a thought experiment for fun

If you could overthrow your country's government and replace it with something else, how would you go about making it the freest society possible. >inb4 define freedom The least amount of authority people have over each other.

>>44695 Artificial wombs. Control people's brain development in utero so they were incapable of running into the walls inherent to the affordances of a brittle system. They would experience themselves as completely free for their entire lives.

>>44695 >government >freedom no

I would not. I don't think people in my country are capable of being ungoverned any more. They're too used to the yoke and don't have any connections to each other. Without a tyrannical government they would turn into savages and kill each other. Probably the Mexicans would the only people with the ability to self-organize.

>>44697 And you would call anarchy gratis huh?

>>44695 By principle, it would obviously be an anarchist society. I wouldn't say libertarian because employers have oversight over employees in spite of the ideology's claim to "freedom". I would be skeptical of a libertarians counterclaim that capitalist oversight is merely a product of crony capitalism/state intervention - as if companies would give up their tools in the event that the state is abolished.

>>44695 >freest society possible Free from what? Cuz i want to be free from goverment, but also financial powers, diseases, and american/chinese imperialists. Probably a mix between my current liberal democracy but with a heavier socialist layer on top, where big massive companies are state-owned so Instead of being crushed by the soulless mastodon that is amazon, you get crushed by a democratically run state enterprise that doesnt waste money in bonuses to yacht-jockeys. Our national symbol would be the guillotine, there would be one in front of every government building to remind the current rulers what happens if the fail the people. Then i would designate a city as the special economic zone of "freedomtopia" where something like 75% of the laws dont apply, the roads arent paved, and if you shack catches fire you have to fight the fire yourself.

Well my nation is a federation so i guess replace it with a confederacy of states similar to switzerland with a very high autonomy for local governments within those states.

>>44705 OP defined freedom as freedom from oversight, so as long as financial powers and imperialists are seen as oversight, then they should be excluded judging by the premise. In any case, I think the premise makes the variety of responses narrow, yet some of them are still surprising. The question of how to implement freedom as OP sees has yet to be answered. The way I see it, as much as software has been a detriment for freedom, it's the closest we have gotten to realising horizontal democracies.

Mandated human extinction.

>>44695 Simplify taxes&bureaucracy. You could entirely automate the process while also ensuring nobody earns less working more due taxes which is currently possible and curbs productivity since gov is essentially telling people don't even try to improve. Freedom starts with financial freedom. Possibilities you cant afford are pointless.

>>44716 Nonexistence is not freedom. It is a state (debatably) which allows for neither freedom nor its lack, as it belongs to an entirely separate ontological category.

the thought experiment wasn't fun

>>44721 If you into philosophical takes you gotta hook people up into their own matrix instances where they can be the sole omnipotent god. Maximum degree of freedom. Any configuration with equal individuals will limit one individuals degree of freedom for the sake of the other.

I would reduce work hours every year, without diminishing wages. It would help a lot to mitigate climate change, and it would encourage more people to go DIY, since they would have more time to do elaborate stuff with their hands instead of wageslaving in an office or a fast food joint. You can even go further: Forbidding food delivery for anyone who isn't handicapped and enforcing mandatory world cuisine courses so everyone can learn how to make awesome food. You can easily destroy the cancer on earth that is Uber Eats and Deliveroo that way. I think the workweek could be instantly reduced to 32 hours, then I would reduce labor hours by a set amount every year, and society would have to adapt and get comfy. It could be 4 hours every year, 2 hours, 8 hours, it could follow a linear or exp/log scale, whatever, but the main goal is to make wageslavery obsolete while society keeps functioning normally, and I think it's definitely possible with today's technology. When COVID-19 suddenly made "non-essential" jobs obsolete, nobody batted an eye. Why don't we abolish these bullshit jobs once and for all, and then share the remaining work between all of us, workers and NEETs?

>>44729 Would you be the one paying the wages? Because otherwise I'm pretty sure people would steadily flow from running businesses into just working less, or maybe running a family business where they don't have to pay wages

>>44732 Who has been producing the microprocessors you are using to soykafpost, a family business or a huge factory in China? Family businesses wouldn't even exist anymore if central banks around the world didn't print a ton of helicopter money last year. If the "free market" operated as intended, without government intervention, 98% of brick-and-mortar mom-and-pop shops would have closed down by now. As cute as they may be, they are essentially superfluous for the economy as a whole. >people would steadily flow from running businesses into just working less That's the whole point, they would actually work instead of staring at Excel charts all day pretending to be productive.

>>44729 > Forbidding food delivery for anyone who isn't handicapped and enforcing mandatory world cuisine courses so everyone can learn how to make awesome food. You can easily destroy the cancer on earth that is Uber Eats and Deliveroo that way. Here that basically means no delivery outside the city because places didn't do it before those kinds of services appeared. What did we do then? We didn't eat restaurant, because there are almost no local ones and we've got other things to do than drive back & fro all the time (for those who have a car and aren't dependent on public transit, otherwise it's even more impractical). Especially since that adds an unnecessary gas expenditure. And awesome food tends to be stupidly expensive, so we'd keep just making local cuisine. Poor-edition. Ah, similarly, lacking a car, if I couldn't get my groceries delivered (although larger groceries do actually do delivery in general), filling pantry and freezers would take a whole day of running back and forth, hoping meat and other frozen perishables don't unfreeze dangerously during travel. That's also even less practical with the pandemic.

>>44737 >awesome food tends to be stupidly expensive Why do you mean by this? By awesome food do you mean a decent produce of vegetables, meats and cereals you have to cook yourself, or wasting the time of someone else preparing pizza because no one taught you how to make a pizza from scratch? I'm not arguing against people having access to non-local foods, or exchanging produce from different parts of world. I'm arguing against unnecessary jobs, notably food delivery service jobs who deliver low-quality fast food to other wageslaves working in the modern service industry.

id have to overthrow everything including various billionaires and also execute them and id burn the money and then id just let the power vacuum exist. people would be forced to start by taking care of themselves and immediate communities. powers would develop of course and maybe these communities would start trying to absorb one another and fight. However it would happen much slower than if I tried to instate anything. currencies could develop again, but my issue with the money wasnt the money it was to avoid some person with a lot of resources taking charge. Id want to just see how all of america naturally develops and fills the vacuum as spread out communities and knowing the things we do now and at this point in history. I dont really care what happens in the end just that there was opportunity to try again. but if I thought i had the answers like some of the people here and thus that false confidence that my system would work freedom would hardly be a priority. id start by exiling like a good chunk of the people on places like this and other chans. Id have some webcrawler type thing check for certain word usage or content consumed and just put all these people in some sort of land given up for them on the condition they cant ever enter again. Id focus efforts on psychology and therapy and also id remove any secularity and have a state religion but people would still be free to practice whatever religion they wanted. Id trace wealthy peoples historical records and see if their money traces back to some war crime or crime against humanity and it would all be confiscated. From then on punishment for sufficiently horrible deeds would not simply be over just because you died, and your family would instead be required to have some sort of rehabilitation, debt, or service to those still affected by whatever crime occurred until those facing the consequences of it also died. Outside of this id fracture everything into even smaller states then there are now and all decisions about spending, social programs, social institutions, taxes, legal and illegal substances, punishment etc. would be up to these smaller city states and my government would function as a religious authority that has jurisdiction in all these areas. But even I can see problems with this, and that its just a fantasy that ignores complexities. so yeah id just burn everything and let it naturally develop again, someone will come up with something better when given the chance. or that at least will provide developments and so when it falls people even better know how to self govern.

>>44738 I meant non-local produce for most of the expensive part. Essentially, anything that has to be imported and hasn't traditionally been tends to be too expensive to meaningfully add to your regular feeding habits (with some notable exceptions such as tofu). I'd kinda want a machine of some sort to make more fast-food like stuff for me, simply because I have more interesting things to do with my time than dedicate it to cooking. Currently, I compensate by accepting a repetitive menu by cooking huge batches at once and freezing so I don't have to constantly waste my time.

>>44732 >working less good, as it is people work way more than is really necessary >or maybe running a family business where they don't have to pay wages also good

>>44739 >Id trace wealthy peoples historical records and see if their money traces back to some war crime or crime against humanity and it would all be confiscated. From then on punishment for sufficiently horrible deeds would not simply be over just because you died, and your family would instead be required to have some sort of rehabilitation, debt, or service to those still affected by whatever crime occurred I like you

>>44754 >inb4 el presidente gets axed himself cause grandpa had too much fun in ww2 and the plan falls before it starts

>>44695 TL;DR: Ancap insists on maintaining illusion that power structure issues are about mean ol' governments being big meanies, and not about power structures.

>>44754 im glad someone does I kind of assumed everyone would hate me from that post if not for the caveat of me understanding itd be best not in my hands. but im glad on a personal level someone agrees with that statement as even if its wrong at its core is something i feel strongly about which I imagine your in line with. >>44763 Yeah its possible id just have to die then if i was said el presidente i dont think I actually would but its def possible. it wouldnt necessarily get axed before it started if that happened as it means the idea was even better than el presidente which would be like ideal. but of course it could also happen as just a "fuarrrk you hypocrite". But at the very least thats not an idea I could even mention without considering i could be th first to go and do I wouldnt be surprised. I also wouldnt really advocate for death as that ruins the whole point of the person taking up from what i like optimistically see at its core as understanding having to pay for generationally spanning crimes as not any more unfair than suffering because of them. It.jist seems strange in what I think is a world that assumes your totally detatched from your parents world view and subsequently their parents world view and so on. Maybe because of that is why at the end of the day id just let people develop what they want, as even without any surprisise discoveries id still consider myself as someone still just working to relieve suffering i had no part in but theres no better ot worse person or people to work on it than me and surely if no one even attempts its not gonna get better any quicker. This could all be a rationalization, but also id never truly enact what im saying. Again id do the first thing of just leaving it to fate. The one thing i am semi confident in is that kind of pure freedom but not total hellworld doesnt happen top down but bottom up so people id imagine have to have the mindset and want for ot across the board for it to happen. So its an obvious choice for me, if it doesnt work out it wasnt time, if it does i answered OPs difficult question.

Bro you seriously expect me to fuarrrking take this thread seriously lmaooooo. Nice try FBI

>>44695 I think that the thought experiment presented in some of heinleins books had a good point: >Utilize AI and machine learning to determine courses of action and causes for society to work towards. and I would add >Have elected officials of non-party representatives who must relinquish all attachments (i.e. wealth and social status/citizenship) who debate and work with the AI to pick which scenario is the most ideal. Otherwise, implement a thunder-dome style tournament, where anyone can enter, and once elected, anyone else can claim a challenge after a certain given time or some number of months in office. All battles will have no more than 1 survivor. Elected officials cannot change the rules.

It would be very difficult to throw a whole country into a state of anarchy, starting with the fact that most people fear independence greatly. Normal peeps themselves would react brutally to this, or, in an established anarchy-like context, they would freak out and act like there is no order in nature/universe, making bloodbath and bizarre soykaf because the only order they've known is through careful and malicious gov't/corps psyops. Their false god would be dead. >>44700 Agree with this lain, but making a few points. The general civilized mentality does not compute basic good sense, empathy as a pillar in humanity or a healthy sense of collective. We "need" to give our soykaf to a knowingly malicious entity because we "trust" it more than our fellows. That's social contract, we pretend we trust/cope with/obey the government, it pretends to care about the mass. Society as it is has managed to kill the seeds of human nature (as I believe, founded in the principle of will to be free) centuries ago. Either a state of freedom is created from a deep mistrust or an overwhelming painful frustration in modern civilization, making people (not as mass) take interest in being strong for themselves as individuals, abandoning jobs, being cynical with the poisonous facilities offered by bureaucracy, doing their preps for a world to come and educating a new stronger generation. All of that combined with a delicate notion that nobody needs their authority as a human that knows some soykaf, but simply doing so because that is better for everyone. That takes time, but it's not impossible in small terms (small groups in farms, squatting gangs, single families out the grid). I honestly think part of its great difficulty comes from this: >lonely man bothered with soykaf in modern life starts getting interested in being autonomous and free >starts learning some things, molding his mind >imagining how he, along with a legion of alikes, would raise their children under the sign of freedom and build a new and noble form of decentralized society >impossible to find women to do this as they're too bound to modern comfort >would have to buy sex doll and never procreate >would be a weirdo along with other weirdos and soykaf would go on same way as always

>>44819 women are peer pressure victims even moreso than guys. It should be entirely doable to indoctrinate them into your little cult same way they continue to live under islamic rules while sitting in a western country.

>>44819 there are women who are in to this idea. I think the issue might be more that typical man who is dissatisfied with life is also bad at talking to girls and does not match modern masculine ideals (buff guy with lots of money), and typical girl who is dissatisfied with life still wants the modern masculine ideal (lumberjack with lots of money/social capital). Maybe not enough people realize that living innawoods will make you scrawny and smelly.

>>44822 Theres also the hippy/newager chicks who are into this sort of stuff, some of them are cute but prolly batshit. >Maybe not enough people realize that living innawoods will make you scrawny and smelly. It sure does, but with the right herbs and stuff around you can also have things to counter that.

>>44821 Your attempt to diminish my simple idea by calling it a "little cult" was very cute, femanon. Thing is, I can't think of a cult-like anything without semi-divine leadership and a strong doctrine. There is no formal process of indoctrination in going to the woods with your weird partner. Maybe I was too enthusiastic in my description of "raising children under the sign of freedom", but I was referring to a context where a single family/small group would raise their kids apart from modern civilization, under their own rule. No peer discussion here, I just can't picture modern women wanting to do this and that's ok. >>44822 It's truly unbelievable how catchy the masculine/feminine ideal complexes are nowadays. The only problem in the practicality of this idea is that there would be no continuation of the process of a growing alternate society because women are not big in enjoying harsh, almost ascetic living. Yet some men seem to have some "primitive nostalgia" in their hearts. That could be the fuel to seek a life based on exploration/living beyond the limits of societal rule. Or at least a glance of it.

>>44875 I wasnt trying to diminish anything. I just think thats exactly what you need to make it happen. Most live free guys are solo operations and living as loners is not appealing. A single person vs her entire social circle telling youre crazy - you know who wins. You need a group to get social credit for appeal. And a group of people living away from society due their shared believes is really not far from a cult. Dont need sacrificing goats to el diablo. That said i do believe chances for things going wrong are not lower. You shouldve heard plenty stories about remote places and the fuarrrkups that happen when people think they can get away with soykaf.

>dismantle all nuclear weapons >carry out mass bombing on every single powerplant regardless of type or purpose >claim to disband the government, but just secretly relocate them to an offshore oil rig or some underground complex like Raven Rock >carry out mass executions on low level officials like mayors, police officers, firefighters, etc.

>>44821 Mudderfuxing opposite of the truth. Study kyriarchy or "feminist" theology, you fool.

>>44921 either a fool or an malevolent liar

>>would have to buy sex doll and never procreate way to invalidate asexuality, you moron. Your logic contradicts "a state of freedom is created from a deep mistrust or an overwhelming painful frustration in modern civilization" with "getting interested in being autonomous and free [..] would raise their children under the sign of freedom" forming a strange loop. I imagine you creating a teletubby society with gynational-anon, where you would probably farm humans for genetic stock. (disgusting, if true) > social credit either a toxic modernist meme why occidental civilization developed the postmodern condition, or an oppressive Chinese system for challenging dissent. You seem to mean the former with your fleurs du mal. Your kind caused the Cultural Revolution. Also, taking a step back for a side note, > A single person vs her entire social circle telling you're crazy - you know who wins. By "her", you mean to declare kyriarchal "ownership". You need to help people escape the matrix rather than make yourself such an agent or architect. > It's truly unbelievable how catchy the masculine/feminine ideal complexes are nowadays. No, we only have one clever anon, who considers challenging me with dangerous epigrammatical gynationalism cute. I do not find it cute. Those tricks will not keep me focused, because I can intuitively see through gynanons intention to keep me focused on lainchan for whatever reason. I might keep focused here of my own free will, but gynanon's trickery repulses me nonetheless.

>>44921 How about you study marketing. Its known who is easier to influence and the result is women. No theological bs but simply empirical data used to make money. Or look at revolutionaries. Rebels come primarily from men. Female rebel armies are almost entirely fiction with a few exceptions and the women who find themself in regular rebel armies end up generally as fuarrrktoys to keep the boys motivated. Not an enticing job to play. Its no surprise anyone with a brain would nope out.

Neither possible nor desirable, as preventing someone from infringing on another person's autonomy requires the power of coercion and hence, authority. What I assume you would call a "free society" based on your definition sounds like a soykafhole for anyone who isn't a predator of some kind, I can't imagine anything more bleak and soul crushing than that type of "utopia". I get that the question wasn't whether it would be a "good" thing so I guess that's a little off topic, but to reiterate I can't think of any society principled on individual non-infringement or free association which wouldn't either be consolidated by rogue statists or acquire a statist character simply to prevent its own takeover.

its not about one country imho but rather the totality of them, and i dont believe in any perfect or freest system but rather just freedom being a side product of maintaining planetary biodiversity, if u had power i think rather than try to create the perfect state u shud just be more like a gardener and help the states bloom where u can and cut weeds where u can...

Fractal localism where you can just move to a place that strives for whatever it is you believe

>>44932 > sex slaves exist and females don't do dangerous stuff plz think kyriarchy is fake The kyriarchal establishment conditions ppl into slaves to sex who fall out of favour with that establishment. Mind polluters target feminine populations out of the ambition to influence the influencer. AMBITION... not... relaxation. What you call "motivation", in immediate reality, since sexuality forms a hypnotic mechanism, refers to hypnotically conditioned behavior. Kyriarchal influencers turn others into proxies for life and death, breeding by depopulation of those unable to gestate. Kyriarches infringe the autonomy of the mind brainwashing by generating signals with maximum potential for information entropy. Psychological force is infinitely more heinous than physical force, and both are coercion. A society based on digging holes to make underground country could do the whole free association thing. People looking to escape anyone or anything must dig deeper and more elaborate. Barriers between people based on simple but long puzzles become common. Free information and autodidactic training would need to form cultural corner stones. Everyone would need neutered, to centralize birth locations preventing abuse. Minimalistic nurture facilities would make early life survival comfortable. Exploration and adventure based education would replace education systems. Information and exercises necessary to build an in vitro birthing lab, should come first and foremost after language acquisition and vital plant agriculture exercises.

I believe the education should occur entirely through auto didactic archeology. Scavenger hunts left for newborns to solve in an almost empty world.

>>44695 >overthrow people >freest society possible I don't think replacing the people means anything but just delaying the inevitable or maybe only freeing it during your time and once you're gone someone else will replace the same people you've overthrown. Great examples are in form of fiction. You can assassinate entire bloodlines of a kingdom or empire in a fictional story but do you think the people who'd replace them would be no different? It only takes about a few decades and another individual would have matured to replace the same oppressive people you'd have fought against. How about replacing the ruling structure in such story with the so-called "Republic and Democracy" but even with such politics there will always be corruption in the heart of power. Anything, be it religion, as long as it can be an extension of exacting power it can be corrupted. The key solution is in Logos. When people are born what are they? They learn, they gain knowledge, they change. People have been making solutions like religion, teachings, and wisdom but the problem is even these are not even immune to corruption (which is exactly the case with all those soykafty translations and obvious and blatant modifications).

>>45008 everything ends you dont have to strive or even want to make something everlastingly perfect and im not sure if I could I would even. Its freest in the sense for a moment you are giving total freedom. Any sort of system probably sacrifices even this moment and thus is less free in comparison.

>>44877 >that said i do believe chances for things going wrong are not lower Yeah, I agree with you. Humans are humans, just a tiny (psychological) minority are interested enough in seeking actual autonomy. Most people are unconsciously bitter but if you ask them, they're ok with the way things are. It would require outstanding self awareness of each person in order to work, even in a "small distant groups" layout where they communicate through sub networks or something alike. I was imagining a more natural way for society to be freer (through decentralization/peaceful rejection), because we also know what happens when revolution strikes, oppression and misery seems to strike harder. But actual freedom in society is 100% daydreaming. We can only fight for ourselves.

Elected monarchy with set-in-stone Constitution with Bill of Rights protecting modern practices of basic liberties. The national government would act as the head of a federation of tribal republics with each tribal nation having sovereignty within its borders with the national government acting as mediator in disputes between tribes and having final say on international matters such as war. Also, there would be a system of voluntary, incentive-driven national guilds that will provide insurances to those who voluntarily join and follow its standards for workplaces and product approval. It would be a combination of the ancient Germanic tribal nations of the Bronze and Iron Ages especially the Anglo-Saxons on pre-Christian England and a mild form of Falangism.

>>45192 That sounds like it has nothing to do with the type of freedom OP described but OK, I guess there is no way to answer OP's question in a non-boring way.

>>44695 >The least amount of authority people have over each other. Impossible, because you then have to define authority. It's already a problem with contemporary "Free Speech Advocacy", if you make it so someone can scream racial slurs in a child's face with out criticism, let alone prosecution since it's just words bro git over it, then clearly the former has authority over the latter, he was more able to assert his freedom to say whatever the fuarrrk he liked more than the child was able to assert her freedom to walk down the street without being verbally attacked on the basis of her race. There's usually an additive and subtractive element to most anti-authority freedoms, in that it usually provides a freedom to one while taking freedom from another.

>>45200 I think it kind of relates to OP as I think both their suggesting and the way they phrased it perfectly illustrate how most people who think they know what society and people needs least understand the complexity of those needs and simply don't listen or talk or engage with society and people and it's entirely just mental masturbation that if implemented would probably end up in the history books as "the age of soykaf" or something awful.

>>45192 >>45200 This illustrates further of that which I referenced.

>>45228 Growing up in Alabama this just looks like my grandparents house and now my parents house since they've retired. This is an attainable life, just work remote and move to dixie.

>>45228 Ok. Again, that's not even remotely like the kind of freedom OP was talking about, his question wasn't "what's your ideal political system". FYI you can live in a mudhut and plant potatoes right now if you wanted to, I'm sure there are ample neopagan communities in northern europe/Russia who would go along with it and/or already try to live in a similar way. >>45226 I agree, but it's about more than just being terminally online and not interacting with others. Most "political" types from imageboards haven't read any kind of theory beyond 4chan infographics, and it shows. Most of the basic concepts they're expressing have been thoroughly dissected, developed and structured into books and essays long before some internet dweller from /p0l/ thought it up, and they're handicapping themselves so much by just insider trading their soykafty board memes and listening to dumbass e-celeb podcasts. There's a whole library of resources available (for free even) on political philosophy that most imageboard users will never read because they think leaving one's comfortable echo chamber or receiving formal training in humanities is tantamount to being indoctrinated.

>>45231 Yeah I agree now that basically the things you referenced are what I would be hoping someone would get out of conversation. Used to think not talking to anyone was the issue or being "terminally online" as you say but nowadays I see that isn't central and what is central is a lack of accessing information or like you said at the end choosing to not access something and discrediting whole ways of understanding off of weak armchair criticisms. My phrasing was my brain basically mindlessly recycling a criticism out of habit that I think doesn't get to the core of the issue now.

>>45230 Where in Alabama are you?

>>45230 Damn, I need to get into canning, fast.

I would go live out on my own and wait for the people that can't live without law and order to kill each other. Then live as an individualist with my chosen group of people. If others come along then maybe we can form a community. But for the first stretch it is going to be a lot of people freaking out and killing/looting because either they don't know what to do or people are going to act out their fantasies when everything goes south.

>>45230 Do your parents or you work at redstone? If so, are you or any of your loved ones in the FBI? Government defense contractors? Military? I dont trust anyone on an IB saying they are preppers, might be you know who trying to get preppers to come out of the woodwork if you know what I mean... t. also a bamalain

Honestly, I'd go with a socialist government, one akin to Burkina Faso. Even if you're fully against socialism, that's on you but it's honestly the only kind of economy that could help better this country's economic and democratic situation. Our history has shown that at least. Making it a federation and with standardization of a lot of provincial and local languages would also greatly help in literacy, enacting laws on a cultural or religious basis should also be completely secular considering that culture and practice of religion differs completely by province and locality. I'm completely against getting funds or allying with the United States either. They're the reason why my country is so islamist in the first place, has super privatization of industries, why a lot of our culture and history has been completely washed away by religious identity, such as our cinema, which was flourishing during the more `democratic`, secular period of our history, until that government got couped and replaced by an Islamist dictatorship. If that happens at least this place would be livable for most people, as it is today the future seems incredibly bleak.

Just a quick quote from the Unabomber. "Changes large enough to make a lasting difference in favor of freedom would not be initiated because it would be realized that they would gravely disrupt the system. So any attempts at reform would be too timid to be effective. Even if changes large enough to make a lasting difference were initiated, they would be retracted when their disruptive effects became apparent. Thus, permanent changes in favor of freedom could be brought about only by persons prepared to accept radical, dangerous and unpredictable alteration of the entire system. In other words by revolutionaries, not reformers"

>>44695 Supply by force advanced weaponry to every individual that cannot be removed from the human body of which will be activated by ai targeting anyone being too rude to you. Illegal to not keep bullets in it. An auto turret that is on your chest and back. No prison system. No wages and do tasks to receive funding upon proper completion of x task you are involuntarily but equally assigned so as to narow down through random selection your forte. A helmet is to be worn that will automatically pep when someone is a lair so as to avoid people pretending to suck to get better jobs. Only one punishment cruelty or dishonesty, execution by ai turrets on any x person. Removal gets an execution by ai of course upon being seen/scanned. Attempting to prevent the turret from killing an asailant will cause the helmet to give you electroshock therapy upon your bed once you are to sleep later to remove resent memory if so disturbed by such events. To many shocks and you will be executed. Humans will evolve thus to be better as the guns act as selective breeding. >>44697 >but what if everyone was the government aka the powers that be

>>47550 >pep *beeb >>comment too short --and light up and such.

>>44739 That is just North Korea

>>44931 >Female rebel armies are almost entirely fiction with a few exceptions generally women only start fighting as part of an army once things have gone so far to soykaf that literally everybody needs to have a gun and march and stuff. The unfortunate truth is that women tend to have less muscle mass, only the burly women can really be part of an army. >and the women who find themself in regular rebel armies end up generally as fuarrrktoys to keep the boys motivated. This applies to pretty much any army actually.

>>44695 Make women the dominant sex and force men into chains to become nothing more than sex slaves with electric collars competing for drops of water and the possibility to kiss their queen's feet. And for real. Break down big corporations into groups of smaller ones, because small ones can quickly adapt and also can make sure that everyone it them has a voice. Make sure that common ownership of companies exist between people who work there, since it would allow for pay to be both based of someone skill/work yet at the same time never allow for someone to become a billionaire. Give everyone a thousand or so every month so that fear of unemployment wouldn't be a way to push people around yet fast majority would prefer to work. Also remove political parties and instead choose who manages the state randomly from the population for the next few months or years. that solves the issue of there being inherited power. And implement some voting mechanism that preferably is public and can be seen by everyone to not let things happen that the majority of people doesn't want.

>>44695 >making it the freest society possible. >The least amount of authority people have over each other. I would actually do the exact opposite. The problem with modern society isn't that it doesn't have enough freedom, but rather that the quality of our freedom is soykafty, because it allows flat-earthers, anti-vaxxers, islamists, anarchists, anarcho-libertarians, predatory capitalists and other crackpot anti-citizens to spew their putrid waste freely without any credentials or even the good of the whole population in mind, and to whip the moronic masses into frenzy in uncertain times. What wee need is a fair aristocracy where false gods aren't tolerated and where the economy is redirected from profit-seeking to merit and excellence.

>>44695 Realistically, erase about 95% of all laws, shred the current constitution, set up a new one and only note down the most important things. Discipline by force is constitutionalized, so Spanking your kids becomes accepted on a state level. Taxes are set to 1/10th of the income, regardless of the income level. Basically, just return to basic laws. Additionally, all gender/alternative sexualities nonsense is abolished, only relationships that lead to successful procreation in the traditional sense (man+woman=child) are eligible for marriage. Firearms are unregulated, basically like the American 2A, but inherently a part of the constitution, and phrased in a way that is impossible to misinterpret (something like: "every citizen of nation X is not to be restricted in his abilities to acquire a firearm by purchasing, building, inheriting or finding it, and owning, or giving it away.) Also, I would definitely use every trick in the book to start a giant conflict to justify sending about 50% of the current youth to die. Idiots need to be culled, and those who return will be all the wiser.

>>48904 >Return of the long house Duuuuuuumb. You have no good ideas

>>45228 I like this neoreactionary stuff. Small monarchal feudal societies were actually freer and more dignified than what we have today. I don't want deracinated and dehumanized techno-feudalism, I want an acceleration, overextension and then collapse into pre-industrial small city-state feudalism. All the leftist ideas are so clearly doomed. We already have a way in which we lived in harmony with nature for eons. In the past two hundred years of going crazy with progress, we've nearly ended the world at least three times and are working on a fourth and fifth. The experiment has failed.

>>48936 >We already have a way in which we lived in harmony with nature for eons. did you know Switzerland used to be heavily forested? It's been an artificial environment for centuries. Before then, humans hunted mammoths etc to extinction. People used to fuarrrk with nature since forever.

>>48909 Eh, pass. Sounds dreadfully boring. I'll keep living my bisexual ethical-slut lifestyle, and voting for whatever socialists run in elections that I'm eligible to vote in.

>>48940 Smash ass, inhale dick, perfection. Rome is collapsing anyway, may as well have some fun while it lasts.

>>48940 >>48942 Does Rome collapse because of decadence, or is decadence a byproduct of collapse? Or are both a byproduct of a larger, third factor? An eternal question. Don't vote for socialists, the ones that work (Scandinavia, etc) are fundamentally different in a different environment and cannot be compared to ones elsewhere. In the US for instance, all socialists are captured and only represent capital trying to sneak in the back door—they wish to appropriate and shift our current system to be a more insidious and durable form of exploitation. They will betray you. Best of luck

>>48937 I'm not saying we can't interact with nature. There are degrees. A bit of relatively local agriculture and keeping of the land is obviously different compared to where we are now. This is reductive

>>48937 Oh and humans did not hunt mammoths to extinction. We have wool-less mammoths to this day. The end of the last ice age had far more to do with it. If anything, we are close to making the derivatives of mammoths extinct today via industrial society and hunting using motors and guns and satellite maps. How do you address what I said at the end of that previous post? That we have accelerated not only changes in nature and singular local extinctions, but mass global extinctions and biome collapse—all since the industrial revolution? Say what you will about pre-industrial humans, but we never did that for 200,000 years. Now we do it practically once every few decades. And it is accelerating. We are flying into a brick wall at two hundred miles an hour. We need to hit the brakes.

>>48949 >We have wool-less mammoths to this day. elephants are an offshoot from mammoths and speciated millions of years before that particular ice age. >Say what you will about pre-industrial humans, but we never did that for 200,000 years. They probably would have if they could.

>>48947 The post I replied to said that we should revert to feudal, pre-industrial technology only.

>>48950 Yes, it's an offshoot of a common ancestor. Evolution is a tree, not a ladder. But the fact remains: mammoths were not suited to the change in climate, and that is why the are extinct today. Moreso than hunting. Clearly other similar species adapted succesfully. >They probably would have if they could. Yep. Because we are they, and we did it the second we were able to. Which is why I said originally that I hope for acceleration and overextension and collapse, so that we lose the ability to do this stuff again. Same way the Romans forgot how to build roads. >>48951 The examples you described are all pre-industrial. Agriculture, land stewardship, city-building, etc all existed long before the industrial revolution

>>48953 >The examples you described are all pre-industrial. Agriculture, land stewardship, city-building, etc all existed long before the industrial revolution Yes, and my point was that all of those activities can and have resulted in significant environmental degradation.

>>48954 Temporary environmental degradation (with frequent rotation)—not system-wide cataclysm. We only get to screw that one up once. We have gotten uncomfortably close several times since the 19th century, and before then? Never.

>>48957 >Temporary environmental degradation (with frequent rotation)—not system-wide cataclysm. nope. Look what happened in the Levant when the Mongols broke all the irrigation systems, it hasn't recovered to this day. >and before then? Never. There's a genetic bottleneck about 75k years ago where the human race was nearly wiped out.

>>48958 Those are local, not global, and the bottleneck wasn't a result of our own actions. You really can't deny that since the industrial revolution our ability to crash our support systems have ballooned. I get what you're trying to say but you're ignoring the scale

>>48961 >You really can't deny that since the industrial revolution our ability to crash our support systems have ballooned. Of course not. But it has always been there. >I get what you're trying to say but you're ignoring the scale The scale is whatever scale humans exist on, it is not about what technology you have. You can fuarrrk up the environment just fine with nothing but fire.

>>44729 That soykafty graph has been debunked countless times. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WdA9ZK0Hpho Your other arguments are also silly... are you not aware of the fact that working hours have gone down for cenutries https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2021/01/work-working-hours-change-trend-charts/ The problem with Marxoids you people literally just ignore reality.

>>49195 Linking articles from world economic forums to support the status quo here is kinda like linking articles from the CPC to support whatever Chinese are doing. And while I don't have time right now to look at depth at that youtube video, if you are saying that there really is no difference between rise in productivity and hourly compensation, then I wonder how do you explain the rise of inequality in last decades. If nothing changed between how much people earn percentage wise, inequality has next to no reason to be different than in the past.

>>49195 >are you not aware of the fact that working hours have gone down for cenutries they've been going down for about one century, maybe a little more. Rural peasants pretty much anywhere worked way less than factory workers... it just doesn't take that much work to farm if you have a high people-per-square-kilometer ratio, as multi-generational peasant farmers would. And before you say "buh buh why would rural peasants go to the cities to work in factories then??" because there was some reason they couldn't be rural peasants any more. In Britain it was enclosure laws, in Russia it was the civil war and imposition of collective farming. If you lower the amount of people per square kilometer needed to produce crops, you end up with a massive unemployed workforce who will take any job they can get. >>49196 >then I wonder how do you explain the rise of inequality in last decades. that one's easy, it's from increasing government corruption and privatization of basic services.

>>49197 Classic farming is actually sunrise to sundown. Im originally from a remote place with no tech. Meaning still horse to plow not even tractor. Its seasonal however and you have a lot of free time in winter although that free time is also used to repair things you have no time repairing during farming season.