all 11 comments

[–]jet199 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

I'm opposite to you.

I see most people as being decent.

It's the chattering classes who are arseholes.

[–]Node 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (4 children)

depraved/moronic/vile

These are three separate characteristics, and they're unevenly distributed among the population. The tripartite area of the venn diagram featuring all three is pretty small. Few are depraved. Perhaps vile commands a larger share, and moronic takes first place in the contest for best of the worst.

But the biggest negative category is simply 'easily manipulated', or mentally weak. The TV tells them what to think, and describes the version of reality they should believe in.

Populations have always needed 'leaders' in order to conventionally prosper. Perhaps this need (or inclination?) to outsource our thoughts and decision process is our downfall? Regardless, leaders inevitably arise, and replace personal choice with their edicts that become the law of the land.

What would improvement look like, and how could it be achieved? It's not really possible in the leader/follower system we've had since forever. Any improvement in the population must necessarily be matched and exceeded by the control exerted by the command structure.

As the cure for virtually every other problem facing humanity, once again it appears that massive population reduction is the only viable answer. It would be a relative improvement, but the 'lived experience' of self-reliance and functional versatility would feel completely different. Opinions vary on whether that would fit the definition of "improvement".

[–]fschmidt[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

I assume you have seen my solution. This doesn't fix most of humanity, but I don't care. A solution that works for the few reasonable people currently stuck in this godforsaken world is good enough.

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

Because those Christian groups that reject the Old Testament are all evil.

I'm not familiar with those groups. Unless you mean the belief that the Old Testament has been superseded by the new? In that case, it's more of a 'that was then, this is now' situation. Still important to know, but no longer "the rules".

I only played chess, never go. Was around 1800, but a few wins against a 2300.

Of course the big question is whether I can convince other people to support the Arkian idea.

What would be the selling point? How would it differ from the traditional cult? As for group cohesion, you'd almost have to have physical proximity, which would lead back to the community issues.

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

Because those Christian groups that reject the Old Testament are all evil.

I'm not familiar with those groups. Unless you mean the belief that the Old Testament has been superseded by the new? In that case, it's more of a 'that was then, this is now' situation. Still important to know, but no longer "the rules".

Yes but degree varies. In the modern Protestant churches that I have seen, the Old Testament is essentially ignored. In contrast, Mennonites refer to the Old Testament often.

I only played chess, never go. Was around 1800, but a few wins against a 2300.

I was also mostly a chess player, but Go is a better game. If you were 1800, then learning basic Go will be easy for you.

What would be the selling point? How would it differ from the traditional cult? As for group cohesion, you'd almost have to have physical proximity, which would lead back to the community issues.

There is no selling point except to intelligent people who want to preserve intelligence, and that means basically no one. So the only practical way to promote this is to first promote moving to Colonia Vianna and then explain to those who move there that if they don't want their descendants to assimilate into Mexico that this is the best option. Of course I need to move there first which I hope to do soon. Your solution of "massive population reduction" would play out over a long time and isn't sure to work. It is basically a repeat of the middles ages. My solution is more promising in the short term, but still a long shot.

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

https://www.corbettreport.com/bigoil/

Are you familiar with this theory of how and why our current reality is the way it is? I've only watched the first video so far, and the claims are pretty 'far-reaching'.

Off topic, but I still had this tab open.

[–][deleted] 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (4 children)

I understand, but I am not anti-humanity per-se like you implied you are, but I hate the current incarnation of what they have become.

[–]fschmidt[S] 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

If I think that people can be improved, then I am not really anti-humanity. So basically I agree with you.

[–][deleted] 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

You said before that you are a misanthrope. Misanthropy by it's definition is the hatred of literally all of humanity.

[–]Node 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Misanthropy is the general hatred, dislike, distrust or contempt of the human species, human behavior or human nature. A misanthrope or misanthropist is someone who holds such views or feelings.

If you can believe the wikipedia in this case, it takes form at several levels. If one were to look around at current human behavior, there is a lot to dislike, distrust, and even hold in contempt.

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

Just semantics. With your definition, I wouldn't be a misanthrope. But I do hate most of humanity.