Email to Anthony Albanese, PM of Australia (06.05.2023)
Dear Prime minister,
I am an indigenous person whose ancestors walked the Earth some 200 million years ago, before Australia became a continent. My ancestors, the First People, are the true original owners of the Earth on account of their earliest exclusive possession of the landmass that includes the present day continent of Australia. I hereby claim original ownership over this entire continent on behalf of my people. Since all living humans are descendants of the First People, my ancestors, I provisionally include all permanent residents of Australia as co-claimants, including You. I respect the right of anyone to deny our shared original ownership and thus relinquish the associated ownership rights.
I call on You to denounce the false claims made by some tribal corporations that they alone are the first people and the original owners of this landmass or any part thereof.
Sincerely,
Dear Prime minister,
I am an indigenous person whose ancestors walked the Earth some 200 million years ago, before Australia became a continent. My ancestors, the First People, are the true original owners of the Earth on account of their earliest exclusive possession of the landmass that includes the present day continent of Australia. I hereby claim original ownership over this entire continent on behalf of my people. Since all living humans are descendants of the First People, my ancestors, I provisionally include all permanent residents of Australia as co-claimants, including You. I respect the right of anyone to deny our shared original ownership and thus relinquish the associated ownership rights.
I call on You to denounce the false claims made by some tribal corporations that they alone are the first people and the original owners of this landmass or any part thereof.
Sincerely,
A common characteristic of pagan/polytheistic cults is that their gods quarrelled, cheated, fought and abused one another. Human subjects of such gods were stuck with contradictory ideals, with bad role models, and their moral conduct could not possibly be better than that of their gods.
In Norse/Germanic paganism the top gods were violent, tempestuous and intemperate, gods of war (those tribes were literally idolising conflict and murder). The essence of their value system seems to be animal survival and domination through violence, with no transcendental principle to be discerned. They had no concept of humanity, no ideas about the principles of sense, meaning, consciousness. Their paganism was primitive in every sense, irrational and self-defeating, and the only reason it is promoted today is because it is inseparable from Nazi ideology. Nazism was impossible without mystifying the connection between ‘blood and soil’, and paganism offered them this ideological excuse to dehumanise other races ‘on their ancestral soil’. Nativist supremacism is not possible without animistic commitments. What they failed to understand is that the value of humanity resides in rational agency, which is independent of ‘bloodline’ and contrary to tribalism. Paganism and subsequently Nazism denied the conditions of their own capacity to generate meaning and bestow value, and this implicitly denied even their own values.
On Ethno-Traditionalism
Some influencers of the ‘freedom movement’ are advocating the idea that global fascism can be defeated only by a return to a culturally homogenous nationhood ruled by traditions inherited from the ancient tribes of that area. Let us forget for now about the implications of “blood & soil” ideology, or ‘nativist supremacism’, which is a complex subject in its own right. They seem to forget that just two years ago, perhaps still now, the majority of their own ethno-tribe, their own family, would have them forcibly vaccinated, masked and locked up in a concentration camp if they did not comply with the arbitrary and harmful orders of the day. No, your ethno-tribe will not have your back if you start to think rationally and therefore autonomusly. Are those ethno-traditionalist influencers also not aware that the overwhelming majority of their tribe does not give a damn about traditions anymore? They just want affordable bread and reliable services, including social media where they can conveniently post their ‘opinions’ about covidiots, or whatever is the current thing they are told to talk about. In any case, traditions were always only about crowd control, allowing every fool to live their life without thinking, because they knew what was expected of them, and obedience to these rules was the only standard of right vs wrong; no moral conscience required. Try to exit this ideological enclosure because you found something ‘wrong’ with it and see how quickly they will dispatch with you. But what happens when traditions are lost? Without tradition you have two choices: 1) obey the rulling power unquestioningly, which is absurd, or 2) think, about almost everything, and make a moral decision at every step, which is hard work. Can you see what just happened? Because the traditions are mostly lost, cultural homogeneity undermined, things became scary and no longer make sense, some people started to think, trying to work things out. Even the proponents of tribal ethno-nationalism started to think instead of just hailing their tribal gods of war and mindlessly practicing the rites of fertility in the great circe of life. It is predictable that the first reaction would be fight/flight, wanting to UNDO all the bad changes and go back to some mythical safe-place where the gods of war kept their ancient tribe healthy, harmonious and happy, and nobody would dare to have a wrong idea because the village chieftain would chop off their head. When they will realise that this vision is just a sanitised illusion, just a fear-reaction, they will think again, will try to work things out a little deeper, perhaps relinquish some of the old assumptions and think of something entirely new. This is a good thing.
The compliant majority is still complying, not yet thinking. They are adhering to the pattern of their traditional thought-regime even after giving up their traditions. People cannot realise they are captives of a thought-regime, let alone be freed from a thought-regime, until they realise that the invisible regime is itself the cause of pain, or plainly absurd. They need more time.
Some influencers of the ‘freedom movement’ are advocating the idea that global fascism can be defeated only by a return to a culturally homogenous nationhood ruled by traditions inherited from the ancient tribes of that area. Let us forget for now about the implications of “blood & soil” ideology, or ‘nativist supremacism’, which is a complex subject in its own right. They seem to forget that just two years ago, perhaps still now, the majority of their own ethno-tribe, their own family, would have them forcibly vaccinated, masked and locked up in a concentration camp if they did not comply with the arbitrary and harmful orders of the day. No, your ethno-tribe will not have your back if you start to think rationally and therefore autonomusly. Are those ethno-traditionalist influencers also not aware that the overwhelming majority of their tribe does not give a damn about traditions anymore? They just want affordable bread and reliable services, including social media where they can conveniently post their ‘opinions’ about covidiots, or whatever is the current thing they are told to talk about. In any case, traditions were always only about crowd control, allowing every fool to live their life without thinking, because they knew what was expected of them, and obedience to these rules was the only standard of right vs wrong; no moral conscience required. Try to exit this ideological enclosure because you found something ‘wrong’ with it and see how quickly they will dispatch with you. But what happens when traditions are lost? Without tradition you have two choices: 1) obey the rulling power unquestioningly, which is absurd, or 2) think, about almost everything, and make a moral decision at every step, which is hard work. Can you see what just happened? Because the traditions are mostly lost, cultural homogeneity undermined, things became scary and no longer make sense, some people started to think, trying to work things out. Even the proponents of tribal ethno-nationalism started to think instead of just hailing their tribal gods of war and mindlessly practicing the rites of fertility in the great circe of life. It is predictable that the first reaction would be fight/flight, wanting to UNDO all the bad changes and go back to some mythical safe-place where the gods of war kept their ancient tribe healthy, harmonious and happy, and nobody would dare to have a wrong idea because the village chieftain would chop off their head. When they will realise that this vision is just a sanitised illusion, just a fear-reaction, they will think again, will try to work things out a little deeper, perhaps relinquish some of the old assumptions and think of something entirely new. This is a good thing.
The compliant majority is still complying, not yet thinking. They are adhering to the pattern of their traditional thought-regime even after giving up their traditions. People cannot realise they are captives of a thought-regime, let alone be freed from a thought-regime, until they realise that the invisible regime is itself the cause of pain, or plainly absurd. They need more time.
Another hilarious, and tragic, piece by a self-hating marxist who happens to be an exceptional writer: https://samkriss.substack.com/p/in-englands-dreaming
Substack
In England's dreaming
Lizards and black magic: a republican case for Charles
There is no escape from the ‘other’ side of humanity. They are our alter-ego, our own shadow.
A sovereign citizen who goes by the name Charles III ran from the journalists and refused to answer questions following his sentencing to 100 hours of community service at the Melbourne Magistrate’s Court.
A true story.
I recently ordered some injectable vitamin C, but I didn’t have any syringes. I also felt a bit uneasy about self-injecting (never done it before) so I procrastinated. Today I was driving past a drug injecting centre, and having all the ‘gear’ still in the car I realised they might give me a quick demo and some free syringes for home use. This was also a good opportunity to investigate what happens inside these injecting centres. I walked in, some guy in a blue tracksuit asked my for spare cash, about three times, but I ignored him, went straight up to a nurse and quietly explained the situation (the place felt a bit like a library, so my voice naturally assumed THAT tone). She says (in a normal voice) that they can’t help me. I say Why? (now also adjusting my voice to normal), it is only vitamin C. She tells me to go to my GP because their liability insurance does not cover “this kind of use”. The explanation sounded rather typical of the local government absurdities so I just nodded ok ok, fine, just please give me some syringes and I will somehow do it myself. The nurse again says “No, our liability insurance does not cover this kind of use… and you are holding up the customers, SIR!”. So I say, what if I had some heroin in the car and just needed some syringes. She looked at me sternly and said that I already told her what I really need those syringes for. I responded, what if I lied, because I was too embarrassed to tell you I use heroin. At this point she calls the security and I got instantly man handled by a huge Māori guy (I didnt even see him coming at me) and was not so gently forced out the front door. All the junkies looked at me as if I were some kind of criminal. A disheveled woman clutching an empty shopping trolley was shaking her head with disgust as I was limping away… What a day!
I recently ordered some injectable vitamin C, but I didn’t have any syringes. I also felt a bit uneasy about self-injecting (never done it before) so I procrastinated. Today I was driving past a drug injecting centre, and having all the ‘gear’ still in the car I realised they might give me a quick demo and some free syringes for home use. This was also a good opportunity to investigate what happens inside these injecting centres. I walked in, some guy in a blue tracksuit asked my for spare cash, about three times, but I ignored him, went straight up to a nurse and quietly explained the situation (the place felt a bit like a library, so my voice naturally assumed THAT tone). She says (in a normal voice) that they can’t help me. I say Why? (now also adjusting my voice to normal), it is only vitamin C. She tells me to go to my GP because their liability insurance does not cover “this kind of use”. The explanation sounded rather typical of the local government absurdities so I just nodded ok ok, fine, just please give me some syringes and I will somehow do it myself. The nurse again says “No, our liability insurance does not cover this kind of use… and you are holding up the customers, SIR!”. So I say, what if I had some heroin in the car and just needed some syringes. She looked at me sternly and said that I already told her what I really need those syringes for. I responded, what if I lied, because I was too embarrassed to tell you I use heroin. At this point she calls the security and I got instantly man handled by a huge Māori guy (I didnt even see him coming at me) and was not so gently forced out the front door. All the junkies looked at me as if I were some kind of criminal. A disheveled woman clutching an empty shopping trolley was shaking her head with disgust as I was limping away… What a day!
Nonsense cannot be ethical or moral. Any ‘moral code’ or ethical claim that contains a logical fallacy (contradicts itself) is nonsense, therefore wrong. The starting point for morality/ethics is consistent reasoning, not ‘the heart’, not tradition, not ideology, not obedience, not nature.
I suspect the experts agree that the majority cannot be reasoned with, cannot be morally ‘fixed’ but only ‘managed’. The events of the last few decades fit the Nietzschean dictum: “Whom you cannot teach how to fly, teach how to fall the quickest.” This won’t work either. The experts are evidently also just people who are yet to learn how to fly.
Forwarded from Normal (Michael Kowalik)
My Email to Energy Network company regarding the introduction of a quarterly Meter Reading Fee.
I received your letter informing me that a meter reading fee will apply if a smart meter is not installed, implying that this fee covers an additional cost to your company associated with traditional meters.
In order to establish whether your financial claim reflects a genuine cost, I need additional information:
1. The actual purchase price of the additional “smart meter”.
2. The estimated installation cost of the additional “smart meter”.
3. The expected service-free lifespan of the proposed “smart meter”.
I bring to your attention that the extended scope of information that would be collected by a “smart meter” is owned by me and is subject to licensing. You have not attempted to negotiate a price for this near real-time, energy-lifestyle information to be made available to you. If you will make me an offer, I will be able to determine whether “smart meter” is the right choice for me.
I received your letter informing me that a meter reading fee will apply if a smart meter is not installed, implying that this fee covers an additional cost to your company associated with traditional meters.
In order to establish whether your financial claim reflects a genuine cost, I need additional information:
1. The actual purchase price of the additional “smart meter”.
2. The estimated installation cost of the additional “smart meter”.
3. The expected service-free lifespan of the proposed “smart meter”.
I bring to your attention that the extended scope of information that would be collected by a “smart meter” is owned by me and is subject to licensing. You have not attempted to negotiate a price for this near real-time, energy-lifestyle information to be made available to you. If you will make me an offer, I will be able to determine whether “smart meter” is the right choice for me.
Update on the manual meter reading fee (see above): The energy company has decided not to impose a charge on manual meter readings, and apologised for confusion and inconvenience caused by their previous letter.
There is a logical distinction between valuing health and valuing the necessary conditions of health - the necessary condition of value is not ‘therefore’ valuable, this is a common logical fallacy. philpapers.org/rec/KOWWII Disease is a necessary condition of the value of penicillin, but disease is not valuable because penicillin is valuable. So, we can value what we need nature for without valuing nature because of it, precisely because nature is also a source of disease and pain, and the cause of death.
philpapers.org
Michael Kowalik, When it is Not Logically Necessary for a Necessary Condition of Value to be Valuable - PhilPapers
The premise that it is logically necessary for a necessary condition of value to be valuable is sometimes used in metaethics in support of the claim that agency, or some constitutive ...
Negative inclusion is Exclusion.
To include the negation of something with that something, you only exclude that something, without including anything else in its place. For example, by including as women those who ‘contradict the premise that only females are women’ with those who ‘are women only because they are females’, you exclude females from women and end up with an empty category.
To include the negation of something with that something, you only exclude that something, without including anything else in its place. For example, by including as women those who ‘contradict the premise that only females are women’ with those who ‘are women only because they are females’, you exclude females from women and end up with an empty category.
If most people are substantially controllable under certain conditions, and those conditions can be produced by a leader, then most people are substantially not free to begin with. The degree to which people are controllable is not all or nothing; this is evidently a matter of degree and varies from person to person. On the other hand, since Humans are essentially moral beings (if we were not moral beings then our freedom would have no intrinsic value), we are not blameless for being controllable. And here lies a dilemma: we must either accept moral responsibility for our unfreedom, or we did not deserve freedom in the first place.
There is a feedback loop between morality and rationality: bad moral choices give rise to irrational beliefs, and irrational beliefs give rise to bad moral choices, and over time this can escalate to a catastrophe, but the process can also be reversed, leading to general moral improvement.
What makes us Human (rational consciousness) occurs in a different time to biological evolution, in a different reality. Crocodiles evolved for much much longer than Homo sapiens evolved from apes and are still just reptiles. In a sense, animality and humanity are opposites, but humans have the capacity to go back to the other side, become less conscious by prioritising their animality, or go beyond it, by prioritising their rational consciousness, within a single lifetime.
That chimps engage in tribalism, violence and social competition proves that these are not Human behaviours, but animal behaviours, and something else is necessary to be human.
Forwarded from CunningPlan 🐭
This Canadian sets it out well: https://twitter.com/DNSWilson/status/1655819673756389376?s=20
A lot of people are getting upset having their conduct during covid compared to Germans supporting the rise of Nazism.
Let's recapitulate.
A fifth of the population was legally classified as unclean. They were barred from most public spaces, including theatres, restaurants, movies, pubs, clubs, swimming pools, sporting events, concerts, conventions, etc.
To access public facilities, people had to carry a digital mark with them so authorities could confirm they weren't unclean.
The unclean were fired and barred from most jobs: education, healthcare, courts - all public sector work, most major union jobs and a wide smattering of major private employers. When they were fired, the unclean were denied employment insurance, the reasoning being that they had been fired for cause on account of being unclean.
The unclean were banned from travel on trains, planes, and chartered boats. They had no legal means of leaving the country. Even if they wanted to, they could not escape the country that obviously hated them so.
It became illegal to socialize with the unclean. They weren't allowed to attend weddings or funerals, or visit sick relatives or friends in hospital.
Special laws were made for the unclean subjecting them to house arrest if they were around a person who had recently had a positive PCR test. The unclean had to continue to cover their faces in public when universal masking was dropped.
It became socially acceptable to wish death upon the unclean in social media and in major news organizations. Public health figures and other politicians gave press conferences to shame and insult the unclean. The public developed shared pejorative names for them, and relished in insulting the unclean.
News media regularly ran polls asking if the unclean should be arrested or fined. Public figures openly and proudly spoke about witholding medically necessary healthcare from the unclean - letting them die. The unclean were removed from organ transplant lists, condemned to almost certain death.
No end date for these measures was ever suggested, no timeline given. To the contrary, this was called the "new normal".
Criticizing any of these developments made you a social pariah, and likely cost you most of your friendships and family relations, if not your job.
The lesson of the Holocaust - and of covid - isn't that Germans or Albertans or people of the 21st Century are uniquely gullible or evil. It's that for most people, "morality" is not a matter of principle, but rather of adopting what they perceive to be the dominant group ideology - even if that ideology is marked by wanton irrationality or brutal inhumanity.
Indeed, as in certain cults or gangs, the brutality or irrationality of the acts or beliefs required to signal group inclusion further entrench people into the ideology, rather than repel them; a kind of perverse sunk cost fallacy writ large.
So, yes, if you're a typical person - Albertan, Canadian or otherwise - it is overwhelmingly likely that you would have been a Nazi if you were born in Nazi Germany. If you cheered along lockdowns and mandates, that likelihood approaches certainty.
Repent.
A lot of people are getting upset having their conduct during covid compared to Germans supporting the rise of Nazism.
Let's recapitulate.
A fifth of the population was legally classified as unclean. They were barred from most public spaces, including theatres, restaurants, movies, pubs, clubs, swimming pools, sporting events, concerts, conventions, etc.
To access public facilities, people had to carry a digital mark with them so authorities could confirm they weren't unclean.
The unclean were fired and barred from most jobs: education, healthcare, courts - all public sector work, most major union jobs and a wide smattering of major private employers. When they were fired, the unclean were denied employment insurance, the reasoning being that they had been fired for cause on account of being unclean.
The unclean were banned from travel on trains, planes, and chartered boats. They had no legal means of leaving the country. Even if they wanted to, they could not escape the country that obviously hated them so.
It became illegal to socialize with the unclean. They weren't allowed to attend weddings or funerals, or visit sick relatives or friends in hospital.
Special laws were made for the unclean subjecting them to house arrest if they were around a person who had recently had a positive PCR test. The unclean had to continue to cover their faces in public when universal masking was dropped.
It became socially acceptable to wish death upon the unclean in social media and in major news organizations. Public health figures and other politicians gave press conferences to shame and insult the unclean. The public developed shared pejorative names for them, and relished in insulting the unclean.
News media regularly ran polls asking if the unclean should be arrested or fined. Public figures openly and proudly spoke about witholding medically necessary healthcare from the unclean - letting them die. The unclean were removed from organ transplant lists, condemned to almost certain death.
No end date for these measures was ever suggested, no timeline given. To the contrary, this was called the "new normal".
Criticizing any of these developments made you a social pariah, and likely cost you most of your friendships and family relations, if not your job.
The lesson of the Holocaust - and of covid - isn't that Germans or Albertans or people of the 21st Century are uniquely gullible or evil. It's that for most people, "morality" is not a matter of principle, but rather of adopting what they perceive to be the dominant group ideology - even if that ideology is marked by wanton irrationality or brutal inhumanity.
Indeed, as in certain cults or gangs, the brutality or irrationality of the acts or beliefs required to signal group inclusion further entrench people into the ideology, rather than repel them; a kind of perverse sunk cost fallacy writ large.
So, yes, if you're a typical person - Albertan, Canadian or otherwise - it is overwhelmingly likely that you would have been a Nazi if you were born in Nazi Germany. If you cheered along lockdowns and mandates, that likelihood approaches certainty.
Repent.
X (formerly Twitter)
Don Wilson, LLB 🇨🇦 (@DNSWilson) on X
A lot of people are getting upset having their conduct during covid compared to Germans supporting the rise of Nazism.
Let's recapitulate.
A fifth of the population was legally classified as unclean. They were barred from most public spaces, including theatres…
Let's recapitulate.
A fifth of the population was legally classified as unclean. They were barred from most public spaces, including theatres…