(untitled)

Left wants total state control and digital cages. Right wants strict borders and protection from the globalist net. Both think they hate each other, but they're just fighting for the exact same centralized state steering wheel. What if the real inform isn't winning the culture war, but ending forced proximity? Imagine a baseline sandbox world: A global automated logistics/utility layer funded entirely by resource extraction royalties. Zero state-owned means of production. 0% income tax. You keep 100% of what you earn. Pure meritocracy built on a post-scarcity floor so humans don't starve. Then you decentralize the physical world into autonomous enclaves. Online communties in real life. Want a strict traditional/religious enclave with zero screens? Build it. Absolute internal sovereignty, Want a high-tech progressive metropolis? Build it, Want a raw, maximum-freedom sandbox with no laws but the non-aggression principle? Move to the open trade zones. No imperialism. No forcing your neighbor to live like you. The ultimate right is the Right to Exit—if a node is like kicking dead whales down the beach, you pack your bags and leave. We waste 90% of human brainpower fighting culture wars because the current system forces incompatible people into the same legal jar. Remove the survival anxiety, separate "where we live" from "how we trade," and cortisol drops to zero. Why let central banks trick us into fighting over the mud when a modular sandbox lets everyone win?

>>100552 This isn't communism , this is giving people the option on living however way they want to live. Freedom will as long as it doesn't impact someone ability of their own choices. A way of religions being able to co exist without the war or need to spread like a disease for conversation numbers within a religion. This philosophy removes the social friction between humans and for the war of who is right who is wrong in ways of living. No constant war on drugs , no laced drugs , no need for greed , wars , equality upset , starving people , homelessness , people hiding medical information for profit , people using others downfall for profit . Everyone has the freedom of mind, Psychedilecs It's not pushing strict capitalism, communism , not pushing one world religion , its not pushing false multiculturalism (it should be optional not forced) , It's not pushing strict anti government anarchy. This philosophy actually makes a more diverse world with different architecture , thriving cultures of many colors , happy people , better tech advancements and a thriving human evolution , more connection with others , a sense of belonging , Healthy bodies with choice of true medical and diet advice , Increased life expediency within choice that are given to everyone. Seems like the only way forward for a more peaceful society.

>>100552 Yeah, I agree, that sounds great. Even just the "maximum-freedom sandbox with no laws but the non-aggression principle" part alone already sounds great. Isn't that ancap/minarchism btw? Anyway, I think it all gets much trickier when considering how to implement it and how different parts should hold together.

>>100554 I agree , we can only hope at the rate increase of tech advancments an this AI push will increase the likelihood of those reality

>>100552 >A global automated logistics/utility layer funded entirely by resource extraction royalties. Question for you: Who owns and controls the automated logistics layer? Isn't the whole thing just a world government with extra steps and a better branding? >Pure meritocracy built on a post-scarcity floor so humans don't starve. Where does the storm come from? How can we have meritocracy when there will be people born in a poor enclave? I like the general idea and I think you're right about the left/right thing, but you must acknowledge what power would own these redistribution systems etc. It reminds me a bit of AnCap, which is appealing at first sight before realizing that within such system. I prefer Distributism which I suggest you to take a look at. I think it works with humans as they actually are rather than as rational agents in a philosophical thought experiment. Your village governs your village, your region governs your region. Higher levels only handle what lower levels genuinely can't. Most people would own or have access to (through commons etc) to productive property, and after all real humans would have genuine conflicts that require genuine governance, but just enough of it. A limited government, basically. pic unrelated

>>100552 look lain, another hellthread in the making. Disguised as centrism, by a commi. how elegant.

who subsidizes this for you? I can see its a noble idea, and even urge you to format this into a book - or other medium yt-vid if you have a channel. etc. So that the idea wont fade away here on laincahn. More so the reason why, is because the idea need to be manifested, because the current status does not favor it. Hence make it eternal, and give it a book to rally around. Do you understand this ? Back to 1st question "who subsidizes" , because currently no one is likely to, you should make the idea eternal as book, for future possibility.

>>100557 The idea is more like 8chan of statecraft, where systems like communism, minarchism, syndicalism, etc, can coexist together. Which is really tricky, because there needs to be a mechanism that protects, for example, minarchist society, from communist society in case the latter decides it wants to conquer the former, for example.

>>100552 >meritocracy built on a post scarcity floor so humans don't starve Translation; first we solve one of the most fundamental and enduring problems of human life. Then, we build our utopia. Ultimately, some enclaves are going to have oil, and some are not. Some are going to have great farmland, and some will have barren rock. Some will have strategically important sites, and others will occupy insignificant backwaters. Some will live in floodplains, others will live in areas vulnerable to hurricanes. Some will be downstream of others, and have to deal with the consequences if their upstream neighbors use the river as a toilet, or a cemetery. Or redirect it so they can have a lake. One enclave might be convinced that its neighbor's actions are literally endangering the entire world, and right or wrong might take it upon themselves to save it. What governs the inevitable interactions between different enclaves ? Suppose a bunch of rowdy youths from one place run over and steal some brides from their neighbor, and don't tell me brides and daughters are included in the post scarcity economy.

>>100556 >Isn't the whole thing just a world government with extra steps and a better branding? Not really, but there are some aspects of it that definitely qualify as such. The World Bank, IMF, and the ICC are all essentially government functions. But I wouldn't go as far as to say it is a "world government", since they are very limited compared to what a typical government does. In particular they don't have much enforcement ability on their own, they can only be used as a cudgel for one nation (usually the US or a western European nation) to beat another with.

>>100552 If you understood Diogenes you would know he wasnt interested in changing things but learning to accept, rejoice, and flourish in things precisely as they already are.

>>100562 Thats the TAO -more so

>>100563 Tell me, what is your favorite story or teaching from Diogenes?

>>100565 I like the time he owned Socrates in the marketplace of ideas.

Capitalism wants digital cages, your stuck in 2016. The biggest pusher and proponent of what your calling digital cages right now is "the right", back then it was "the left" because it isnt either its just a natural progression of capitals purpose pushing further into simulacra where now its impressions and clicks and whatever. Im not gonna bother reading soykaf like this until you people get it right, all the social media and corporations and whatever you guys were complaining about being too woke shifted right especially in trumps second term. The datacenters and AI make money and literally a right wing government has pushed more funding into them than ever before, and said datacenters theoretically in simulation profit more the more time spent in digital cages. Those on the right are literally just repeating the same mistake the left did, when you were calling out the left of existing only online or existing in digital hugboxes and cages and needed to touch grass the left was convinced no this is how it really is. But now that the rights trapped in and a lot of the left has moved on except its most inflammatory online addicted elements its the same soykaf where you guys are like no the kids really are using the litterboxes no they really are eating the dogs. Whats going to happen thankfully is whats going to be left in this online discourse space is just a minority of retards and like 90% bots designed to inflame and psy op and generate discussion not realizing half of said discourse and "data" they are getting from it is just other companies bots while the rest of us pass over it all. This is already happening as we speak, at some point its going to lead to it all bursting. All the data used by political think tanks for predictions or moves they should make is going to be increasingly innaccurate and they will flounder.

>>100556 >Question for you: Who owns and controls the automated logistics layer? Isn't the whole thing just a world government with extra steps and a better branding? I like these questions, and I think they are pieces that I am missing for this philosophy/idea. The problem with a traditional world government that I assume you had in mind is that they are prone to the human flaws of government that we see in our current day and age with greed , pushing a agenda and etc. The idea I am thinking is more an automated layer which produces resources for human survival & innovation, to which this also a self feeding loop for itself. This bottom layer that is universal is transparent, fair to human kind >Where does the storm come from? How can we have meritocracy when there will be people born in a poor enclave? The idea is that the version of poor that you will have under this idea will only be the bottom floor that is universal if it's your choice to have a place to sleep, basic survival needs are sorted there will be no sense of poor where you'll starve , go thirsty and cannot enjoy life. If it's someones choice to live in the jungle and eat coconuts then they should live as they see fit but no one should be locked into a way of living , hence the means to 'exit a node' if you don't like it. If someone grows up in a community in which they don't believe in the ideology no one should be forced to stay and everyone has the choice. >look lain, another hellthread in the making. Disguised as centrism, by a commi. The problem with you is that you're still bound to the 2D template of a classic political spectrum of left right up down central commie , fascist. I'm far from a commie , if it's someones choice to live in a cult and willingly dispute wealth between others then by all means do it but no one should be forced in one locked in way of living. The problem I'm trying to conquer is to allow ways of living as people see fit to them to co-exist. No religion should have a need to conquer the whole world , different communities/cultures should respect to their way of living as it's fair choice to everyone. I believe in free and open markets as well as private trade and if someone wants to work to reap more rewards in life then they should have that. By no means am I saying people have to dispute wealth evenly if they don't choose to. >>100558 I have a pretty detailed document I've been writing which includes more information that I've been working on. This actually started because as I see with a lot of cultures and communities there is immigration and cultures area being lost, forced multiculturalism, endless wars over ideas being fought and I had to scrap the traditional political spectrum to something that will work universally. With international zones that are like a /b/ Random board that follow a global ruleset with my rules being respect one another as everyone has freedom of choice so long as it doesn't drastically effect someone elses freedom of choice. With communites that live within, a /g/ community , /anime/ , you can even put in terms universal reddit and communities that live within are their own subreddits. Everyone has a choice to go to a subreddit they agree with , not everyone has to agree with other board/subreddit but everyone has a choice to live how they see fit with mutual respect as those boards/subs are fairly allowed to coexist. As who is another human to say how another human should live. Why should someone within a religion feel the need to convert others to that religion by force / indoctrination to validate their legitimacy of the religion. If I come up with my own religion and I'm the only one to believe in it then it feels false untrue , if more people believe in it then it's going to feel more real.

>>100568 >im not gonna bother reading this >stuck i 2016 >capitalism bla bla trump >left right You're stuck within your own cage of sheep-think , as you believe there is only left right , capitlism wants this socialism wants this. I'm beyond this and don't care for left and right. As this idea in thread removes the need of forced proximity and tension under something you don't believe in yourself. >psyop bots retards No this isn't a psyop. As you're already stuck within your own psyop that has grasped millions/billions of minds already. The ability to step out of the traditional way of viewing politics , humanity and being able to see where AI Tech is leading us and using it to our advantage in creating a utopia of choice and everyone lives life how they see fit. You can live and believe that agrees to you as a unique individual but I shouldn't have to agree with it and live under it as I am my own unique individual.

>>100570 >being able to see where AI Tech is leading us and using it to our advantage in creating a utopia of choice and everyone lives life how they see fit. At the moment AI tech seems to be leading us towards a world in which a handful of psychopaths control almost all the resources in the entire world. The only technology I can think of that has a worse potential impact is the nuclear bomb. "utopia of choice" isn't exactly what I really want out of life, anyway. We basically have that already and it sort of is like kicking dead whales down the beach. Like, you can go on AliExpress and get damn near anything you want, right now, for really cheap. And it is like kicking dead whales down the beach. It's all crap. Life is better when you have few good choices rather than many crappy choices.

>>100570 You didnt understand anything I said at all like I dont know how to respond because either its stuff I agree with or even the stuff I dont agree with I just dont get how its relevant.

>>100572 What do you agree with and what do you disagree with?

>>100570 the tension cannot be so easily removed. Maybe in your society everyone wants electronics, well nearly everyone. Not every little private utopia is going to be on a copper mine. What happens if the biggest coppermine in the world is right next to some little environmentalist utopia that decides that in the interests of the earth mother the mine needs to be closed ?