Reinvigorating the sticker project could be an effective way to reach people who otherwise remain isolated inside their propaganda dominated echo chambers on the social media. Sticker-bombing mainstream social media discussions on the mind-control platforms (Faceboot, Twitter, Reddit) could also be fun, if you don’t mind the risk of getting suspended.
Stickers.pdf
216.3 KB
Sticker Project. Search the channel for “sticker” for ‘how to use’ ideas.
Forwarded from Normal Chat
Somewhere between a complete surrender to the forces of history, which negates our capacity to guide its course, and the desire to save everyone from the consequence of their bad moral choices, which negates their moral agency, there lies the path of responsible action.
Forwarded from Normal Chat
A worthwhile distinction to draw in relation to the problem of induction is between deterministic physical systems (‘apples always fall to the ground when dropped, because gravity’) vs non-deterministic conscious agency (the farmer was always kind to us sheep, gave us unlimited free food and medical care, so he would never kill us). The concept of trust relates to the latter, but it does not make sense to say that we ‘trust gravity’. Moreover, trust is irrelevant for moral consciousness, because we are responsible only for our actions, not for the betrayals by others. A good example here may be when person X trusts person Y to do what they promise. If the promise is broken then X is not morally liable, but if X relies on the trust in Y to give a guarantee to Z, then X already betrays Z because trust is not a guarantee. The mere possibility of betrayal by Y precludes X from legitimately expecting others to trust Y (trust is not a transitive property), let alone enforce anything on others on the basis of one’s trust. This is doubly problematic if X has the duty of care to Z.
One vote one person is not Democracy; the freedom from undue political influence by organised interest groups, from social coercion and mass deception, where respectful public deliberation is the primary means of reaching agreement, and voting is there only to certify the state of agreement and not used as a substitute for it, is democracy. Disagreement, bad faith, coercion, or deception cannot be meaningfully re-presented. The system we live in is not democracy.
Individuals form groups, in good faith, to serve the interest of the individual; it would be absurd to form a group to serve the group, akin to idolatry ‘for its own sake’. Therefore, all forms of collectivism are false, and beneath their absurdity hides bad faith of the few.
What I mean by Humanism
The term Humanism has been used to signify a range of sometimes contradictory views. I consider most of these views logically deficient. When I refer to Humanism I mean that conscious rational agency (the Kantian definition of Human) is a universal, fundamental value (which we all implicitly affirm by acting intentionally), and a condition of all meaning. On this view, all actions that negate the humanity of others also negate our own humanity, which is ultimately self-destructive. I explain and defend this form of ontological Humanism and associated ethics here: https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3737433
Consistent, ontological Humanism is compatible with religion, insofar as religious traditions symbolically encode the moral essence of human existence: especially the golden rule. https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3883011
The term Humanism has been used to signify a range of sometimes contradictory views. I consider most of these views logically deficient. When I refer to Humanism I mean that conscious rational agency (the Kantian definition of Human) is a universal, fundamental value (which we all implicitly affirm by acting intentionally), and a condition of all meaning. On this view, all actions that negate the humanity of others also negate our own humanity, which is ultimately self-destructive. I explain and defend this form of ontological Humanism and associated ethics here: https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3737433
Consistent, ontological Humanism is compatible with religion, insofar as religious traditions symbolically encode the moral essence of human existence: especially the golden rule. https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3883011
Ssrn
Ontological-Transcendental Defence of Metanormative Realism
If there is something (P) that every possible agent is committed to value, and certain actions or attitudes either enhance or diminish P, then normative claims
“Communes have a lot in common, a common ethos, but unable to individually generate lifesaving healthcare, mechanised transport, defence, communication technology, manufacturing etc so they have the natural tendency to unite into a system of communes, Communitarianism, under a Central Committee.” The ethos of the Commune can result in only two logical outcomes: a) aggregation into a communitarian system (really, communism), or b) a suicide cult. This is what the so called “freedom movement” in Australia seems to be steered toward.
Profit is not of itself a motive for action. The pursuit of wealth requires a higher motive, a purpose the wealth and the associated power are accumulated for. Wealth/power is always a means, not an end. The ultimate aim of action is always the same: meaning.
If gender is a social construct then it is not, by definition, an individual feeling; it must by socially verifiable, not individually asserted. And if gender is just a freely chosen denoscriptor, then it is nothing but a nickname.
The WHO defines ‘gender’ as follows: “Gender refers to the characteristics of women, men, girls and boys that are socially constructed… Gender identity refers to a person’s deeply felt, internal and individual experience of gender, which may or may not correspond to the person’s physiology or designated sex at birth.” These statements contradict one another: if gender is socially constructed then it cannot be just an individual feeling or experience.
“I will not apologise for killing a few innocent people to keep the rest of you safe.” Said the man in a blue suit.
Forwarded from Normal Chat
Giving the mob a fuse, something to burn, smash up and then get bored, is a counter revolutionary strategy. Fake revolution frustrates real revolution.
If, as the man said, “the revolution will not be televised”, then whatever is televised is not the revolution.