If only the better argument counted for something.


Why not make it free?

I would be nice to make everything free, but some things are defined by their resistant to distribution.


Still, that being said we can acquire a high degree of ubiquitous material wealth if we do three things:

1. Reform IPL to make all code free as in speech and beer. Privacy could still easily be respected. In fact copyright enforcement and privacy of correspondence are mutually exclusive.

2. Deploy nuclear reactors quickly to provide the bottom of a anthropocentric materials economy food chain.

3. Develop an open source humanoid robot, recharged by the reactors, and instructed by ever evolving shared open code above, to automate any labor task we need done yet are unwilling to do personally.

With those things accomplished, essentially everything would be free. Certainly anything that could qualify as a basic human need.

In the mean time we absolutely could deploy a UBI and give everyone a piece of their human inheritance.


Women and ISIS


The fact that some women seem to be actually interested in being property in ISIS is incomprehensible to some, but it’s not completely devoid of logic if you look at a bit of the bigger picture.

We in the west live in a very ideologically individualist society and we seem to equate submission with weakness. Yet paradoxically we laud anyone who submits to the many collective positions on which society depends. Example: A submissive man is pathetic, yet a solider is heroic despite service being the very basis of being in the military. It couldn’t function without at least the majority of the time obeying orders without question and without hesitation.

But the thing is there are advantages both psychological and practical to being inclined to submit. After all, that’s why it’s a common survival strategy. Some people just aren’t assertive by genetic inclination. And a structured social order, even if that order places one in a subordinate role, can be a pleasant thing for some people.

I think the fact that western society both refuses to admit that and depends on it utterly,  drives a lot of people underground and makes them bitter about the hypocrisy of the mainstream.

We are still a young culture, and there are a lot of elements of human nature that we have not created niches for. Drug use and various paraphilias for example. We seem to wish to stamp them out, but realistically that’s never going to happen. We’re still not even done solidifying our response to homosexuals.

One draw of systems from the 7th century is that they have had time to incorporate everything. Even if that incorporation is oppressive or an effort to annihilate it, at least they have a clear answer, and that is fundamentally appealing to the human mind. We like answers, even if they are wrong and toxic. (Just ask anyone who thinks nuclear power is a bad idea.)

Authority is difficult even if it’s over only yourself. Self reliance is inherently difficult. The pressure of making choices can be quite high contrasted with the comfort of having imposed structure, especially in a culture like ours that imposes all manner of discipline externally thus corroding self discipline.

Also in our society most people realize what a raw deal the vast majority of authoritative roles actually are. Much of our culture is suffering from the curse of middle management, in which you have just enough power to get in trouble when things go wrong but not enough power to ensure things go right.

As a result, a lot of people just coast as much as they can. If you look at things and realize you’re going to end up property anyway, you might start looking at the situation the way a person did in earlier eras prior to selling themselves into slavery. (Which believe it or not occurred a lot.)

Also we tend to dismiss the owner types in ISIS as cartoonish monsters, but in reality they are more likely to be something like soldiers or cult members for the most part. Yes they by definition must be violent and the like to seek to join a violent death cult, but then again, it’s pretty obvious that many women are quite attracted to violent assertive men. (Just look at jail house serial killer marriages.)

Indeed we glorify and cultivate this attraction when it’s about the “correct” classes of violent assertive men, such as our soldiers and police officers. So, given all that, is it really so shocking that some women would arrive at a mindset that genuinely finds life in a 7th century Islamic culture appealing, even before you get into the seductive power of religion itself and the draw of a charismatic conman recruiter?

Not to me. Not so much.

Still, it must be said that for the good of the species those that wish to join ISIS should not be given the freedom to do so because that action directly leads to the harm of others. I’m a big fan of freedom as any of my readers should know, but when you find local girls or boys wanting to fly off to join ISIS, it’s time to seize their passports.

Blank People

It was recently asserted to me that multiculturalism is to blame for among other things a dramatic rise in the death rate of my demographic.

Here are my thoughts:

I think it’s more like a contrast thing. Like western culture seems recently eager to respect demographic variations, such as gender, race, income, orientation etc, but the side effect is a rising of the tide that doesn’t include the one group that essentially serves as the default. White men.

In western culture your demographic identity is more or less defined by some deviation from a somewhat arbitrary baseline. That baseline is white straight male. Or “Cis” males in the more hateful corners of the web.

Socially, if I can’t check one of the non-default boxes, I am essentially deemed unworthy of focused help.

Because white men have historically been in the top slot socially,  the perception is that the last thing that they need is help. But this is based on old data. Maybe my grandfather didn’t need help, but I might. Even by your definitions.

A culture is by definition people working together to help all members of the culture so long as they play by the rules. While the drive to unbias the rules is certainly a worthy ethical goal, the bigger picture of inclusion is being lost in some places along the way.

In today’s world I feel like a lot of assumptions about my value are made in a hateful way for actions and contexts that simply have never applied to me. I feel like I live in a bunker, waiting for the radiation to dissipate. I feel isolated and cut off because no part of the culture I was born in wants me beyond my family and friends or any pocket money I may have.

Nothing in this culture is welcoming to me except those things which welcome everyone and have a parasitic agenda. (Like the various cults on offer, both secular and spiritual, and of course anywhere my money is good.)

These days all the division lines are about keeping the 99% from uniting vs their real enemies. And while I have no interest in buying into that I must also face the fact that others have bought in, and as such I am going to find myself hated on many fronts for being white, or straight, or male, or whatever.

This makes me afraid to speak to people because I’m always an outsider in some sense. And always I feel silently hated. I can barely interact with minority strangers because I have to worry about everything I say lest it be twisted into some kind of racist remark. Which is extremely ironic when you think about it.

So the problem isn’t that society is reaching out to other groups, the problem is that the only people reaching out to my group are bigots, to the point that if you made any kind of support system for white men exclusively in any context it would be instantly crushed and mocked as being racist, sexist, etc. Or invaded by actual racists.

The only group that gets even a tiny fraction of respect (as well as disproportionate hate) is the men’s rights movement. And really that’s only because they have such glaring points. Male over representation in the homeless population and the work place fatality stats for example. It’s hard to say they don’t have a point when there is audio recording out there of men being mocked by domestic abuse help lines as if having a penis makes one immune to being beaten with a hammer or a brick. Or otherwise abused or intimidated.

I mean really, can you imagine calling 911 essentially only to be mocked? Calling 911 to protect yourself and being arrested because your attacker was female? That happens. And we learn as men of non-color to never complain about anything that applies to just us because of the hateful social response. Hell, the only reason I feel comfy sharing this post is because I assume no one will ever read it.

Essentially we are being left behind, and as men are generally conditioned by both evolution and social training to literally put our lives on the line in an effort to be useful, this lagging behind means that suicide looks more and more like a good idea. Especially when getting psychological help often essentially means being scolded and humiliated.

Many of these suicides are passive. Not wearing your seat belt, taking up smoking, eating all kinds of salt and sugar and processed meats just waiting for something to kill you so your family can get the insurance because Contrary to the popular image a whole lot of white men are Really selfless good people.

I’m not saying I’m one of them, I’m just saying they are out there. About once a day it like occurs to me that I could simply die and avoid a whole lot of potential horror. Nothing dissuades me from this except those same friends and family. TV seems to want me to die for all sorts of things. Especially being jobless. At the very least my death would be culturally invisible.

Again, think about it. When a death happens what’s the first thing the TV tells you to make you care about it? Gender, family status, race. Etc. How many times have you heard the addendum “including women and children” as a way to intensify the impact of a wrong? (Google the phrase in quotes, 434,000 results, virtually all of them attempted outrage multipliers.)

I’m fortunate in that I am articulate enough to explain myself to therapist types, but in all my interactions with them I had to make a clearly and lengthy case for why I don’t just go get some life crushing job.

The solution with those people always seems to be about going away or getting in line.

It’s not pressure from the other groups crushing my demographic, it’s the lack of help at the cultural level making it merely appear hat way by contrast. I am not oppressed by gays or minorities or women or whatever. I am oppressed by the 1% and its machine. I am oppressed by a culture that dismisses my suffering and the very value of my life. I am oppressed by being a blank person.

These groups I am instructed to resent by the TV all have legitimate issues that need urgent attention and I am happy to see them get what they need, and will help when I can, I however also think when you focus it on any race or gender or designation you are by definition perpetuating a prejudice.

The solution is a universal approach and holding everyone to the same rules.

Specifically we most urgently need a UBI. No picking and choosing, no red tape. Living wage for living people. Let greed and ambition and boredom and creativity and curiosity take care of the rest.


The great thing about a UBI is it’s self correcting. A ubi check means nothing to a rich person but means salvation to a homeless person. No administration needed.

It’s like the opposite of a flat tax.

The problem is that when it comes time to be helped, I’ve been abandoned essentially because of my lack of a race or a gender or an orientation etc. I don’t have a culture in a sense. There isn’t much that helps me unless I’m a worker or otherwise funded.

It’s just culturally assumed that because I’m a white male I must be a-ok. And I assure everyone, that’s not the case.

I’m ok because I have a family that loves me. Otherwise I’d be homeless or dead right now.

I feel like the only social help I get is like an unintended side effect of support aimed at other groups that just can’t bring themselves to overtly exclude me in vengeance for the actions of the 1% of previous eras who’s race and gender I happen to share.

The Just Ice Department

The psychopathy of police, prison, judges, lawyers and vengeance are right there, in the very word.

There’s nothing warm or helpful or human about any of it.

Criminals are either desperate or mentally ill. The entire concept of there even possibly being a criminal worthy of sadistic torment is absurd. It’s literally equivalent to outlawing poverty and mental illness. The obviously insane idea that we can cure those things by simply hurting “offenders.”

By closing the asylums and leaving the prisons open we doubled down on torture as a cure. Every bit as backwards as calling in an exorcism priest to deal with epilepsy.

Norway is doing it right. Prison and asylums should be pleasant social quarantine at worst.

We as a species need to grow the fuck up.

Liberal Hate


To be fair, I do see a lot wrong with the progressive movement, just ask me about gun control, GMO hate, and nuclear power, but that makes a lot of sense since progressivism is forced to be a single party event in this country.

You have two general approaches to political change, the desire for something new or the desire for something old. Conservatives are by definition regressive. They wish for stasis or regression. Progressives are the other side, they wish for change and progress towards something new.

The problem is that there are many possible futures but only one past. It makes sense to have a single conservative party, but in order to counter that you need a concerted effort to balance it, but again that’s a problem because progressives can’t agree as easily as conservatives because many possible futures.

For example, I want to see a future with nuclear reactors and the freedom to own weapons. My reasoning isn’t relevant to this comment.

My point is to prove that it isn’t logical to lump “liberals” together like it is to do so with conservatives, because of the shared past, divergent future, dichotomy. Admitting there are general differences between two groups thus making total equality impossible or nonsensical is ironically something also relevant at the gender level. It’s insane for example to ask for breast equality among the genders and we all understand that. The difference in breasts is not an oppressive conspiracy.

8765786076That said, if any party is more guilty of ignoring facts it’s the conservative party since there are reasons we abandoned elements of the past when we did so. Granted not all of them were valid and good reasons but for the most part we had good cause, at least at the time.

The right wing in this country is completely fact immune on a whole slew of issues ranging from economics to climatology to sociology. When they aren’t simply lying for power on behalf of their 1% owners.

Basically we need a depth of process reform that simply isn’t going to happen prior to the singularity. And what I am hoping for is internal changes to the one party that overtly stands for change. Since currently the ship of state is headed for a waterfall.

1336153857475Letting the 1% try to keep ALL the money is just insane. It will destroy the country. Though of course they can just fly away. Realizing that they are a pathology at the systemic level is the first step towards finding an ethical cure.

As opposed to merely executing them, French revolution style, which is perfectly possible given how few people we’re talking about here. And I should also point out that if this ever becomes the position of the government, there’s no where to run as our drone strikes have shown.

Social Security Works Email: 2015-07-04 1226 PM

Resharing because I agree, and because the original was an email.

From: http://www.socialsecurityworks.org/

There are two kinds of people who want to cut Social Security—liars, and people who believe the lies. They’ve heard the conservative talking points. “Social Security is going broke.” “Social Security won’t be there for me when I retire.” “The only way to save Social Security is to cut benefits.”

Unfortunately, these Wall Street funded lies have gotten plenty of traction in recent years. So much so that a recent survey shows that 43 percent of young people believe that Social Security won’t be there for them when they retire—no matter how much that same survey shows that these same young people want it to.

It’s time to set the record straight. This 4th of July weekend, when you’re speaking with your Chris Christie-loving cousin at the family BBQ, you have the facts on your side:

  • Social Security has a $2.8 trillion surplus and can pay out every benefit owed to every eligible person for nearly two decades. After that, even if we do nothing, it will pay out approximately 80% of benefits owed for the next 75 years.
  • Social Security has not contributed one penny to the deficit because it is independently funded by the FICA payroll tax.
  • Proposed “tweaks” to Social Security would hurt seniors, disabled veterans and people with disabilities.
  • All we need is to ask millionaires and billionaires to start paying into Social Security at the same rate as the rest of us and we not only extend the life of the Social Security trust fund, but we can expand benefits to the majority of Americans.

With the facts on our side, we have begun to see a dramatic shift in the national conversation around Social Security. It wasn’t that long ago that we were still fighting a “chained CPI” benefit cut being proposed by President Obama, all Republicans and some Democrats in Congress. Today, 44 out of 46 Senate Democrats and 116 out of 188 House Democrats have gone on record supporting expansion. And 79% of likely voters – Democrats, Republicans and Independents – support expansion!

Underlore © 2013