Joshua Roberts

Every individual is a potential investment.

The rulers of this world have for thousands of years understood this concept far better than has the “average man” and thus the preponderance of fortune via sustained aggregation of capital and influence. The “wretched of the earth” often view their own offspring as wretched and codify in them this perspective, the evolution of a slave morality is indispensable to a ruling class autocracy and we must be aware of the naked determinism. It is enough therefore for me to suggest to you who read this that a popular culture which stands in opposition to this movement (a movement which constitutes the whole of our history as a species) is possible, a culture which would, and in fact can, smash the entire apparatus of global corporatism. The understanding that the universe is indeed an integral system should suggest to us that all human beings are an investment to us. Can we protect the benefits and notion of the family while achieving the realization of unity?

Both are possible, both are necessary. We must maintain the system of the family and strengthen it and we must also create a world culture in which all humans come to see other humans as being indispensable members of their own family – the human family. This may be to some a dangerous diversion into theory and debate which merely opens the door to further globalization, but I must say as I often do that we must walk a razor’s edge if we are to move forward. We must be vigilant against the culture of global corporatism while seeking to create a true global culture: we are faced with a terrible dilemma, if we do nothing we shall have a new world order designed by Malthusians, if we attempt to produce an alternative design it will be under constant assault from those very forces who will try to co-opt it and create a managed form of their own design thereby.

The richest and most powerful have the greatest ability to enhance their investments. With each passing generation the sustainability of personal empire increases and its only attritional opposition forces that up the form of the exceptional who manage to break their imperial conditioning and wriggle through the mud of this world onto dry land. In many cases these individuals are essentially co-opted by the very system of domination they might overthrow; moreover, as time passes and the system of global domination evolves the possibility for escaping from this further management diminishes. You may wake up but you are still a prisoner, forced to plow the fields of your masters and faced with the impregnability of the systems they control.

This dynamic has produced the information war, the war of ideas: this process has been going on for thousands of years.

The battle has changed but the field remains the minds of mankind. You have been persuaded that thoughts and feelings are not material substances by the very people who utilize them for the purpose of sustaining empire. It is enough to become angry, the whole nut of the problem is dissent.
The parameterization is clear: we must identify those individuals and institutions and reject them; we must invest in one another. The evolution of such a system of organized dissent is what the “left” in American politics is thematically supposed to be. I might say that in fact there is no left per se, that a left only coalesces as a sort of homeopathic response mechanism to cultural infections that become too severe. The essential problem here then is that the body politic itself (the electorate) has become cancerous, it has been made cancerous by design so as to eliminate the threat of immunological responses.

To be continued

what is rational for the individual is not rational for the external system is a logical fallacy perpetrated by individuals who adopt a view of existence which is flawed.

the individual is a misnomer, the universe is one giant integral system, quantum mechanics informs us directly of this principle.

the problem is cultural, a world where everything is owned and therefore responsibility is regulated by self-interest will result in totalitarianism.

and yet there seems to be no other solution and thus the progression of the modern world as a whole toward precisely that: ownership.

but it is a misplaced hope to think that by some miraculous mechanism of self-interest a sustainable or acceptable model (to my standards or perhaps yours) should be produced thereby.

one can, therefore, only speculate that such an ordering would be preferable and it seems reasonable that despite the consequences it is preferable.

hey wont pollute the river because they own it in most cases, they have a vested self-interest to maintain, what is to them, an acceptable condition. but their definition of acceptable can vary from case to case.

whats more, they can now deprive the whole of society from the natural use of the river as a means for transit etc.

the initial concept of government is that the People own the river, the problem is that rather than the people benefiting materially as a whole…

from the ownership of the river they are in fact taxed because our government is ill-constituted and corrupt.

what if every citizen obtained a given sum of revenue from the ownership of a river? then you would have popular interest in the river motivated by market principles. but how to achieve that is the goal of government.

this is generally not possible because people exploit power for self-advantage.

without producing a culture, it is impossible to resolve any such dilemma.

the very difficult task is to produce a culture which is aware, acutely aware of such issues and has a non-monetary vested interest and the desire to defend the condition of various systems.

i think such organizations can emerge now with IT at this state, the problem is they are obstructed from active roles in policy creation, their role in policy creation often fails to consider the totality of the market, and ultimately: the existence of external markets and competition itself.

carrying capacity as a logistical determinism is based on various models, you change the implementation you change the resolution.

we can shake the equation out via existing technology, but we cannot do so because the organization of those models is engendered by the profit motive.

it would seem that those with money and power invariably are the sorts of people unable to wield it properly – this is quite telling about the human animal. moreover: the degree of introspection

into the operations of the human mind, as a practice turned outward has given rise to forms which are essentially aberrations and ultimately inhuman.

did they get you to trade your heroes for ghosts?

it has been well remarked that most men lead lives of quiet desperation, but this is a bad perspective and like all perspectivisms (morality comes to mind) they are ultimately diminished by the external world of one’s fellow creatures.

the models break down in practice.

a victory garden is a very good first shot as the princes of this age, it is to be encouraged, but we have had the technology to make food so cheap that only the rich would starve and then as a mere cultural function – this is not only possible from a sustainability standpoint it is necessary.

instead we have gmo’s and farm subsidies, we have a deregulated economic model and free trade.

science is the bitch of money and power, the world is seemingly run by Malthusians..

the documentary “the corporation” makes a decent case for the corporation (being a legal entity like a person) being a psychopath.

one thing is certain, the corporations sole motive is often the profit motive, to this end it is “an externalizing machine”, and the cost is paid by everyone.

this is an inefficient model for the organization of production, all centralized control has the same flaw, the most successful companies themselves are emergent in that they emerge from the employees.

but what is necessary is an emergent governmental system of virtual representation.

it is not the modeling of the human being and its entrance into synthetic systems which has commoditized human life and made us all into synthetic properties of a discrete system – it is the inaccuracy and improbability of the model, its lack of sophistication.

and yet this transparency itself is a double edged sword. one must have a culture fit to use such a tool, for now you literally Are your FICO score.

guns and butter, napalm and color tv.

it should be increasingly apparent to us that our entire theory of civilization is built on flawed principles.

its structure is predictably sick and inhuman as a result, survival in the Jeffersonian sense is required but will not be enough to address that the crystal palace has been built up on a foundation of sand.