Outis

*

Obiectiv: copiii de azi cind vor fi adulti, sa nu mai trebuiasca sa discute despre ciolaci...

SInt destul de batrin ca sa imi amintesc de vremurile cind, cu exceptia unei zile la fiecare doi ani, nimeni nu vorbea despre politicieni.

("I’m old enough to remember that, except for one day every other year, no one talking about politicians.")

(comentator Jeff E)

*

Telegrame https://t.me/unaltnimeni
Microblog https://teletype.in/@unaltnimeni

*

'Fight for those who can't fight good'
(comentator archangel74b)

*

re. AUR 2024. AUR si patologia statului

*

2023.08.01

Comentariu la citate din George Simion despre institutii si membri de partide, Cotidianul.

"AUR propune reducerea numărului de instituţii „parazitate” de membri de partid. [...] Avem mult prea multe instituţii parazitate de membri de partid care nu îşi fac treaba, reducerea acestor instituţii este soluţia. [...] două treimi dintre instituţiile centrale şi locale ar trebui desfiinţate pentru reducerea cheltuielilor bugetare. [...] Noi nu vrem să ne angajăm din membrii de partid în instituţii unde nu au competenţă"

Acesta este primul pas in directia corecta. Asanarea statului, insa, nu este nici o treaba facila, nici suficienta: exemplul lui Trump, sabotat non stop de birocratie, trebuie luat aminte. Mai mult, Trump a fost tradat repetat de mincinosii instalati de el in posturi. AUR are el insusi experiente de acest fel cu fosti parlamentari.

Dincolo de anecdotica, asanarea statului nu este posibila nici din motive teoretice. Puterea functioneaza ca un atractor pentru caracterele cele mai lipsite de scrupule, principialitate, constiinta morala. Statul are un nucleu sociopatic, manifest prin instrumentalizarea fiintei umane, manipulativism, antiumanism (vezi cazul Rog, https://anon.to/yUbPHm). Statul este mizantropic si machiavelic prin definitie. El ilustreaza principiul lui Hayek, 'de ce ajung in frunte cei mai rai'. Asadar, statul opereaza _in mecanica sa intrinseca_ ca o _masina de anti-selectie_. Mai mult, puterea corupe (Lord Acton), si chiar si cei mai buni sint susceptibili. Nici un efort moral, etic, din partea AUR nu se va putea opune acestor _legi naturale_.

AUR trebuie sa ajunga la intelegerea acestor mecanisme asumindu-si curajos ceea ce trebuie facut: _demantelarea statului_, reducerea lui, inapoierea puterii romanilor ca indivizi, comunitati si asocieri voluntare. Accentul nu cade, ca mai sus, pe 'membri de partid' care 'paraziteaza institutii'. 'Institutiile' insele _sint parazitare_, membri de partid sau nu.

=> Stat mic, popor puternic.

Ruinele altruismului de stat [fin]

Cele de mai sus reprezinta un nexus cauzal care nu are nimic de-a face in particular cu 'cultura' romaneasca, cu istoria totalitarismului recent, cu 'specificul' natiei noastre. Daca se duce ceva de ripa, nu e romanimea: sau, nu singura. E lumea occidentala care a uitat binele libertatii. Sa incercam sa fim destepti, nu doar 'buni', sa intelegem de unde provine raul, si sa ne scapam de sub acest tavalug care, de 150 de ani, zdrobeste fundatiile insele ale vietii civilizate, naturale, omenoase. Sa dam statul inapoi, sa returnam puterea de a face lucruri, inclusiv altruiste, inapoi romanilor.

Sa ignoram pe zicatorii de rele, pe victimizatorii profesionisti ai romanimii, pe 'sufletele frumoase' care cinta litania neputintei. Sufletul nostru anarhic (Petre Pandrea cf. Dan Puric), traditia noastra de mefienta fata de institutii, istoria noastra de impotrivire la ridicarea unui Leviathan (asa numea Hobbes statul modern) - toate, parca ne-au croit pentru sarcina aceasta. Aceasta este miza in 2024, care poate fi ora astrala a romanitatii moderne. Stat mic, popor puternic.

[vezi in telegraf]

Ruinele altruismului de stat [continuare]

2. Monopolizarea de catre stat a functiilor altruiste. Aceasta incepe cu sistemul de 'asigurari', care reveneau in mod normal indivizilor (economisire, 'banul alb pentru ziua neagra'), familiei imediate, a celei extinse, a retelei de suport sociali (prieteni si cunostinte). Asta a fost prima miscare, sub Bismark, care a dus treptat la subordonarea din ce in ce mai completa a societatii fata de stat, la pierderea autonomiei si autarhiei, la distrugerea familiei, la atomizare sociala si anomie individuala.

1+2 inseamna: cind statul iti ia banii pretinzind sa faca el ceea ce faceai tu, anume altruism, orice cheltuiala altruista reprezinta un cost dublu al actului altruist. Utilitatea marginala a leului creste, cea a actului altruist scade, iar la un raport intre cele doua, pragul angajarii altruiste nu mai este trecut. Asa se obtine 'dezumanizarea' de care, printre atiti altii, se plinge la Cotidianul dl. Marga. Dezumanizarea este un proces politic.

3. Statul submineaza si lichideaza actiunea neconstrinsa a individizilor si a asocierilor voluntare dintre acestia. In cazul de fata, asocierile lor voluntare in scopuri caritabile. De la bursele si ajutoarele pentru muncitorii englezi in secolul XVIII, pina la zilioanele de forme de ajutorare pe criterii din cele mai diverse, rasiale, medicale, fost loc de munca! intr-o tara ca America. La rindul ei, capacitatea asociativa nu apare peste noapte, nu apare la ordin, sau cind se da cu fundul de pamin 'umanistul' frustrat. Capacitatea asociativa tine de incredere, iar increderea este o functie a testarii in timp, a progresiei prin pasi mici si a amplificarii graduale a cooperarii verificate. Altruismul social tine de istoria si cultura cooperarii asociative, nu de 'stat', ca e mare, mijlociu sau mic.

4. 'Privatizarea' in operatie astazi, si nu doar in Romania, este de ordin abstract, lipsit de orice fundament in asociativitate. Asociativitatea, structura ei, functionarea ei, este dirijata de scopul asumat si se maturizeaza pe masura ce noi cai de atingere a scopului sint descoperite si incercate. In cazul de fata, statul distorsioneaza structura de motive (incentives), substituind acestei orientari catre scop, orientarea catre satisfacerea criteriilor statului, de la constituire pina la controale. Invatamintul nu este 'privat' doar pentru ca platesti bani in vreme ce statul produce profesorii, da licentele, compileaza programele de invatamint, si omologheaza diplomele absolventilor. Societatea nu este 'civila' atunci cind statul, UE sau Soros iti da bani ca sa faci ceea ce faci. "Altruismul' fata de batrini nu este ingrijire cind, probabil in cirdasie cu statul, organizatii criminale 'albe', adica functionind legal, nu au alta grija decit sa obtina reinnoirea licentelor si sa faca cit mai mult profit (mita fata de organele de control si supervizare, cirdasia acestora in compromiterea scopului si maximizarea profitului - mita este un cost de productie!, reprezentind doar un aspect al problemei).


Statul zis 'liberal' de azi este statul providential de ieri caruia i-au intrat zilele in sac, si care a devenit 'managerial'. Adica, a carui treaba este controlul minutios al tuturor activitatilor si asocierilor de oameni liberi in scop dirijist.
*
[continuare jos]

Re. Varia. Aberatiile statului roman

***

Ruinele altruismului de stat

[vezi in Telegraf; vezi la Anonimus]

Azilele de batrini... Corul semnalizatorilor de virtute si a 'sufletelor frumoase' (Hegel) este asurzitor. Sentimentele sint justificate. Dar la atita moralism educat desfasurat, te-ai fi asteptat si la putina analiza. Nu de alta, dar indignarea, ca e prezentata 'cultivat' sau prin injuraturi, nu aduce solutii, iar descoperirea acestora presupune intelegerea cauzelor.

Soarta batrinilor Romaniei a fost pecetluita din start: doar descoperirea rezultatului e tardiva. Plasarea greutatii altruismului fata de batrini in circa statului, increderea in altruismul de stat e o gresala care poate izvori fie din ignoranta, fie din prostie, fie din indiferenta. Ignoranta e educabila. Prostia nu: ea e ignoranta cu goarna si, adesea, cu tichie de margaritar. De multe ori, in spatele prostiei manifeste se ascund complicate ecuatii de personalitate si/sau interese subsidiare. Cit despre faptul de a-ti pasa sau nu... Poza goala a sentimentelor e o forma de agresiune numita 'moralista', si de obicei e scuza petru dezlantuiri victimizante, mizantropice si malitioase. In cazul de fata, ca in multe cazuri, acestea iau o tenta anti-romaneasca, demoralizind inca si mai mult un popor care are prea putine prilejuri contemporane de mindrie...

*

Altruismul intotdeauna a mers mina in mina cu economia libera pina cind functia altruistica a fost preluata si distrusa de statele 'providenta' dupa mijlocul secolului XIX. Catedrale, universitati, muzee, biblioteci, burse si ajutoare, toate deriva din filantropie, din capacitatea naturala a oamenilor de a ajuta. De cele mai multe ori, altruismul e practicat din motive egoiste: dorinta de iesi in evidenta, de a epata, narcisismul. Alteori, mai rar in zilele noastre, din motive sacrificiale, dorinta de ispasire, credinta cumpararii unui bilet spre rai. Kant era nemultumit ca binele origineaza in interes, si ca nu exista Binele cu majuscula. Locke era satisfacut cu binele emergent al pietei: macelarul care ne pune cina pe masa nu pentru ca ne vrea binele ci din interes propriu. Dincolo de Kant vs. Locke, nevoile altruiste sint naturale pentru orice individ care nu e un sociopat!

Apoi: filantropia nu e doar apanajul celor avuti. Doua exmple contemporane. Uitati-va la cite se fac azi prin finantare de grup (crowd funding): se scriu carti, se fac filme, se pornesc afaceri. Uitati-va acasa, in Romania!, unde Daniel Roxin a organizat campanii arheologice cu fonduri strinse de la benevoli.

A fost suficient ca statul sa dea inapoi doar un pic, sa permita redirectionarea unui procent amarit din taxele compulsive catre scopuri alese individual, pentru ca spectrul lumii romanesti sa se imbogateasca, sa adauge valoare pentru toti, pentru ca lumea noastra sa fie mai buna si mai frumoasa. Imaginati-va ce s-ar putea face daca romanii ar fi lasati in pace, daca ar putea gestiona singuri, fara ingerinta statului, banii care de drept le apartin.

*

La originea problemelor cu casele de batrini stau urmatoarele lucruri.

1. Pauperizarea prin taxare aberanta. Altruismul este o o functie de utilitatea marginala. Cind fiecare leu conteaza, nu mai ai lei de dat. Cind esti intr-o continua grija pentru hrana de miine, altruismul devine un lux. Asta se aplica atit trecatorului de pe strada care da de pomana unui cersetor, cit si apartinatorilor acelor batrini care au fost pusi la stilpul infamiei, culmea, fara urma de compatimire, de empatie, de altruism!

Ca sa fie clar: taxare peste nivelul de 10% era inconcevabila inainte de secolul XX, iar pina si acei oameni erau numiti (aminte 'zeciula'), iobagi, serbi sau clacasi. Las cititorul sa puna singur lucrurile in perspectiva. [continuare jos]

Ontological Shocks, Total Pyrrhonean Semioclasis and a Soul Set for Liberty [continuation]

So, off the board went, without qualms or regret, things which framed everything I strove for my entire life and on account of which I entertained vague fantasies of 'posterity'. It felt like truth and it felt like freedom and, more, it felt clean and healthy...
What will be the following ontological shock, is impossible to say, for no sane person can anticipate the content of the next episode of psychotics...

For a mind in the habit of thinking, used to the discipline of reasoning, conclusions are not hard to accept, you go where the facts and the logic lead you: a new tyranny is rising and is moving at cruising speed. More difficult is the problem what to _do with the conclusion_...
I can tell this much to the reader who will happen across these lines.
I had spent my entire life until my mid 20s in an Eastern European communist totalitarian regime. _They will not succeed_, this tyrannical version on steroids, aiming globally, with its 'scientific' justifications and its high tech armament of repression. Large-scale 'control' is the pipe dream of the Machiavellians, and such control _is not possible_.
Machiavellians of all persuasions are sociopaths at their core. They believe in the infinite malleability and manipulability of the human mind. They believe that humans are born 'tabula rasa' and they can inscribe on their minds whatever designs of anthropogenesis and social engineering they hallucinate. These basic beliefs _are false_.
Following Dr. Malone's soul searching, and equally from personal experience, the experience of a young professional cast long ago in a compulsory work place away from home, feverishly digging for understanding in the permitted but mostly irrelevant books, experience which framed the rest of my life (call it my formative existential crisis) --- I know these _other_ basic beliefs, namely: that people distinguish innately between good and evil; that as a consequence the drive for liberty has precedence; that people _independently_ come to find again and again the language of liberty - words, concepts, arguments; that they can summon the grit to withstand tyranny within, and that, sooner or later, they will find the courage and the means to oppose it. Whether you believe in natural instinct, in God or in the soul, _this_ is the ineradicable truth about human nature. And, if you cannot believe any of the above but still resist Machiavelianism, then at least tell yourself that these are the beliefs _worth having_: at least you will not feel despondent, dejected, forlorn _and powerless_. Heck, even mathematics is founded on basic beliefs (axioms), so you _must_ believe in something, isn't it?
And here is another rationale, this time, learned 'cold': control congeals life, energy, creativity. Control makes things brittle and brittle things break easily (see also Taleb on antifragility). Tyranny is _self_ destructive. It originates in malice, in spite, it grows by negative-sum games, and these all are eating away and finally take down the agents. Tyranny is the cancer of social life.

Even though the new tyranny will not succeed, it can produce a lot of damage - suffering, destruction, death, it may take a long time to meet its appointed time with Ananke, and it may become full blown before we, the older generation, are dead. But, heck, nobody leaves this place alive so, how we live, what we think, say and do, makes all the difference. The difference which may be the only big thing at stake.

Note. Comment submitted to Principia-Scientific, to the Australian League of Rights and to Mike Zimmer's epheptikoi substack.

Re. Dislocarea anilor 2020

*

2023.06.26 Comentariu la Robert D. Malone, Ontological and Existential Shock

Ontological Shocks, Total Pyrrhonean Semioclasis and a Soul Set for Liberty

I had undergone a similar 'ontological shock' as Mr. Malone describes the phenomenon for himself and Mr. Marik: thank you for the candor and for the concept. Mine, took place in two bangs, the second followed by several smaller after-bangs.
My field was political science (go figure...) and, although not mainstream, my work fully respected the epistemological and methodological standards of argumentation officially established since the Enlightenment... I believed deeply in the Western civilization built around the core value of liberty, and I aimed my lifelong work to be a contribution to it, and to engage in dialogue with the epitomes of the reflection on political matters since Plato onward...

The first ontological shock came in 2020/2021. I was in an utter state of disbelief when I saw the unfolding of the 2020 US election and what followed. Corroborating countless accounts from all around the country and analyses which I could validate by my judgement, I soon came to the realization that without the collusion of large swathes of of the media apparatus and, worse, of the judicial apparatus, this electoral stunt could not have been pulled... After this first domino had fallen, the path of inference lead to the fall of the next, and the next, and the next. The judicial power is the third power in the state, while the press (the media) is often considered as the forth power. Once the judicial power goes corrupt, the entire theory of the separation of powers in the state, of the mechanism of checks and balances between them, that is to say, _the foundations of the modern state_, go bad - _from within_. Once the press power goes corrupt, there is no force to keep government good _from without_. The road to tyranny is wide open. I thought then, 'the entire political science, down to the first premises and foundations, ought to be re-made'.
But then, there came in quick succession the second, third and forth ontological shocks: covid, decarbonization/demethanization, zelenkysm and the accompanying fomentation of propaganda, censorship and criminalization of dissent and political opposition. I don't even mention elgebetism, transhumanism, migrationism, reversed racism and the like. They were around for a while, and I consider them either epiphenomena or diversions (elgebetism = oversexualization of politics). The 'road to tyranny' was not only just 'open', we were moving at full trotting speed along it.
All of these take place under the guise of 'science', in ways which had made of science a mockery and a shame. So, I asked myself, what else is false? By the summer of 2022, I was fully engaged in what I called Total Pyrrhonean Semioclasis, the total demolition of previously held opinions (thank you Descartes, for laying your soul open for us; 'Meditations on First Philosophy'): history (lifelong pleasure), evolution theory (the framework for my interdisciplinary work in political theory), cosmology (curious dilettante). And, further down the rabbit hole, to the ultimate recesses, materialism, finiteness and telonomy. All these are _discourses_, which is to say, complex linguistic constructions (hence semio-clasis, the opposite of semiotic construction) _with a performative intent_ (John L. Austin, how to do things with words). After a life long love-affair with philo-sophy, excuse the pun, to my utter embarrassment, only now did I discover Pyrrhonism, which should be the basic mental frame of every civilized person (pyrrhonism is not your off-the-shelf skepticism, not another 'doctrine', but an art, an attitude, a _discipline of the soul_ towards truth and the profession of opinions; if need be, I invite the reader to get acquainted, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5kzZdps9PG4). [continues next]

Re. Varia. Aberatiile statului roman

***

Gluma buna pentru weekend!

Primavara aceasta, am revazut cu mare hlizeala 'Pentagon Wars', cu Kelsey Grammer (1998). Dar pentru prima data am observat in creditele finale ca e bazat pe o istorie adevarata, de fapt, pe cartea scrisa chiar de colonelul John G. Burton, cel care in film conduce investigatia elucubranta asupra vehiculului blindat de lupta Bradley. M-am intrebat cum de SUA sint puterea imperiala mondiala de facto, dar nu a cistigat mai nici un razboi de la al doilea razboi mondial incoace, si posedind o birocratie militara parca scoasa din Kafka?

Nu trec citeva saptamini de la panseul asta lasat in suspensie, cind aflu uluit ca Bradley-ul nu numai ca inca exista, dar a fost desfasurat in cadrul 'contraofensivei ucrainiene' cu rezultate _dezastruoase_.
Iar acum, haha!, statul roman, o putere aservita SUA, cumpara variante ale acestui dezastru din banii publici: ce poate fi mai perfect pentru incheierea acestui dosar de aberatie birocratica si militara?

A, da, si sa nu uitam, achizitia din ianuarie a unui sumbmarin care abia incape in Marea Neagra, cind la Timisoara se fabrica minisubmarine militare.
Povestea acestor 'vehicule blindate' de pomina este acel 'gift that keeps on giving'.

Intotdeauna incepeti-va sfirsitul de saptamina cu un ris bun!

N.B. Nu sint nici un fel de specialist sau expert, sint sigur ca acestia ar putea justifica impanat toata povestea. Dar, vedeti cu judecata proprie documentatia sumara de mai jos (in ordinea mentionarii):

* The Pentagon Wars (1998) [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ir0FAa8P2MU]
* Lt. col. James G. Burton: The Man Who Made War On a Weapon [https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/lifestyle/1986/05/08/the-man-who-made-war-on-a-weapon/7b47ff0e-59df-4201-845c-d19b1597b395/]
* Bradley vehicle [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bradley_Fighting_Vehicle]
* Assault Amphibious Vehicle [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assault_Amphibious_Vehicle]: "The program replaced both the AAV engine and suspension with US Army M2 Bradley Fighting Vehicle (BFV) components modified for the AAV... After the 2003 invasion of Iraq, AAV-7A1s were criticized for providing poor protection for the crew and passengers compared with other vehicles, such as the M2 Bradley." (deci mai proaste decit originalul de poveste!]
* SUA pierzind razboaie: Why does the US lose all its wars? [https://www.siasat.com/why-does-us-lose-all-its-wars-bbc-analysis-2186400/], citind cartea "The right way to lose a war : America in an age of unwinnable conflicts", Dominic Tierney, 2015 [https://www.amazon.com/Right-Way-Lose-War-Unwinnable-ebook/dp/B00KVK374K]
* Dezastrul Bradley in Ucraina (de presa oficioasa!):

Sosirea triumfala!, 2023.06.08 Russian Forces Shocked! The Best Versions of the US Bradley Fighting Vehicles arrived in Ukraine [US Military News, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6GKSowOIC4s]

Apoi, doar o luna mai tirziu!, 2023.06.12 Ukraine loses 16 US-made armored vehicles, group says, but Kyiv’s forces still gain territory [CNN, https://edition.cnn.com/2023/06/12/europe/ukraine-offensive-battlefield-losses-progress-intl-hnk-ml/index.html];

Si, la momentul bilantului!, 2023.07.15 Nearly a third of the Bradley armored vehicles the US provided Ukraine may have already been lost or damaged [Business Insider https://www.businessinsider.com/ukraine-nearly-third-of-bradley-armored-vehicles-lost-or-damaged-2023-7]; 2023.07.23 New Footage Shows ‘Graveyard’ of U.S.-Produced Bradley Fighting Vehicles in Ukraine Taken Out By Russia [Military Watch Magazine, https://militarywatchmagazine.com/article/new-footage-bradley-graveyard-ukraine]


Vezi in Telegra.ph