from poor rural areas and towns, to cities. It would revitalise the “left behind” parts of the western world, and put the brakes on the relentless flow of natural resources and “embodied cheap labour” from the poor parts of the world to the rich parts. It would set the whole system moving towards a more sustainable and fairer state.
This may sound unrealistic, but please give it a chance. I believe it offers a way forwards that can
(a) unite disparate factions trying to provoke systemic change, including eco-marxists, greens, posthumanists and anti-globalist supporters of “populist nationalism”. The only people who really stand to lose are the supporters of global big business and the 1%.
(b) offers a realistic alternative to a money system heading towards collapse, and to which currently no other realistic alternative is being proposed.
In other words, this offers a realistic way forwards not just right now but through much of the early stages of collapse. It is likely to become both politically and economically viable within the forseeable future. It does, though, require some elements of the left to abandon its globalist ideals. It will have to embrace a new sort of nationalism. And it will require various groups who are doing very well out of the current economic system to realise that it is doomed.
Here is an FAQ (from the paper).
What is a complementary currency? It is a form of money that can be used alongside regular money.
What is the fundamental goal of this proposal? The two most fundamental goals motivating this proposal are to insulate local human subsistence and livelihood from the vicissitudes of national and international economic cycles and financial speculation, and to provide tangible and attractive incentives for people to live and consume more sustainably. It also seeks to provide authorities with a means to employ social security expenditures to channel consumption in sustainable directions and encourage economic diversity and community resilience at the local level.
Why should the state administrate the reform? The nation is currently the most encompassing political entity capable of administrating an economic reform of this nature. Ideally it is also subservient to the democratic decisions of its population. The current proposal is envisaged as an option for European nations, but would seem equally advantageous for countries anywhere. If successfully implemented within a particular nation or set of nations, the system can be expected to be emulated by others. Whereas earlier experiments with alternative currencies have generally been local, bottom-up initiatives, a state-supported program offers advantages for long-term success. Rather than an informal, marginal movement connected to particular identities and transient social networks, persisting only as long as the enthusiasm of its founders, the complementary currency advocated here is formalized, efficacious, and lastingly fundamental to everyone's economy.
How is local use defined and monitored? The complementary currency (CC) can only be used to purchase goods and services that are produced within a given geographical radius of the point of purchase. This radius can be defined in terms of kilometers of transport, and it can vary between different nations and regions depending on circumstances. A fairly simple way of distinguishing local from non-local commodities would be to label them according to transport distance, much as is currently done regarding, for instance, organic production methods or "fair trade." Such transport certification would of course imply different labelling in different locales.
How is the complementary currency distributed? A practical way of organizing distribution would be to provide each citizen with a plastic card which is electronically charged each month with the sum of CC allotted to him or her.
Who are included in the category of citizens? A monthly CC is provided to all inhabitants of a nation who have received official residence permits.
What does basic income mean? Basic income is distributed without any requirements or duties to be fulfilled by the recipients. The sum of CC paid to an individual each month can be determined in relation to the currency's purchasing power and to the individual's age. The guiding principle should be that the sum provided to each adult should be sufficient to enable basic existence, and that the sum provided for each child should correspond to the additional household expenses it represents.
Why would people want to use their CC rather than regular money? As the sum of CC provided each month would correspond to purchases representing a claim on his or her regular budget, the basic income would liberate a part of each person's regular income and thus amount to substantial purchasing power, albeit restricted only to local purchases. The basic income in CC would reduce a person's dependence on wage labor and the risks currently associated with unemployment. It would encourage social cooperation and a vitalization of community.
Why would businesses want to accept payment in CC? Business entrepreneurs can be expected to respond rapidly to the radically expanded demand for local products and services, which would provide opportunities for a diverse range of local niche markets. Whether they receive all or only a part of their income in the form of CC, they can choose to use some of it to purchase tax-free local labor or other inputs, and to request to have some of it converted by the authorities to regular currency (see next point).
How is conversion of CC into regular currency organized? Entrepreneurs would be granted the right to convert some of their CC into regular currency at exchange rates set by the authorities.The exchange rate between the two currencies can be calibrated so as to compensate the authorities for loss of tax revenue and to balance the in- and outflows of CC to the state. The rate would thus amount to a tool for determining the extent to which the CC is recirculated in the local economy, or returned to the state. This is important in order to avoid inflation in the CC sector.
Would there be interest on sums of CC owned or loaned? There would be no interest accruing on a sum of CC, whether a surplus accumulating in an account or a loan extended.
How would saving and loaning of CC be organized? The formal granting of credit in CC would be managed by state authorities and follow the principle of full reserve banking, so that quantities of CC loaned would never exceed the quantities saved by the population as a whole.
Would the circulation of CC be subjected to taxation? No.
Why would authorities want to encourage tax-free local economies? Given the beneficial social and ecological consequences of this reform, it is assumed that nation states will represent the general interests of their electorates and thus promote it. Particularly in a situation with rising fiscal deficits, unemployment, health care, and social security expenditures, the proposed reform would alleviate financial pressure on governments. It would also reduce the rising costs of transport infrastructure, environmental protection, carbon offsetting, and climate change adaptation. In short, the rising costs and diminishing returns on current strategies for economic growth can be expected to encourage politicians to consider proposals such as this, as a means of avoiding escalating debt or even bankruptcy.
How would the state's expenditures in CC be financed? As suggested above, much of these expenditures would be balanced by the reduced costs for social security, health care, transport infrastructure, environmental protection, carbon offsetting, and climate change adaptation. As these savings may take time to materialize, however, states can choose to make a proportion of their social security payments (pensions, unemployment insurance, family allowance, etc.) in the form of CC. As between a third and half of some nations' annual budgets are committed to social security, this represents a significant option for financing the reform, requiring no corresponding tax levies.
What are the differences between this CC and the many experiments with local currencies? This proposal should not be confused with the notion, or with the practical operation, of local currencies, as it does not imply different currencies in different locales but one national,complementary currency for local use. Nor is it locally initiated and promoted in opposition to theregular currency, but centrally endorsed and administrated as an accepted complement to it. Most importantly, the alternative currency can only be used to purchase products and services originating from within a given geographical range, a restriction which is not implemented in experiments with Local Exchange Trading Systems (LETS). Finally, the CC is provided as a basic income to all residents of a nation, rather than only earned in proportion to the extent to which a person has made him- or herself useful in the local economy.
What would the ecological benefits be? The reform would radically reduce the demand for long-distance transport, the production of greenhouse gas emissions, consumption of energy and materials, and losses of foodstuffs through overproduction, storage, and transport. It would increase recycling of nutrients and packaging materials, which means decreasing leakage of nutrients and less garbage. It would reduce agricultural intensification, increase biodiversity, and decrease ecological degradation and vulnerability.
What would the societal benefits be? The reform would increase local cooperation, decrease social marginalization and addiction problems, provide more physical exercise, improve psycho-social and physical health, and increase food security and general community resilience. It would decrease the number of traffic accidents, provide fresher and healthier food with less preservatives, and improved contact between producers and consumers.
What would the long-term consequences be for the economy? The reform would no doubt generate radical transformations of the economy, as is precisely the intention. There would be a significant shift of dominance from transnational corporations founded on financial speculation and trade in industrially produced foodstuffs, fuels, and other internationally transported goods to locally diverse producers and services geared to sustainable livelihoods. This would be a democratic consequence of consumer power, rather than of legislation. Through a relatively simple transformation of the conditions for market rationality, governments can encourage new and more sustainable patterns of consumer behavior. In contrast to much of the drastic and often traumatic economic change of the past two centuries, these changes would be democratic and sustainable and would improve local and national resilience.
Why should society want to encourage people to refrain from formal employment? It is increasingly recognized that full or high employment cannot be a goal in itself, particularly if it implies escalating environmental degradation and energy and material throughput. Well-founded calls are thus currently made for degrowth, i.e. a reduction in the rate of production of goods and services that are conventionally quantified by economists as constitutive of GDP. Whether formal unemployment is the result of financial decline, technological development, or intentional policy for sustainability, no modern nation can be expected to leave its citizens economically unsupported. To subsist on basic income is undoubtedly more edifying than receiving unemployment insurance; the CC system encourages useful community cooperation and creative activities rather than destructive behavior that may damage a person's health.
Why should people receive an income without working? As observed above, modern nations will provide for their citizens whether they are formally employed or not. The incentive to find employment should ideally not be propelled only by economic imperatives, but more by the desire to maintain a given identity and to contribute creatively to society. Personal liberty would be enhanced by a reform which makes it possible for people to choose to spend (some of) their time on creative activities that are not remunerated on the formal market, and to accept the tradeoff implied by a somewhat lower economic standard. People can also be expected to devote a greater proportion of their time to community cooperation, earning additional CC, which means that they will contribute more to society – and experience less marginalization – than the currently unemployed.
Would savings in CC be inheritable? No.
How would transport distances of products and services be controlled? It is reasonable to expect the authorities to establish a special agency for monitoring and controlling transport distances. It seems unlikely that entrepreneurs would attempt to cheat the system by presenting distantly produced goods as locally produced, as we can expect income in regular currency generally to be preferable to income in CC. Such attempts would also entail transport costs which should make the cargo less competitive in relation to genuinely local produce, suggesting that the logic of local market mechanisms would by and large obviate the problem.
How would differences in local conditions (such as climate, soils, and urbanism) be dealt with?It is unavoidable that there would be significant variation between different locales in terms of the conditions for producing different kinds of goods. This means that relative local prices in CC for agiven product can be expected to vary from place to place. This may in turn mean that consumption patterns will vary somewhat between locales, which is predictable and not necessarily a problem. Generally speaking, a localization of resource flows can be expected to result in a more diverse pattern of calibration to local resource endowments, as in premodern contexts. The proposed system allows for considerable flexibility in terms of the geographical definition of what is categorized as local, depending on such conditions. In a fertile agricultural region, the radius for local produce may be defined, for instance, as 20 km, whereas in a less fertile or urban area, it may be 50 km. People living in urban centers are faced with a particular challenge. The reform would encourage an increased production of foodstuffs within and in the vicinity of urban areas, which in the long run may also affect urban planning. People might also choose to move to the countryside, where the range of subsistence goods that can be purchased with CC will tend to be greater. In the long run, the reform can be expected to encourage a better fit between the distribution of resources (such as agricultural land) and demography. This is fully in line with the intention of reducing long-distance transports of necessities.
What would the consequences be if people converted resources from one currency sphere into products or services sold in another? It seems unfeasible to monitor and regulate the use of distant imports (such as machinery and fuels) in producing produce for local markets, but as production for local markets is remunerated in CC, this should constitute a disincentive to invest regular money in such production processes. Production for local consumption can thus be expected to rely mostly – and increasingly – on local labor and other resource inputs.

submitted by anthropoz to sustainability [link] [comments]

Freebay AG

Jesus H. Christ, I nearly fell hook, line and sinker for what appears to be an innocuous triangle on the surface but is actually a lording pyramid in truth.

On Monday my friend who happens to be a semi-pro sportsman with his eyes on the financial freedom dream you see in YouTube ads rocks up to my house. He's parked outside and reckons to me, "dude, are you keen to go to a board game thing where you learn how to manage your finances?"
I'm usually against financial preaching and stuff because it usually sounds hokey and bullshit, but against my better judgement I cave in and we go. The whole ride there he's telling me about this amazing mentor that's going to make me learn about making money without any effort, a dude I'm going to call James. Now James is a charming, well-off guy with a family. He doesn't quite have the YouTube millionaire lifestyle that you usually expect in this sort of 'profession' but I'd happily trade places with him if the opportunity presented itself.

Anyhow, from moment one, James and my friend are mouthing off incessantly about how much money they're making on Freebay. Mind you, I'm oblivious to what the fuck is going on because I don't understand what's cracking - but literally the whole time there's graphs on a screen, and they're talking about these magical AI bots that guarantee returns on investment. Now this is South Africa, and these blokes are talking about making something like 10 000 USD in a month!? Do you know that 10 000 USD in South Africa is like enough to pay for an entire undergraduate degree at the best university in the country, and these geezers are making this shit in a month? Fucking hell.

Anyhow, we digress from the discussion about Bitcoin and that to get to the meat and potatoes of the meet-up, which was to play that Cashflow game that that bloke who wrote Rich Dad Poor Dad formulated. Before we got to playing the game we had this zoom webinar with fellow victims... I mean participants, and they're all monotonously droning on with a despondent stare the same principles from this book that's supposed to be the Bible to financial freedom. There's a charismatic bloke leading the charge and the whole thing feels eerily reminiscent to a cult, in retrospect. You see, in the moment I'm eating all of this shit up about how wealth is a mindset and what not, and when I consider the conversation that was had around me just before the webinar - I saw two positive blokes trusting in this 'company' or whatever and seeing clear cut returns. Maybe they're right, maybe they're onto something. We play this game and that's all I'm thinking about: passive income, wealth, financial freedom - FREEBAY.

After the game, I'm sat talking to this James bloke, his missus and my mate. They're apparently all on this Freebay tip making stacks of foreign cash that doesn't get taxed by the government, and now they're sizing me up. I tell them I'm a small-time writer in uni studying to become a teacher. They tell me that I can exponentially increase my earning potential by watching the link to video that my friend had sent to me during the webinar, and then by opting into a 190 EUR package... the same things I running through my mind: passive income, wealth, financial freedom - FREE FUCKING BAY.

And then I go home, ruminate over the whole thing and begin my research. The whole thing? A facade. Apparently, this Freebay shit was being run under the name of some other pyramid/ponzi-esque cryptocurrency racket called Karatbay and people got fucking conned out of hundreds of thousands of dollars. Suddenly, I realise from the website that they posture themselves as 'affiliate marketers' or whatever in an attempt to hide in plain sight. What's worse is that when I play the sequence of events back in my mind from the beginning when my friend randomly rocked up to my house, the whole thing felt like an entire fucking rat trap and I nearly fell for it too. What blows is that my buddy is balls deep in the pyramid and he's blinded by the illusion that he'll find wealth with these people. He's on the prowl for every friend, family member and acquaintance he can get his hands on and it sucks to see him acting this way.

I just thought I'd share my story. Always be on the lookout guys, these motherfuckers are everywhere - try and save your buddies from this shite. Also, I just thought it'd be wise to mention the name FreeBay in any anti-MLM rhetoric you spew, because these people are predatory as hell.
submitted by milankundairy to antiMLM [link] [comments]

Going to War Against the Bitcoin Scam Industry

Going to War Against the Bitcoin Scam Industry

Considered by many the most revolutionary breakthrough of the 21st century, Bitcoin continues to surprise the world with its allure and resilience.
Launched in 2009 as a way to create a decentralized method of exchanging money, Bitcoin is by far the world’s biggest and most valuable cryptocurrency. It peaked at around $20,000 per coin in 2017 and today’s value is just under half that amount.
The Bitcoin Scam Industry
The rise of Bitcoin and the cryptocurrency industry it fathered has created great interest and attention over the last ten years. Nobody is certain as to the projection Bitcoin’s value will take over the medium-to-long term. This uncertainty, however, has not deterred investors from purchasing and trading the commodity.
Such interest and attention has unfortunately given rise to a number of criminal entities that seek to take advantage of innocent and unsuspecting victims through cybertheft and cryptocurrency fraud.
Recent investigations into the darker side of the cryptocurrency world have revealed that victims have been scammed out of an estimated $16.5 billion in digital currencies since 2011.
Types of Bitcoin Scams
The number of Bitcoin scams that have surfaced are too many to list. Hackers and scam artists continue to develop new ways to defraud their victims. New scams surface almost on a daily basis. Below are a few of the most notorious of these:
Fake Bitcoin Exchanges
The rise in popularity of Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies has created an increase in fake Bitcoin exchanges. These exchanges deceive their users by offering excellent market prices, giving the impression that the user has made a great investment. The user however, discovers later that the Bitcoin exchange is fake and the scammer has run off with the money.
Bitcoin Ponzi Schemes
Similar to mainstream investment scams, the scammer receives Bitcoins from new investors in order to settle accounts with previous investors. This inevitably results in the investors never receiving a return on their Bitcoin investment.
Fake Cryptocurrencies
A common scam is to release a new cryptocurrency to the market that promises to rival existing ones. The premise is that the time to invest successfully in existing cryptocurrencies has lapsed and that it would be a great investment idea to purchase a new up-and-coming cryptocurrency. This new cryptocurrency may be featured on a fresh, professional looking website. You can bet that it will exaggerate their client base. The purpose is to create a ‘fear of missing out’ illusion forcing victims to scramble to jump on board.
Malware
Using sophisticated techniques, scammers can access your wallet and deplete your funds if you do not have the required malware protection. Malware can be downloaded by clicking on links from unknown email sources, downloaded from the internet and social media, and elsewhere.
How to Avoid Getting Scammed
The best advice is to trust your instincts and go with the common wisdom that if something seems too good to be true, it probably is.
Other tips to protect yourself from Bitcoin fraud is to:

What to Do if You Have Been Scammed

If you have fallen victim to a cryptocurrency scam, send a complaint to at [[email protected]](mailto:[email protected]), and we will do our very best to get into contact with you as soon as we can to initiate your funds recovery process.

submitted by asaston to u/asaston [link] [comments]

Going to War Against the Bitcoin Scam Industry

Going to War Against the Bitcoin Scam Industry

Considered by many the most revolutionary breakthrough of the 21st century, Bitcoin continues to surprise the world with its allure and resilience.
Launched in 2009 as a way to create a decentralized method of exchanging money, Bitcoin is by far the world’s biggest and most valuable cryptocurrency. It peaked at around $20,000 per coin in 2017 and today’s value is just under half that amount.
The Bitcoin Scam Industry
The rise of Bitcoin and the cryptocurrency industry it fathered has created great interest and attention over the last ten years. Nobody is certain as to the projection Bitcoin’s value will take over the medium-to-long term. This uncertainty, however, has not deterred investors from purchasing and trading the commodity.
Such interest and attention has unfortunately given rise to a number of criminal entities that seek to take advantage of innocent and unsuspecting victims through cybertheft and cryptocurrency fraud.
Recent investigations into the darker side of the cryptocurrency world have revealed that victims have been scammed out of an estimated $16.5 billion in digital currencies since 2011.
Types of Bitcoin Scams
The number of Bitcoin scams that have surfaced are too many to list. Hackers and scam artists continue to develop new ways to defraud their victims. New scams surface almost on a daily basis. Below are a few of the most notorious of these:
Fake Bitcoin Exchanges
The rise in popularity of Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies has created an increase in fake Bitcoin exchanges. These exchanges deceive their users by offering excellent market prices, giving the impression that the user has made a great investment. The user however, discovers later that the Bitcoin exchange is fake and the scammer has run off with the money.
Bitcoin Ponzi Schemes
Similar to mainstream investment scams, the scammer receives Bitcoins from new investors in order to settle accounts with previous investors. This inevitably results in the investors never receiving a return on their Bitcoin investment.
Fake Cryptocurrencies
A common scam is to release a new cryptocurrency to the market that promises to rival existing ones. The premise is that the time to invest successfully in existing cryptocurrencies has lapsed and that it would be a great investment idea to purchase a new up-and-coming cryptocurrency. This new cryptocurrency may be featured on a fresh, professional looking website. You can bet that it will exaggerate their client base. The purpose is to create a ‘fear of missing out’ illusion forcing victims to scramble to jump on board.
Malware
Using sophisticated techniques, scammers can access your wallet and deplete your funds if you do not have the required malware protection. Malware can be downloaded by clicking on links from unknown email sources, downloaded from the internet and social media, and elsewhere.
How to Avoid Getting Scammed
The best advice is to trust your instincts and go with the common wisdom that if something seems too good to be true, it probably is.
Other tips to protect yourself from Bitcoin fraud is to:

What to Do if You Have Been Scammed
If you have fallen victim to a cryptocurrency scam, send a complaint to at [[email protected]](mailto:[email protected]), and we will do our very best to get into contact with you as soon as we can to initiate your funds recovery process.
submitted by asaston to u/asaston [link] [comments]

[ CryptoCurrency ] Supporting BTC is unethical

Topic originally posted in CryptoCurrency by buddykire [link]
Buttcoin is holding the entire crypto space back, so of course I´m a little salty. It´s literally making the world a worse place, and setting human progess back a few years. Such a shame that most people can´t see the bigger picture. Imagine if all the money, work and marketing spent on buttcoin, was actually spent on a coin with a future instead. Buttcoin is just gonna pump to some number, then dump right back down at some point, like what happened in 2018. Many people have killed themselves at the hands of buttcoin. Average guy gets phucked while the whales manipulate the market and become billionaires.
They talk about buttcoin like it has a bright future and will change the world, but this couldnt be further away from the truth. Yes, it has changed the world and it accomplished a lot as the first crypto. But it´s time to move on. If the human population had been smart enough, lets say some 200 IQ aliens came down to earth. They would shut off bitcoin immediately and build something better from scratch. These big exchages know that butcoin will eventually fail, but they unethically market it because they make a chitload of money on it. Promise unrealistic things to people that don´t know any better. People who have no idea of all the flaws of the system, or even how it works.
Crypto while great under the hood in some cases, is just the latest example of human greed and incompetence. Putting money before progress. Unable to see the bigger picture. What I´m looking for from the cypto community as a whole, is a confession that you are only in it for the money, nothing else. Thats it.
Buttcoin is decentralized money, and I get people want to diversify in uncertain times where fiat currency is on shaky ground, nothing wrong with that. But realize that btc has no long term future and will die, thats a fact. Just saying lol. Bitcoin made the world progress in the beginning, but it cannot carry the torch any further.
Whats gonna happen is bitcoin will pump and dump till it´s dead. A cycle of pump and dumps. Since it actually can never support mass adoption, it will never be more than a speculative asset first, traded on nothing but hope, lies and manipulation. Speaculation will always be the number one usecase, and not just any speculation, but specualtion based on an extremely manipulated market ruled by people who are not good people. Supporting bitcoin is pretty unethical in my book at least. Newbies go in with their life saving and they lose a lot of it because there are so many scams. And bitcoin makes these scams possible in the first place. Bitcoin not being mass adoped leaves room for shady actors to fill a gap of promise of a new mass adoption cryptocurrency. And thus the cicle continues. If another crypto already occupied that gap, and was the number one leader, there would be less scams, and people would be better educated.
I see very few people speaking about this, so I take it upon myself to be a person fighting the good fight in a sea full of bad actors. Bitcoin becoming this grand thing is an illusion and dream selling, nothing more. It is flawed in so any ways, it cannot succeed long term. Maybe even satoshi is a greedy prick since he still havent sold his massive stack. He is clinging onto his invention even tho it stands no chance. Or maybe he´s just not as bright as everyone thinks.
Btc might just fall back down when the stock market collapses again, and when the demand for dollars increases, or not. Who the hell knows. " The only thing I know for sure is that bitcoin will die" - Descartes.


Bottom line: If you support bitcoin you are part of the problem, not the solution. Your actions indireclty contribute to hinder innovation and keep humanity from making faster progress. By supporting bitcoin, you are also indirectly supporting all the scams in crypto that make people lose money. This is just a fact, take a look in the mirror. And atleast admit that you´re only here for the money, and that you dont give a shit about decentralization. Either you support it or you don´t.
buddykire your post has been copied because one or more comments in this topic have been removed. This copy will preserve unmoderated topic. If you would like to opt-out, please send a message using [this link].
[deleted comment]
submitted by anticensor_bot to u/anticensor_bot [link] [comments]

Supporting BTC is unethical

Buttcoin is holding the entire crypto space back, so of course I´m a little salty. It´s literally making the world a worse place, and setting human progess back a few years. Such a shame that most people can´t see the bigger picture. Imagine if all the money, work and marketing spent on buttcoin, was actually spent on a coin with a future instead. Buttcoin is just gonna pump to some number, then dump right back down at some point, like what happened in 2018. Many people have killed themselves at the hands of buttcoin. Average guy gets phucked while the whales manipulate the market and become billionaires.
They talk about buttcoin like it has a bright future and will change the world, but this couldnt be further away from the truth. Yes, it has changed the world and it accomplished a lot as the first crypto. But it´s time to move on. If the human population had been smart enough, lets say some 200 IQ aliens came down to earth. They would shut off bitcoin immediately and build something better from scratch. These big exchages know that butcoin will eventually fail, but they unethically market it because they make a chitload of money on it. Promise unrealistic things to people that don´t know any better. People who have no idea of all the flaws of the system, or even how it works.
Crypto while great under the hood in some cases, is just the latest example of human greed and incompetence. Putting money before progress. Unable to see the bigger picture. What I´m looking for from the cypto community as a whole, is a confession that you are only in it for the money, nothing else. Thats it.
Buttcoin is decentralized money, and I get people want to diversify in uncertain times where fiat currency is on shaky ground, nothing wrong with that. But realize that btc has no long term future and will die, thats a fact. Just saying lol. Bitcoin made the world progress in the beginning, but it cannot carry the torch any further.
Whats gonna happen is bitcoin will pump and dump till it´s dead. A cycle of pump and dumps. Since it actually can never support mass adoption, it will never be more than a speculative asset first, traded on nothing but hope, lies and manipulation. Speaculation will always be the number one usecase, and not just any speculation, but specualtion based on an extremely manipulated market ruled by people who are not good people. Supporting bitcoin is pretty unethical in my book at least. Newbies go in with their life saving and they lose a lot of it because there are so many scams. And bitcoin makes these scams possible in the first place. Bitcoin not being mass adoped leaves room for shady actors to fill a gap of promise of a new mass adoption cryptocurrency. And thus the cicle continues. If another crypto already occupied that gap, and was the number one leader, there would be less scams, and people would be better educated.
I see very few people speaking about this, so I take it upon myself to be a person fighting the good fight in a sea full of bad actors. Bitcoin becoming this grand thing is an illusion and dream selling, nothing more. It is flawed in so any ways, it cannot succeed long term. Maybe even satoshi is a greedy prick since he still havent sold his massive stack. He is clinging onto his invention even tho it stands no chance. Or maybe he´s just not as bright as everyone thinks.
Btc might just fall back down when the stock market collapses again, and when the demand for dollars increases, or not. Who the hell knows. " The only thing I know for sure is that bitcoin will die" - Descartes.

Bottom line: If you support bitcoin you are part of the problem, not the solution. Your actions indireclty contribute to hinder innovation and keep humanity from making faster progress. By supporting bitcoin, you are also indirectly supporting all the scams in crypto that make people lose money. This is just a fact, take a look in the mirror. And atleast admit that you´re only here for the money, and that you dont give a shit about decentralization. Either you support it or you don´t.
I´m here to offer a differnet perspective than the usual circle jerk taking place here.
submitted by buddykire to CryptoCurrency [link] [comments]

10-02 23:29 - 'Blah blah blah. / I'm tired of this game so I'll show my hand and be done with all of you. / Firstly, I've been redditing for a _very long fucking time_. / And beyond that, I've been on hundreds of active online forums si...' by /u/Crippling_D removed from /r/worldnews within 38-48min

'''
Blah blah blah.
I'm tired of this game so I'll show my hand and be done with all of you.
Firstly, I've been redditing for a very long fucking time.
And beyond that, I've been on hundreds of active online forums since before the World Wide Web had pictures. Usenet groups, somethingawful, albinoblacksheep, digg, myspace, fark, most of the chans including 2ch, countless other small niche tech and geek boards.
Not only that but I have a data analysis hobby, mostly written text. My first ever actual program was a random story generator that used functions to pull from dictionaries and (try to) create a coherent plot (it didn't work very well).
I've always been fascinated with the texture, pacing, word choice, intent, subtext, and nuance of human written communication.
So these hobbies and passions have suited me very well in identifying suspicious posts, and have done so for literal decades. I mean, the tactics and subjects that trolls use are always changing, but the same spirit drives all of those tiny little cheetoh stained fingers as they furiously pound out insults to me from their basement lairs.
It's said you can get an idea of the emotional state of an artist by seeing how it influenced their art, and they're right.
Pretty much any act of human creation is always stamped with a bit of its creator's soul, and people with wise enough eyes can see the signs of each mental tick and twitch.
Writing on the internet is no different.
No matter how hard someone tries to hide their inner mental state, word choice, pacing, texture, and nuance always reveal a bit more than the writer ever intended.
So using my instincts, I crafted many scraper bots and semiotic matrices to make sense of the vast amount of content that gets posted to the forums I frequent.
First started doing this during my bitcoin phase, when I was speculating on that one russian exchange. I scraped trollbox and fed it through a very basic sentiment algorithm, and used that to cautiously make a little money predicting pump and dumps.
I have to tell you that experience was a solid education in identifying illegitimate posts, as literally my income depended on it.
I used it over at Digg and predicted the gamification of the front page by 2 months.
I've been using those skills here on reddit too, and oh man I can't even tell you how much it's opened my eyes!!
Especially in the last 6 years, such a shift in dynamics, it's been very enjoyable to learn and taking that experience to refine my algorithms.
I've developed 8 axes of identification that are rather reliable at recognizing suspicious posts, especially ones originating from sources where english isn't their first language.
I shared 3 of them back in 2016 on several reddit subs, in relation to the uptick of troll posts starting the year before.
Funny enough, most of the troll farms back then immediately started crafting accounts specifically to avoid those 3 revealing metrics, which is why I'm not going to detail the other 5 I've developed.
It's true, that not all of the 30+ comments I've gotten in this thread are sockpuppets or trolls, but the vast majority of them are.
And most of them bear the stamp of an American speaker being paid to promote a russian dictator, and most of them are all using the same reply pattern to try and browbeat me into worshiping that false-flagging trump buggerer.
Again, you can change username, buy an aged account, even run your words through google translate a few times, but there's always telltale indicators. The position of verbs in the sentence, how plural groupings are handled, misplaced honorifics and most blatantly just using the same sentence with one or two words changed to produce the illusion of a larger coherent opposition.
All red flags to me, all giving me some clue into the mindset of the writer.
It's fascinating how much you can learn just by reading carefully.
I don't care if you don't think I'm on-point, I've been validated in my own experience far too often to have my method cast into doubt by some aged account no karma internet rando like yourself.
I don't care if you think I look bad for the same reason.
I don't care if you (or anyone) thinks I'm stupid or childish, what I do works and it works better than most propaganda filtering systems I've looked into.
And I'm not going to stop calling out inauthentic accounts, I will not stop refining my system and expanding its scope.
And literally no words typed into the internet by some stranger will ever change that.
Good day sir.
'''
Context Link
Go1dfish undelete link
unreddit undelete link
Author: Crippling_D
submitted by removalbot to removalbot [link] [comments]

A realistic way forwards (long, but I believe important)

Most of us have overlooked a fundamental problem that is currently causing an insurmountable obstacle to building a fairer and more sustainable world. We are very familiar with the thing in question, but its problematic nature has been hidden from us by a powerful illusion. We think the problem is capitalism, but capitalism is just the logical outcome of aggregate human decisions about how to manage money. The fundamental problem is money itself, or more specifically general purpose money and the international free market which allows you to sell a chunk of rainforest and use the money to buy a soft drink factory. (You can use the same sort of money to sell anything and buy anything, anywhere in the world, and until recently there was no alternative at all. Bitcoin is now an alternative, but is not quite what we are looking for.) The illusion is that because market prices are free, and nobody is forced into a transaction, those prices must be fair – that the exchange is equitable. The truth is that the way the general money globalised free market system works means that even though the prices are freely determined, there is still an unequal flow of natural resources from poor parts of the world to rich parts. This means the poor parts will always remain poor, and resources will continue to accumulate in the large, unsustainable cities in rich countries. In other words, unless we re-invent money, we cannot overturn capitalism, and that means we can't build a sustainable civilisation.
Why does this matter? What use is it realising that general purpose money is at the root of our problems when we know that the rich and powerful people who run this world will do everything in their power to prevent the existing world system being reformed? They aren't just going to agree to get rid of general purpose money and economic globalisation. It's like asking them to stop pursuing growth: they can't even imagine how to do it, and don't want to. So how does this offer us a way forwards?
Answer: because the two things in question – our monetary system and globalisation – look like being among the first casualties of collapse. Globalisation is already going into reverse (see brexit, Trump's protectionism) and our fiat money system is heading towards a debt/inflation implosion.
It looks highly likely that the scenario going forwards will be of increasing monetary and economic chaos. Fiat money systems have collapsed many times before, but never a global system of fiat currencies floating against each other. But regardless of how may fiat currencies collapse, or how high the price of gold goes in dollars, it is not clear what the system would be replaced with. Can we just go back to the gold standard? It is possible, but people will be desperately looking for other solutions, and the people in power might also be getting desperate.
So what could replace it? What is needed is a new sort of complementary money system which both
(a) addresses the immediate economic problems of people suffering from symptoms of economic and general collapse and
(b) provides a long-term framework around which a new sort of economy can emerge – an economy which is adapted to deglobalisation and degrowth.
I have been searching for answers to this question for some time, and have now found what I was looking for. It is explained in this recently published academic book, and this paper by the same professor of economic anthropology (Alf Hornborg). The answer is the creation of a new sort of money, but it is critically important exactly how this is done. Local currencies like the Bristol Pound do not challenge globalisation. What we need is a new sort of national currency. This currency would be issued as a UBI, but only usable to buy products and services originating within an adjustable radius. This would enable a new economy to emerge. It actually resists globalisation and promotes the growth of a new sort of economy where sustainability is built on local resources and local economic activity. It would also reverse the trend of population moving from poor rural areas and towns, to cities. It would revitalise the “left behind” parts of the western world, and put the brakes on the relentless flow of natural resources and “embodied cheap labour” from the poor parts of the world to the rich parts. It would set the whole system moving towards a more sustainable and fairer state.
This may sound unrealistic, but please give it a chance. I believe it offers a way forwards that can
(a) unite disparate factions trying to provoke systemic change, including eco-marxists, greens, posthumanists and anti-globalist supporters of “populist nationalism”, as well as large numbers of confused and worried "ordinary" people. The only people who really stand to lose are the supporters of global big business and the 1%.
(b) offers a realistic alternative to a money system heading towards collapse, and to which currently no other realistic alternative is being proposed.
In other words, this offers a realistic way forwards not just right now but through much of the early stages of collapse. It is likely to become both politically and economically viable within the forseeable future. It does, though, require some elements of the left to abandon its globalist ideals. It will have to embrace a new sort of nationalism. And it will require various groups who are doing very well out of the current economic system to realise that it is doomed.
Here is an FAQ (from the paper).
What is a complementary currency? It is a form of money that can be used alongside regular money.
What is the fundamental goal of this proposal? The two most fundamental goals motivating this proposal are to insulate local human subsistence and livelihood from the vicissitudes of national and international economic cycles and financial speculation, and to provide tangible and attractive incentives for people to live and consume more sustainably. It also seeks to provide authorities with a means to employ social security expenditures to channel consumption in sustainable directions and encourage economic diversity and community resilience at the local level.
Why should the state administrate the reform? The nation is currently the most encompassing political entity capable of administrating an economic reform of this nature. Ideally it is also subservient to the democratic decisions of its population. The current proposal is envisaged as an option for European nations, but would seem equally advantageous for countries anywhere. If successfully implemented within a particular nation or set of nations, the system can be expected to be emulated by others. Whereas earlier experiments with alternative currencies have generally been local, bottom-up initiatives, a state-supported program offers advantages for long-term success. Rather than an informal, marginal movement connected to particular identities and transient social networks, persisting only as long as the enthusiasm of its founders, the complementary currency advocated here is formalized, efficacious, and lastingly fundamental to everyone's economy.
How is local use defined and monitored? The complementary currency (CC) can only be used to purchase goods and services that are produced within a given geographical radius of the point of purchase. This radius can be defined in terms of kilometers of transport, and it can vary between different nations and regions depending on circumstances. A fairly simple way of distinguishing local from non-local commodities would be to label them according to transport distance, much as is currently done regarding, for instance, organic production methods or "fair trade." Such transport certification would of course imply different labelling in different locales.
How is the complementary currency distributed? A practical way of organizing distribution would be to provide each citizen with a plastic card which is electronically charged each month with the sum of CC allotted to him or her.
Who are included in the category of citizens? A monthly CC is provided to all inhabitants of a nation who have received official residence permits.
What does basic income mean? Basic income is distributed without any requirements or duties to be fulfilled by the recipients. The sum of CC paid to an individual each month can be determined in relation to the currency's purchasing power and to the individual's age. The guiding principle should be that the sum provided to each adult should be sufficient to enable basic existence, and that the sum provided for each child should correspond to the additional household expenses it represents.
Why would people want to use their CC rather than regular money? As the sum of CC provided each month would correspond to purchases representing a claim on his or her regular budget, the basic income would liberate a part of each person's regular income and thus amount to substantial purchasing power, albeit restricted only to local purchases. The basic income in CC would reduce a person's dependence on wage labor and the risks currently associated with unemployment. It would encourage social cooperation and a vitalization of community.
Why would businesses want to accept payment in CC? Business entrepreneurs can be expected to respond rapidly to the radically expanded demand for local products and services, which would provide opportunities for a diverse range of local niche markets. Whether they receive all or only a part of their income in the form of CC, they can choose to use some of it to purchase tax-free local labor or other inputs, and to request to have some of it converted by the authorities to regular currency (see next point).
How is conversion of CC into regular currency organized? Entrepreneurs would be granted the right to convert some of their CC into regular currency at exchange rates set by the authorities.The exchange rate between the two currencies can be calibrated so as to compensate the authorities for loss of tax revenue and to balance the in- and outflows of CC to the state. The rate would thus amount to a tool for determining the extent to which the CC is recirculated in the local economy, or returned to the state. This is important in order to avoid inflation in the CC sector.
Would there be interest on sums of CC owned or loaned? There would be no interest accruing on a sum of CC, whether a surplus accumulating in an account or a loan extended.
How would saving and loaning of CC be organized? The formal granting of credit in CC would be managed by state authorities and follow the principle of full reserve banking, so that quantities of CC loaned would never exceed the quantities saved by the population as a whole.
Would the circulation of CC be subjected to taxation? No.
Why would authorities want to encourage tax-free local economies? Given the beneficial social and ecological consequences of this reform, it is assumed that nation states will represent the general interests of their electorates and thus promote it. Particularly in a situation with rising fiscal deficits, unemployment, health care, and social security expenditures, the proposed reform would alleviate financial pressure on governments. It would also reduce the rising costs of transport infrastructure, environmental protection, carbon offsetting, and climate change adaptation. In short, the rising costs and diminishing returns on current strategies for economic growth can be expected to encourage politicians to consider proposals such as this, as a means of avoiding escalating debt or even bankruptcy.
How would the state's expenditures in CC be financed? As suggested above, much of these expenditures would be balanced by the reduced costs for social security, health care, transport infrastructure, environmental protection, carbon offsetting, and climate change adaptation. As these savings may take time to materialize, however, states can choose to make a proportion of their social security payments (pensions, unemployment insurance, family allowance, etc.) in the form of CC. As between a third and half of some nations' annual budgets are committed to social security, this represents a significant option for financing the reform, requiring no corresponding tax levies.
What are the differences between this CC and the many experiments with local currencies? This proposal should not be confused with the notion, or with the practical operation, of local currencies, as it does not imply different currencies in different locales but one national,complementary currency for local use. Nor is it locally initiated and promoted in opposition to theregular currency, but centrally endorsed and administrated as an accepted complement to it. Most importantly, the alternative currency can only be used to purchase products and services originating from within a given geographical range, a restriction which is not implemented in experiments with Local Exchange Trading Systems (LETS). Finally, the CC is provided as a basic income to all residents of a nation, rather than only earned in proportion to the extent to which a person has made him- or herself useful in the local economy.
What would the ecological benefits be? The reform would radically reduce the demand for long-distance transport, the production of greenhouse gas emissions, consumption of energy and materials, and losses of foodstuffs through overproduction, storage, and transport. It would increase recycling of nutrients and packaging materials, which means decreasing leakage of nutrients and less garbage. It would reduce agricultural intensification, increase biodiversity, and decrease ecological degradation and vulnerability.
What would the societal benefits be? The reform would increase local cooperation, decrease social marginalization and addiction problems, provide more physical exercise, improve psycho-social and physical health, and increase food security and general community resilience. It would decrease the number of traffic accidents, provide fresher and healthier food with less preservatives, and improved contact between producers and consumers.
What would the long-term consequences be for the economy? The reform would no doubt generate radical transformations of the economy, as is precisely the intention. There would be a significant shift of dominance from transnational corporations founded on financial speculation and trade in industrially produced foodstuffs, fuels, and other internationally transported goods to locally diverse producers and services geared to sustainable livelihoods. This would be a democratic consequence of consumer power, rather than of legislation. Through a relatively simple transformation of the conditions for market rationality, governments can encourage new and more sustainable patterns of consumer behavior. In contrast to much of the drastic and often traumatic economic change of the past two centuries, these changes would be democratic and sustainable and would improve local and national resilience.
Why should society want to encourage people to refrain from formal employment? It is increasingly recognized that full or high employment cannot be a goal in itself, particularly if it implies escalating environmental degradation and energy and material throughput. Well-founded calls are thus currently made for degrowth, i.e. a reduction in the rate of production of goods and services that are conventionally quantified by economists as constitutive of GDP. Whether formal unemployment is the result of financial decline, technological development, or intentional policy for sustainability, no modern nation can be expected to leave its citizens economically unsupported. To subsist on basic income is undoubtedly more edifying than receiving unemployment insurance; the CC system encourages useful community cooperation and creative activities rather than destructive behavior that may damage a person's health.
Why should people receive an income without working? As observed above, modern nations will provide for their citizens whether they are formally employed or not. The incentive to find employment should ideally not be propelled only by economic imperatives, but more by the desire to maintain a given identity and to contribute creatively to society. Personal liberty would be enhanced by a reform which makes it possible for people to choose to spend (some of) their time on creative activities that are not remunerated on the formal market, and to accept the tradeoff implied by a somewhat lower economic standard. People can also be expected to devote a greater proportion of their time to community cooperation, earning additional CC, which means that they will contribute more to society – and experience less marginalization – than the currently unemployed.
Would savings in CC be inheritable? No.
How would transport distances of products and services be controlled? It is reasonable to expect the authorities to establish a special agency for monitoring and controlling transport distances. It seems unlikely that entrepreneurs would attempt to cheat the system by presenting distantly produced goods as locally produced, as we can expect income in regular currency generally to be preferable to income in CC. Such attempts would also entail transport costs which should make the cargo less competitive in relation to genuinely local produce, suggesting that the logic of local market mechanisms would by and large obviate the problem.
How would differences in local conditions (such as climate, soils, and urbanism) be dealt with? It is unavoidable that there would be significant variation between different locales in terms of the conditions for producing different kinds of goods. This means that relative local prices in CC for agiven product can be expected to vary from place to place. This may in turn mean that consumption patterns will vary somewhat between locales, which is predictable and not necessarily a problem. Generally speaking, a localization of resource flows can be expected to result in a more diverse pattern of calibration to local resource endowments, as in premodern contexts. The proposed system allows for considerable flexibility in terms of the geographical definition of what is categorized as local, depending on such conditions. In a fertile agricultural region, the radius for local produce may be defined, for instance, as 20 km, whereas in a less fertile or urban area, it may be 50 km. People living in urban centers are faced with a particular challenge. The reform would encourage an increased production of foodstuffs within and in the vicinity of urban areas, which in the long run may also affect urban planning. People might also choose to move to the countryside, where the range of subsistence goods that can be purchased with CC will tend to be greater. In the long run, the reform can be expected to encourage a better fit between the distribution of resources (such as agricultural land) and demography. This is fully in line with the intention of reducing long-distance transports of necessities.
What would the consequences be if people converted resources from one currency sphere into products or services sold in another? It seems unfeasible to monitor and regulate the use of distant imports (such as machinery and fuels) in producing produce for local markets, but as production for local markets is remunerated in CC, this should constitute a disincentive to invest regular money in such production processes. Production for local consumption can thus be expected to rely mostly – and increasingly – on local labor and other resource inputs.
submitted by anthropoz to ExtinctionRebellion [link] [comments]

Welcome to Freetown

It started with a sign. It stood at the entrance of the small community simple but clear:
Welcome to Freetown.
Enter only if you respect the Life, Liberty and Property of all here.
Murderers, tyrants and thieves will be shot.
The message was a practical one, not inspired by history or ideology but by clarity of purpose. It enumerated the things that would be defended with deadly force and warned away those that would harm them. As time went by and neighbours from time to time suggested alterations or additions to the sign it was always argued that brevity had power. It was unnecessary to explain in detail all the different types of property owned in the community and how it could be destroyed or stolen. It was understood by all what harm to life meant, what need was there to specify differences in degree between murder and assault. Liberty being a more philosophical concept was always harder to define, but all agreed that a good rule of thumb was that if someone came around telling anybody what to do with their property or their life shouldn’t be welcomed and, if telling escalated to threats or orders should promptly be shown the door.
In any case even given the small number of neighbours at the time there was never unanimity to change it. If it’s difficult to get a handful of people to agree to anything, it could only get harder as their number grew. Certainly many would have liked to add more rules. Most in the community were Christian and wouldn’t have looked askance at the ten commandments… but freedom of religion seemed to most an important part of Liberty. Remembering the Sabbath, honouring your parents and not coveting could surely be left to individual consciences, whereas stealing and killing were pretty clearly community problems. So after many arguments Life, Liberty and Property remained as the common denominators.
In time it grew to be a social contract of sorts, first in an unspoken, implicit way, but later it was written in the rules of the homeowners association which all new buyers and builders had to sign. So in many ways it was far more real a social contract and far more binding an agreement than any constitution ever approved by “representatives” but never actually accepted by the people, never mind all the people.
The sign also had a selective effect on new residents. Some did not like the idea of violence, even defensive violence and would rather not buy a house or live in a place that so overtly threatened. The idea of many of your neighbours being armed simply did not appeal to many. Others did not believe in private property, but those that would have unlawfully occupied empty houses thought twice when they saw the sign and headed for easier pickings. Of course there are plenty of rich communists and their lack of respect for private property never stopped them from personally owning it... but this was no luxury community, at least when it started, so politicians and bureaucrats were rare.
The first big change came in the police strike and riots. As cops were increasingly paid less, later and in depreciating currency they started to protest more, work less and turn back to some old ways of extortion. Mostly they just did not answer calls, but sometimes when they did they were expensive and less than helpful. So the community was quick to become self-reliant for protection, hiring a private guard for the main entrance and quickly coordinating a group of armed neighbours as backup should it be needed. When the first riots came more than a dozen neighbours stood behind the guard with enough weaponry in plain sight to deter anything short of an army. So the looting passed them by. Car burnings, break-ins, assaults and all types of chaos and vandalism happened in nearby neighbourhoods. The police were busy protesting for back pay. People took note. Similar signs started going up in many communities that had seen the difference between trusting authority and trusting your neighbours. One neighbourhood that actually shared the main road and access, simply asked to merge. Over the years the community would grow to ten times its size. However that was dwarfed by how far its example reached as thousands of neighbourhoods followed it. Actually the neighbours simply could not tell if they were being emulated… or if other people had just followed their own logic and reached similar common sense solutions to simple problems.
The second big change came with the banking crisis. As savings were wiped out first by deflation then by inflation the community, just as the rest of the country, had to start saving again from almost nothing. This time they would not make the same mistake again, they would not work tirelessly for years while trusting the government and banks to secure the currency and their savings. They began to use Bitcoin and physical gold for their savings so that they could be personally responsible for the security of their wealth. They discovered another advantage of personal responsibility: privacy. Eventually most trade was done in hard assets and again the example spread far. Government money, fiat money was only used to pay government services… and as the first depreciated the second kept losing quality. “Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s” well fiat money most definitely belonged to the government and they were welcome to have it.
Some attempts were made by tax collectors to exact payments in hard assets and in some places they were allowed to do so. Others resisted with more or less force. Soon they learned which places to avoid for fear of tarring and feathering, or worse. Anyone who wanted to keep their property from the hands of the ever more rapacious and bankrupt government also learnt the lesson: keep your real assets in a Free Zone or lose them. It’s not that the government couldn’t muster, if pressed, the force to enter the a Free Zone and loot… but it was rare for a reason: Agents were unwilling to take risks for the meager pay they were receiving so the only way to make it worth their while was to let them share in the spoils. Any illusions that they were law enforcers went out the window after the first few times that happened. Honest cops quit. The ones still willing to loot were viewed by most citizens as what they were, a violent gang. They were too few and too cowardly to face any resistance.
Police reform would come too late. Private security backed by citizen militias would prove cheaper both in peaceful and violent times, as well as far more respectful of the Life, Liberty and Property of its customers.
Tax income withered. The death spiral was too fast and paralysing for the government to stop. The government would continue to pretend to offer services and a few people would pretend to pay for them. It would become obvious that there was nothing magical about a monopolistic administration that allowed it to build roads or schools more efficiently than local institutions, companies or communities. In fact it was hard to imagine how anybody had thought that the monopoly could ever do so with better quality than what consumers could expect from competing providers.
Some people rejected this way of doing things and formed their own socialistic communes, syndicates and associations. Many saw a kibbutz revival in the making. Did people in the Free zones object? No. Live and let live. If they want communal property they were welcome to share theirs… as long as they did not try to take ours. Unsurprisingly most people preferred not to live in a commune.
Localism, self-reliance and secure property rights eventually brought unprecedented prosperity, well-being and progress. But that was later, after we survived the invasion...
submitted by flix2 to GoldandBlack [link] [comments]

[In Progress] [4500] [Factual] Axiomatic Warfare and the Fatal Flaws of Modern Fascism / Video Essay - please critique and proofread

[Video Essay Script] - Links will be used in video as images and segments. https://docs.google.com/document/d/12OX9TTfLhgNEfdDaMWfsHYyAMzTx9G7bSwu_0Ke1Ksc/edit?usp=sharing

Introduction to Modern Fascism

“Repeat a lie often enough and it becomes the truth”- Nazi Propagandists, Joseph Goebbels.

Axioms are our base assumptions about the world. They act as filters for new information coming into our consciousness.
In classic philosophy, an axiom is a statement that is so evident or well-established, that it is accepted without controversy or question. As used in modern logic, an axiom is a premise or starting point for reasoning.
We use these axiomatic assumptions to build our internal models of the world around us. They allow us to compare new information we receive from the outside with our internal narratives, which helps us to decide whether to reject or accept that new information. They are, for want of a better world, your "common sense" beliefs.
So how do you go about changing a relatively normal person's core beliefs and base assumptions to the point of rejecting their fellow citizens as traitors, committing acts of murderous terrorist or vigilante violence like Fascist white supremacists running down protesters in acts of terror, ISIS beheadings or mass genocide?

Shock Treatment and Slow Repetition

One way of changing people into killing machines or obedient sheep is through a big shock to the system, like how electroshock therapy allows for a clean slate to rebuild peoples intern mental models.
Psychedelics encouraged by the alt right and alt-light like Jordan Peterson and Rebel Wisdom as they “Red Pill” people - another way to prepare a “blank-slate” to rebuild peoples internal axiomatic models.
Remaking people, shocking them into obedience and by gas-lighting them about their existing internal models, making them seem irrational, silly or outdated. Reducing them to a mental state of a child and then rebuilding them with a new ideology and worldview, known as “shock therapy”.
As Naomi Klein explains in The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism, these techniques work on larger scales with use of trauma and shock to influence political outcomes has been used since at least Milton Friedman coined the term “Economic Shock Treatment”. He advised that politicians push through painful and unpopular policies all at once during a time of crisis, before people could regain their footing.
The technique is used in economic markets on the large scale, and also against individuals on a small scale. Economics and politics is just human interaction on a larger scale, after all.
Regular repetition and gentle suggestions of ideas can also instil new axiomatic models and core beliefs into people's minds. As Derren Brown demonstrates how powerful suggestion can be, or the multi-billion dollar marketing and advertising industries demonstrates.
Used in combination, shock and repetition can shift until you have moved to positions, perceptions and beliefs to a place you never could have imagined yourself. But luckily once you deconstruct the deception and understand how the trick works, the illusion falls apart.

Defining and Deconstructing Modern Fascism

Firstly, we must define Modern Fascism. Modern Fascism ticks every box of the traditional definitions in Umberto Eco’s essay Ur-Fascism, and not only does it fulfil every criteria, it reveals other motivational forces and has evolved to include new aspects, and has changed into something worse, while it’s main weakness remain the same - the fact that it is primarily motivated by weakness.
As General Franco said in a 1938 interview with Henri Massis: "Fascism presents, wherever it manifests itself, characteristics which are varied to the extent that countries and national temperaments vary. It is essentially a defensive reaction of the organism, a manifestation of the desire to live, of the desire not to die, which at certain times seizes a whole people. So each people reacts in its own way, according to its conception of life… What can it have in common with Hitlerism, which was, above all, a reaction against the state of things created by the defeat, and by the abdication and the despair that followed it?"
This quote perfectly illustrates the transient nature of the ideology, but also the core motivations of Fascism. It is an ideology based on the assumption of weakness which yearns for restoration of a past greatness or to get revenge and recognition. But the way that it manifests itself is different in each place it takes hold.
Therefore the aim of this isn’t to make the case that any particular party or country has embraced out-right fascism (plenty of other people have made that case already), the aim is to reveal the underlying motivations, highlight threats and weaknesses and analyse the less obvious negative effects of Modern Fascism.

History Doesn’t Repeat, But It Rhymes

A false equivalence that is often used is that Liberal Imperialism is just the same as Fascism. And while it is true that imperialists use fascist dictators to extract cheap labour and resources and also dominate smaller counties in a similar way to how fascist empires aspire to rule, the key difference is that the populations of those countries are not gripped by the same fear based delusions.
And therefore more Liberal democracies are better equipped to hold their imperial position of power long term because they are better able to assess risks and react accordingly, rather than over-react based on paranoia and competing egos under excessive pressure.
This false equivalence was also used in 1930’s Germany, because far-left Communists had been co opted and infiltrated by Fascists. They would repeat the mantra that “the Social Democrats were the real racists”.
Contrary to the assumptions of most people, Fascism, as an ideology and political system of government is very distinct to white supremacy. It does of course include white supremecists, but In fact includes many other groups who have been co-opted by Fascist propaganda, or who implicitly support and enable their agenda.
Examples of modern opposition which has been repeatedly infiltrated or just simply made up by Fascists include innumerable conspiracy theories, police groups like Blue Lives Matter, militant Black nationalists, the Boogaloo movement who call for a race war, the “Proud Boys” and even sometimes supposed Anarchists, far-left Communists and Left Accelerationists.

Motivations of Fascism

Fascism distilled down to its core reason for existing is the suppression of opposition who represent workers rights and economic justice. So they patently DON’T look after their own people. They con them into submission of the state by generating jingoistic fear of “the other” - whoever is convenient on that day to blame for their problems.
Fascism is is an economic shock doctrine upon the inhabitants of the country. We don't spread fascist propaganda in tip-pot dictators because we care about the indiginous people there. We install Fascist dictators in order to remove workers rights and open up access to their natural resources.
Artificial moral panics can be engineered and real disasters used to allow corrupt oligarchs and financial predators to consolidate power further by buying up small innovative businesses who don’t have the excess capital to survive the turmoil on their own without external support. Or as a way to eradicate public services by sabotaging them and building mistrust.
They are used to erode faith in public services and institutions by rich people who simply want to pay less tax and don’t see why they should subsidise other human beings who haven’t had the same luck as them. So a major motivation of fascism is to suppress the opposition left-wing party who represent workers rights and egalitarian freedoms.
Populists claim to be against free trade and to some extent they are, but whatever they do will fail because they are interfering with the markets, so they will retreat to the power of market domination. They use their threats of trade barriers as more just more shock treatment for markets, rather than protecting actual jobs or industries.
This is a trick that has been played by Neoliberals too. But while Neoliberals use fascism as a tool for opening markets to Imperialism, they differ from Libertarians, not only because they embrace guns and weed, but they are starting from different positions to achieve the same goal;
Neoliberals seek to remove already existing public services and workers rights that lift bargaining power. But Libertarians want to STOP the government from ever providing those services and investments into the poor or enshrining workers rights.

Modern Fascist Ideology has TWO Core Reasons to Exist; Fear and Freed.

I have been researching and analysing how economic systems differ, using a SWOT analysis (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threads). For each economic system I tried to be as neutral, fair and balanced as possible - which included Fascism.
I might seem strange that someone who is anti-Fascist would want to explore the strenghts and opportunities of Fascist ideologies, but in doing so it reveals the real weaknesses and threats which are too important for us to ignore.
So what exactly IS Fascism? Is it just an economic doctrine or a personal philosophy about the world? The answer is both.
The ideology has TWO core reasons to exist, and TWO distinct audiences types - with one based primarily on fear and the other greed, with each having a malignant and symbiotic relationship with each other.
Fear - Authoritarian/Conservative Fascists
Greed - Libertarian Fascists
There are very few people who actually buy into full Fascist ideology, most believe a watered down version of which resembles Conservatism or right-wing populism or accelerationism, and most of them genuinely believe they aren’t fascist, even though they are being constantly fed subtle suggestions fascist ideology or that align with their plans.
But the most ironic thing is that these groups are mostly being used by the second group of rich Libertarians globalist elites pulling a confidence trick on the host nation. Often posing “anti-establishment” conspiracists who actually uphold the establishment through misinformation. See: Russia Today and Youtube Bitcoin and Gold shills who subtly suggest fascist talking points.
With those rich Libertarians at the top more than happy for those below them, who they deem less worthy, living in even more delusional ideologies with fake enemies to fear, often resembling traditional Christian but values wrapped in modern conspiracies with added elements of “satanic panic”.
Modern Fascism has clearly inspired the modern day equivalents of Brownshirts and Blackshirts, self-styled vigilantes like QAnon, The Proud Boys and “The Boogaloo” - white nationalist violent extremists who want to accelerate towards a full-on race war.
It has also infiltrated numerous alternative groups, such as hyper-evangelical “end times” cults, alternative health scenes, internet conspiracy scenes like flat earth and occult magic.

Lockdown Conspiracies

A commonly missing hallmark of fascism that is present in history during the rise of fascism is a controlled opposition and explicit suppression of opposition. This distorts a healthy society and has unforeseen consequences and blowback.
Fantasies and political thought bubbles are self delusional custom realities resembling an episode of Black Mirror. They act as coping and escape mechanisms. Especially during the Covid 19 lock-down, these tendencies have gone into overdrive with massive events entering the real world featuring David Ike leading protesters alongside fascists as people ignore rising Fascism, climate change destruction and Covid deaths tolls.
Using disasters like Covid or irrational scare tactics such as the "Satanic Panic" style Fascist propaganda from QAnon, can shock people using their fear and disgust response, while making them distrust the news - allowing the government to evade valid criticism from experts while suggesting to people that government public services are inherently evil or Communist.
This type of propaganda is a Libertarians wet dream - making a population not only give up on tax funded public services, but actively fear them. An example is Trump trying to discredit and defund the US Postal Service and other public institutions and regulatory bodies.
Anti Semitism has been used throughout history by those in power to provoke an “us vs. them” mentality, leading to today's establishment still sanctioning and allowing Qanon on major media platforms, provoking and agitating terrorist attackers from the far-left and the far-right.
Those in power in fascist regimes allow and encourage mistrust in the mainstream media, while the long-tail niche political and interest groups keep people separated from each other, who each live in their own custom realities while the real elites continue to dominate and increase their power.
With each bubble framing realities based of identity, race, class, nationality, or even subculture special interests like alternative medicine and “gamer bro” culture, so that when they interact in real life or online, they are speaking past each other because they don’t even agree on the basic principles of how they view society.

The Fatal Flaws of Living in a Fantasy

While the main flaws and weaknesses of Fascism remain the same, they are in-fact exacerbated by this new hybrid model. It’s main weakness is the very fact that it is motivated by weaknesses, fear and greed - rather than true strength, self-confidence or heroic benevolent power, as their adherents like to believe.
A misconception of fascists themselves that it is based on strength, when it is actually based on weakness - even when the driving force is greed rather than fear. Libertarian fascists want to extract labour and materials at cheaper prices, while inflating their own asset values.
In other words; international financiers with little allegiance to any country. Ironically the very type of people who Conservative fascists claim to be opposed to.
Fascism claims to make society more successful, but it actually accelerates the destruction of the culture, country or people, rather than preserving and conserving it, because it betrays a fundamental weakness of insecurity. Competitors and rivals can easily see through the charade of and take advantage.
If anything does the exact opposite. Russian and China are clearly goading Western nations into becoming more divided and totalitarian, as they themselves benefit from becoming more Liberal and open and reap the competitive advantages that brings. See Kraut’s excellent video about Trump on China as an example.
Keynesian investment in the country and people, giving workers more rights, opportunities and a more bargaining power is what makes a country successful and innovative, rather than the faux Keynesian policy of giving kickbacks to corrupt officials for government contracts and widening inequality by supporting the already rich, rather than the ordinary people.

Who Benefits in This Memetic War?

Who is going to war with who? Who is winning? A modern adage is that tankies are just fascists because of their support of authoritarian proto-fascist leaders and regimes who often claim to be Communist.
But from my experience talking to actual fascists, they crave a more multi-polar world where other strong leaders rise up as competition and form alliances with dictators.
So to me, it looks like Fascists are the real Tankies; wishing our enemies be stronger and wanting to accelerate towards race war or civil war that weakens the society.
Not only did Donald Trump have knowledge of Russia allowing ISIS bounties on US troops and withhold that from the public while courting Putin, I have personally heard white supremacists backing extremists Islamists in Discord servers.
Trump jumped to the defense of the people who put a 17 year old with a gun against civil rights protesters and assumed the intent before saying that the outcome should be decided by the legal system.
They share common values and beliefs like Anti Semitism, accelerationist end-times fantasies, patriarchal traditional values and a fear of outside progressive cultures. In fact modern extremists white supremecist groups share recruitment and terrorist strategies and tactics with militant islamists.
You could argue that it was inflicted by Russian or Imperialist propagandists onto the German people in order to take control of larger areas of Europe after the destabilisation of war.
Hitler and Stalin came to a non agression truce called The Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact, which as was a secret non-aggression pact between Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union that enabled those two powers to partition Poland between them.
The pact, signed in Moscow on 23 August 1939 by German Foreign Minister Joachim von Ribbentrop and Soviet Foreign Minister Vyacheslav Molotov was officially known as the Treaty of Non-Aggression between Germany and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.
They divided Poland under the banner of fighting “Polish Fascism” nearly a century ago with both sides ultimately lying to their own people about spreading freedom while being authoritarian to their core and being able to blame “the other” as being the cause of all their problems.
But these days fascism seems to be a rogue meme that no longer serves any particular group. It is pathologically damaging to any society that it happens to grip.
Even the aforementioned Libertarians and accelerationists who think they are benefiting are only temporarily gaining by market price volatility. They ultimately lose through the blowback effect of the whirlpool they create.

Psychopathy, Alienation Nihilism and Insecurity

It is well established that Fascist dictators are driven by psychopathic characters and tendencies. They either don’t care about the truth, or disregard it if it’s not convenient to their narrative.
In totalitarian despotic societies facts are reversed. As George Orwell proclaimed throughout his writings; “War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength.”.
Similar to how authoritarian Starlinist Communists harnessed people’s alienation and tricked them into thinking that it’s possible for the state to fully decommodify everything without having markets, money to account for things, domination or hierarchy or try to convince people that a revolution is just around the corner.
But of course, a council representative is still the head of an organisation, for all intents and purposes, because they wield executive power over others, even if the name has changed. Markets are emergent properties when groups of humans want or need a certain commodity when it becomes available.
But while both Communist and Fascist ideologies are based on lies that harness peoples alienation, fear and envy, Fascism is also especially to the weak. It is attractive to those who want to be strong again (or were never to begin with), or those who want to have a strong leader to help them.
Fascism betrays to others the inherent weakness. Like the insecure kid in school who lashes out - others around can see that it is because of their own insecurity which makes them appear even weaker. Fascism is a psychopathy driven by insecurity.
When people become so absorbed in an ideology there is a phenomena of people to self identify as an actual ideology? This produces a phenomena called Identity Protective Cognition, where people's self worth becomes attached to a belief system or ideology. So that when new information contradicts their worldview it is seen as an attack on the person themselves.
Therefore irrational, emotional quick fix thinking is the default when there is too much pressure and they feel attacked. They no longer use their slow effortful reflective thinking. (See Daniel Kahneman - Thinking, Fast and Slow)
This approach has parallels in evolutionary biology, in which a central issue is the ability to adapt to changing environments. Competency - over-competitiveness in management causes chaos which STOPS hierarchies of competence. (Insert video clips of Sapolsky on Chaos vs Reductionism etc. timestamps linked).
Fascists try to reduce variability in culture and outcomes - causes weakness of less adaptability - because as Sapolsky explains, the variability is not just noise in that type of system CAS (Complex Adaptive Systems) - the variability IS the system. It is fractal and scale free. The noise and variability is an intrinsic part of the system.
But the system doesn’t function properly when the agreed-upon parameters that individuals believe to be true aren’t universal enough to have any form of group coherence.
Birds and swarms of animals can produce amazing complex phenomena, which are greater than the sum of their individual parts. There is a “network effect” once a certain threshold and certain conditions and rules are met.
These rules can be very simple, like repulsion or attraction, or staying a certain distance apart while traveling in a similar direction, but collectively they create patterns that emerge with complexity and I dear say, a certain amount of beauty.
So what happens when millions of people are being brainwashed and misled by cults that are leaving them with a reduced ability to make decisions?
Giving them shit-for-brains just so that some rich people at the top can pay a few percentage less tax? That is the sign of a deeply sick system that cannot continue to function effectively. It is sick on so many levels.

Emergence, Complexity and Human Evolution - A Social-Biological Analysis

The problem with viewing the world through only one lens of analysis (or bucket of knowledge) is that you can fall into unnecessarily reductive thinking. (Sapolsky clips)
I describe myself as a philosophical anarchist. Which does NOT mean I want total chaos and disorder - it means I want the optimal solution to emerge - including the influences and experiences from the bottom-up.
I also think that a bottom-up (or anarchist) lens of analysis is necessary for society to run cohesively in an optimal state. If it is repressed it distorts the overall picture of reality for everyone - similar to a CEO that doesn’t listen to employees and workers on the ground.
I interpret as constantly holding authority to account - to justify its existence and reason for dominating others. I also believe it is every citizen's responsibility to hold authority to account. This would be necessary under ANY economic system or society.
Anarchists also believe in stigmenric, rhizomatic action to make the world better, organically, not from a top-down authority, which fascism seeks to instill on society.
Human beings are collectively parts of a bigger chaotic but stable system known as a CAS (Complex Adaptive System). CAS’s are chaotic systems that can reach periodic steady states of equilibrium.
As Professor Sapolsky explains, humans uniquely exist with a mixture of both communal and individualistic tendencies; known in the scientific world as Tournament vs. pair bonding.
All the evidence suggests that this tendency has greatly improved our success as a species. But those tendencies distorted too far one way or another lead to pathologies and the worst collective misdeeds and wars.
Because as Professor Sapolsky also explains in his brilliant lecture series (which I have condensed the pertinent parts of into a 4 part YouTube video) about CAS; the signals coming from the randomness is being suppressed or repressed, it interferes with the functioning of the system.
Pressure in the system makes the patterns more complex but at a certain point of increasing pressure in the complex system, it stops being linear and the doubling of patterns and periodicity totally stops. Order completely begins to break down because of the butterfly effect.
Fascist regimes fettishise order and rigidity but in a complex adaptive system, the noise IS the phenomena, not a byproduct to be discarded, ignored or repressed.
The majority of people on the right genuinely want to help society by bringing order, using top-down draconian measures if necessary. Whereas the left generally wants to help society by proactively building from the bottom up.
I think both of these approaches are necessary to be balanced properly for a healthy functioning society to emerge.
It seems our tendency to harness both traits and to focus intently on one or the other is our greatest collective strength, while also being our greatest weakness.
And similarly, on an individual level I believe our greatest strengths and weakness are the fact that our brains work efficiently by categorising information to filter out the unimportant bits that slow us down.
As the book by Daniel Kahneman - Thinking, Fast and Slow, brilliantly explains, slow deliberate, consideration thinking takes energy and time, so our brains developed filters which come out as biases. This is an inherent weakness of the human brain.
Now imagine the butterfly effect on the life of just one person who is influenced by the brainworms of QAnon cults or conspiracies which distorts their internal models of the world which they use to filter information about the world
The sad and shocking stories on forums like QanonCasualties show the devastating effects on their close friends, family and work life - amplified by their ever increasingly disconnected lives. (insert Flat earther clip - zoom in on idiot rolling head)
Now scale that up to the level of a whole of a society, a country, or the world? This is a collective madness to cope with and avoid the reality facing us as a species.
Only collective action with agreed basic facts to work from will do to avoid the total descent into actual chaos and destruction.

TLDR; Conclusion and Final Thoughts

In this essay I will have put forward the case for the following four key arguments being true and I have present supporting evidence to explain the logical reasoning for why our current definitions need updating and the threat levels reassed, from a non-hysterical but critical perspective. The overall claims I made are:
  1. Modern Fascism has taken over right-wing populism and bears all the hallmarks of early 20th Century Fascist ideologies.
  2. The ideology has two main reasons to exist, and two distinct audiences which both have a symbiotic, pathological relationship with each other.
  3. The main flaws and weaknesses of fascist ideology remain the same as ever - that fascism is motivated by irrational fears, greed and self deception.
  4. Modern Fascism has major unforeseen damaging consequences for individuals, governments, organisational dynamics, and society at large.
This reality is something I think a lot of fascists, ultra-nationalists and people who have been influenced by the propaganda know deep down on some level already - that they are avoiding the realities of pandemics and ecological harms of ignoring science and reality as it is.
They ignore it because fantasies are simpler to understand. And a narrative based on fear of the other is a simpler way to to process a complex world.
It is also attractive to the part of us that is drawn to conflict and drama - that hunger for something genuinely interesting to happen.
But I would argue from my experience that the beautiful complexity of life in all it’s shades of grey is much more interesting, fun and genuinely fulfilling to understand and engage in, even if it might be harder to deal with and harder to explain.
I believe it is also vital for the very survival of our species.
Thank you to my two Patrons:
Carmen Jongepier
E.V. Roske
(PS, Please, please consider helping me directly as a one off or regularly through Patron to help me continue to make content like and turn it into a high quality video this while surviving, I have just been dumped by my long term partner, I have a long-term physical disability limiting me while struggling to claim the benefits I’m entitled to and have paid into all my life. I now need to move out because I can’t afford to live here anymore on my own. I needed to finish this project before I could get on with other things in my life but I desperately need to focus on fixing myself now I have got this out)
Original Script on Patreon
submitted by Upper-Range to BetaReaders [link] [comments]

Bitcoin Bitcoin solves the illusion. Kills the lies. And is part of freeing the people! The illuminati and the illusion of money (ep.17) THE FUTURE OF MONEY  Andreas Antonopoulos on bitcoin  London Real Bitcoin 10: Log or Linear, Hedging, Volatility, and Money Illusion

When we talk about money as medium-of-exchange, we should be talking in terms of ranges and not along a rigid money/non-money axis. All assets have a degree of moneyness, or exchangeability, and bitcoin is located somewhere along that scale. The best way to find out where it sits would be to get a market price for bitcoin’s moneyness and compare it to other assets’ moneyness. 3/ But If money is considered to be an illusion, then bitcoin's very special, very real monetary properties are being discounted. It makes the whole concept of money sound more random, whimsical, shaky, and soft. But money is hard and real and serious. — Neil Woodfine (@nwoodfine) June 24, 2019. 5/ If money is an illusion, then to be safe, everyone needs to constantly second guess everyone ... Bitcoin is the first money that makes the monetary abuse by authorities impossible. Bitcoin is impossible to inflate without consent from everyone. On a Bitcoin Standard, the path that governments ... Bitcoin’s value is an illusion of money. But so is all governmental money, all central-bank money. All governments always knew that the value of money is an illusion: they could just not fathom a day would come when they would no longer be in complete control of that illusion. In the 1980s, there were European governments who seriously considered outlawing cable and satellite television. The ... Bitcoin and the illusion of money. Share using Email . Share on Twitter. Share on Facebook Share on Linkedin. Bookmark this article. By Tom Chatfield 18th November 2014. The world’s “first ...

[index] [18275] [1750] [12916] [45821] [34985] [36590] [26575] [49169] [15733] [20092]

Bitcoin

Bitcoin is an innovative payment network and a new kind of money. Please help me spread the crypto message by supporting my Bitcoin Ben meetups by joining my Patreon group. FOLD APP, up to 20% Bitcoin Back on online purchases!!! Use my Link and get free BTC!!! This is taken from our interview with Andreas Antonopoulos called The Death of Money' Andreas Antonopoulos is a Greek California-based information security expert, tech-entrepreneur and author. SECRET DEEP FAKE IS COMING! ILLUSION OF BITCOIN XRP ALTCOINS! I go over this weekend Bitcoin and Crypto news! Also Deep fake is now real, plus electric cars ... the illusion of money, uncovering the evil plan behind the federal reserve, the central bank, and the world bank. They have designed a system to enslave you.

#