‘We will coup whoever we want’: Elon Musk sparks online riot with quip about overthrow of Bolivia’s Evo Morales

submitted by fschmidt from rt.com

sorted by:
new (suggested)
topinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]proc0 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

Hmm, what about all the other examples of mass murder by one dictator/king/etc? All hoaxes? Or all justified?

The problem is centralized power and authority, especially in institutions or entities that outlive a single individual. So you'll have one benevolent dude for a few decades but sure enough hundreds of evil people are secretely plotting how to take over, and so it becomes inevitable. Then it's a horror show every time, and that is why history has progressed in the direction it has progressed, less centralization of power because it's so risky.

Again, it's the position itself, and the dictators of the 20th century did something even more evil, which is take over democracies, which were meant as decentralization of power. They take over and not only abuse power, but are setting things up for the next evil guy, unless of course war happens.

A king or an evil cabal of puppeteers, is the same -- centralized power. We need to decentralize power as much as possible. What I think has happened is that power is no longer effectively decentralized by our institutions after *[[computers and]] the Internent... coincidentally arriving at the end of WW2. Before the Internet, communication was sloooww and therefore you could still decentralize authority to a great extent. After the Internet, nobody knows WTF is happening, and why people get so easily manipulated, and OF COURSE the bad actors have taken advantage of this, and the result is a regression and decrease back into centralized power.

I don't know where things need to go from here, but it's certainly not more centralized authority of any kind. We probably need to leverage the Internet and go FULL decentralized government, I mean FULL, no one in Washington anymore, just the People and the Constitution (which btw is a huge milestone for decentralizing power), a military that mostly protects, and the Internet.

*:correction, we got computers after WW2, setting things up for the Internet, but this affected all other forms of communication, the idea here is that the world started getting fully connected, and "globalists" I guess are trying to centralize this power.

[–]Node 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

Looks like I deleted the paragraph where I invoked both /u/fschmidt and our dear Uncle Ted, and pointed out how correct they are/were about the effects of technology on 'modern' society. Although the former seems to want to keep 'some' technologies. The internet in particular has made control through mass brainwashing easier than ever before, while increasing human separation from nature and reality.

Your dream about decentralized government is a nice one, but you'd first need to do something about the quality levels we're seeing in our species. This is where the fundamental problem lies. To paraphrase a SovCit meme, 'How can a man rule another man?'

The answer is to rule the 'stupids', and to promote their level of malfunction so you have more people to rule. There's no solution to this problem while the 90-99% willingly, and with assistance, bow down to their superiors. Perhaps the scheduled end of this catastrophe cycle within the next 30 years will take us back to tribal life that will go much slower next time.

[–]proc0 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Yeah, even I think that's a long shot that will take an unprecedent event of some kind. I was outlining the ideal solution, but the more likely scenario is a huge catastrophe. Hell, the mainstream culture is uplifiting a cult of chaos and destruction, that only want tear things down, and destroy... if they succeed, they'll destroy, if they fail, it's because they had to be destroyed. Either way it's not looking pretty.

[–]Node 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Aside from the cause, it's looking pretty bleak for the next while. Not everyone believes in the earth catastrophe cycle that's 'theorized' to accompany the polar flip, but it's interesting that it's coinciding with human society going nuts. The 'cosmic disaster' playlist on that site explains the science, and where we are now. The poles had already been set adrift when the 1859 Carrington Event happened, and it made the north pole do an immediate 180 degree reversal of drift direction. If that happens again while our magnetic field is weak, it would wipe out electronics and electricity. There's your huge catastrophe, without needing the micronova and earth crust displacement.

Even if we don't get hit with a CME while our field is down, humans are trending towards an accelerating unraveling that needs no additional help. But there will be help, of course.

[–]fschmidt[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

There's no solution to this problem while the 90-99% willingly, and with assistance, bow down to their superiors.

We are entering a dark age that will last centuries. Religion is weak and culture is strongly dysgenic. Religion needs to recover and then impose eugenic cultural rules, and even then it will require many generations for human genetics to recover.

But there is a solution. Withdraw to some island of sanity like the Mennonite area in north Mexico. The Mennonites don't allow their children internet access, so they grow up sane. I hope to move there soon and then spend much more time on real life interactions, and much less time on the internet.

[–]Node 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

I looked at that area and found some articles saying (some of) the Mennonites are fleeing due to cartel violence. I would hesitate to move to a country run by drug cartels, even if there were an island of relative safety and sanity. Although the appeal of that solution probably depends on where you live now.

[–]fschmidt[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

I covered the drug gang issue in my post. What I wrote was based on what local people told me. So I don't think drug violence is an issue.

Where else can one live? The only other place I have seen where I don't feel an urge to exterminate the population is north Idaho. I don't think there are a lot of tolerable options.

[–]Node 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Where else can one live?

That's the question. I've chosen great weather and a beautiful place over human qualities. Yes, the California beach, with up to 98% wearing The Mask while outdoors, alone, and on the beach or driving their car. Having high expectations for localized groups of our species is almost certainly going to result in disappointment. But maybe that's just my cynicism speaking.

Can you spend a period of time traveling? If you were to visit and experience 100 of the possibles, you might find 2 or 3 that could mostly meet your standards. It's true that cultural behaviors tend to vary by region, although I suspect that's less true for rank intelligence.

Have you considered formally listing your criteria and ranking them by importance? It would take some research and soul searching, and would greatly increase your probability of finding a place you could tolerate. Would you live in a place that freezes? How important is the local culture, and what behavioral characteristics in people do you prefer? Are economics and legalities important? Don't forget about trends, as the wonderful small town you pick might double in population over the next decade or two.

Or you could just move to one of your current possibilities and see what happens.

[–]fschmidt[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

The biggest weakness of whites is their lack of tribal instinct. For anyone with tribal instinct, the obvious most important factor for where to live is that there is a tribe there that they can join. My religious view isn't the same as the religions in north Mexico, but it is close enough that I can associate with them and be at least somewhat part of their tribe. In north Idaho, I felt that the people are okay but I wasn't sure whether there is an actual tribe there that I could join. Everywhere else that I have seen, I clearly don't belong.

If you were to visit and experience 100 of the possibles, you might find 2 or 3 that could mostly meet your standards.

This is basically what I have done. I have traveled a lot looking for a good place, and north Mexico wins by far.