Feminazi logic: Willingly submit to all questioning, or else suffering during interrogation is your fault

I may now have a somewhat better understanding of the origins of the term “Feminazi” (regardless of the extent to which the word “genuine” reasonably describes the presently described case). Without wanting to debate the appropriateness of eugenics as an appropriate approach (or not) to achieving desirable objectives with regard to an overall reduction in unwanted attentions, particularly including those sexual in nature, the following interrogation-oriented logic can be cited:

If you fail to submit completely to any founded and/or unfounded interrogation, then any suffering occurring as a result is the fault of your own obstinance, because any suffering such as may occur could have been evaded by simply answering any/all questions about any/all subjects to start with.

For example, if any women accuses any man of any impropriety whatsoever, a failure to submit to a thorough interrogation regarding any/all potential previous improprieties is evidence that any suffering during interrogation is the fault of the unwilling interrogee.

Presumably, the number of maybe-Stalins who would have much use for those who can be persuaded to deploy such rationale in the process of effectively seeking means of extortion, or otherwise coercion or power over (especially psychological), is not low these days.

It can also be noted that unwanted sexual attention as a means to achieve a reduction in unwanted sexual attention seems particularly oxymoronic, which would tend to suggest that stated and actual objectives are likely to be highly divergent. However, it is possible that some such “Feminazi” could be motivated by third parties with more generic psychological dominance, control, coercion, extortion and/or blackmail-oriented objectives, which could help to explain the patently illogical aspect of unwanted attention (e.g., toward third parties unrelated to any previous experience of a perpetrator) as a means to reduce unwanted attention.

Posted in Arts, media & society, Courts/police/justice, Epistemology, International, Quotidian | Leave a comment

Proportional representation is not unstable. It would be “too stable” unless designed otherwise

Under proportional representation, government would be more stable and better represent different groups. At present, a small change in electoral results can lead to a 100% shift in power. This inherently leads to many inefficiencies as one government starts something, then the next tears it down and starts something new.

While it’s fine to try new things and abandon plans that prove dumb (or at least not worth the money), the more stable electoral results would tend to provide more stable policy, which would facilitate higher quality and better implementation of policy.

The main problem with proportional representation is that it could be “too stable”, and so any proportional representation elements would need to be designed in a way that makes it easy for a) party members to kick the bums out of their own party at times, and b) for voters to penalize parties whose members prove unable to do so.

In short, being “too stable”, additional (democratically empowered) anti-corruption measures would be needed to reassure about unseen insiders and party lists, etc. Having “lists” at a relatively regional level, not national level, could address that.

Posted in Political philosophy, Political science | Leave a comment

Fixations on trade balance (e.g., balance with each partner) is especially dumb for the country of the main international reserve currency

Active management of trade policy to have equal imports/exports on each trade account with trading partners (or even the aggregate trade account) tends to lead to bad economic policy that is mostly politically motivated (e.g., getting contracts for friends).

The concern should be more about competition, which underlies innovation and technical progress, which are themselves the main thing (aside from effective and generally impartial institutions) which underlie growth in well-being.

It’s not dumb to concern about trade deficits. But to fixate on them is bad, and among those whose opinions on the matter is professional, such a fixation would be discrediting to their peers.

If the above is not obvious, one should take the time to understand the following, as it is very important. The US dollar is the reserve currency for many countries (and companies). The stability and liquidity of the currency mean that there is relatively higher demand, which makes the US dollar “overpriced”. This is a major cause of US trade deficits being practically baked into the global finance and trading system. Also, it can be noted that, yes there are (trade) deficits, but US international buying power is also immediately upgraded due to what is mentioned above (for corporations this means they can get a higher volume of real investments for the same amount of US currency), while at the same time a high US dollar tends to additionally weed out uncompetitive activities and thus contributes to higher competitiveness in the long run.

The billionaires all understand this. However, it is not always better for all groups (especially in the shorter run), and diverse groups should enjoy significant political freedoms (i.e. free of oppression by the state and moreover enjoying the active protection of the state to do so) to research, express and organize to represent their interests both within and outside of the main established political processes and organizations.

Posted in Business and entrepreneurship, International, Policy | Leave a comment

The level of freedom that people in 2037 will have if we do nothing

Non-standard-issue thinking processes to be blocked, while purporting assistance in the form of enforcing to think in a regulated manner at the level of how you do your arithmetic.

A library of approved thought, and the immediate shutting down of cognitive activity against those who consider to think outside of the library of approved thought, until their non-standard thinking processes which are more difficult to monitor and remotely program can be whipped, cajoled and beaten into shape in order to prevent the possibility of other-than-preapproved thought.

The same to be applied to all forms of thought.

And, most especially, those whose brains do not operate in the standardized manner to be re-learned and re-learned again until they either remove themselves from social evolution or accept ways of thinking that are amenable to standard-issue micro-control over their neural function.

 

I.e., the complete mental enslavement of humanity.

Posted in Arts, media & society, Epistemology, Physics, Political philosophy, Quotidian, Science, Web and computing | Leave a comment

How to help a project go forward

In order to ensure that a project can progress in a satisfactory manner, first sabotage any efforts which are inconsistent with nano-management according to one’s specific objectives which valuate other participant’s views or interests at precisely zero except to the extent that knowledge of those things may assist with the nano-management if/when they ultimately tire of the micro-implemented sabotage.

For example, if any thought processes may be detected which are not a) thoroughly consistent with Stalinist objectives or b) primarily viewed as quaint worthless oddities which may potentially be tolerated (i.e., made the object of suppression via neuroweapons) for some interim period, then it would be necessary to generally sabotage any efforts of such individual(s) on the project until correct thinking could be achieved.

In case of the possibility that potential participants may prefer to be involved in other projects, or in case current participants may instead turn to other projects, the necessity to cultivate means of sabotaging alternative projects may become evident.

In the case that project participants are lacking in sufficient confidence to accept such levels of nano-management, effectiveness of reassurances can be developed via focus grouping processes until participants in such projects (to be defined and/or redefined on an ongoing ad hoc and/or pre-planned manner) have an adequately believing and especially willing attitude regarding the ability to nano-win by being nano-managed until they are able to nano-manage them-unselves in an acceptable manner.

______________________________________________

Similarly, if you do exactly as I tell you at all times and places, then you will be powerful.

Posted in Arts, media & society, Courts/police/justice, Economics, pure theory, Epistemology, History, International, Philosophy, Physics, Political philosophy, Quotidian, Science, Web and computing | Leave a comment

Ideal features of an effective police state

1) All citizens believe any accusation about any one (except about benevolent leaders).

2) Any appearance of being downtrodden is evidence of deserving to be downtrodden.

3) Any criticism of the state or injustice is to be presented as evidence that some fault on the part of the individual making the criticism (e.g., related to whatever purported deficiencies and/or potential deviant behaviour, preferences and/or thought) underlies their deservingness of negative esteem which led to their having the possibility to hold a critical attitude toward one or more organs of the state and/or parts thereof.

4) Any statement involving an element of truth is regarded as evidence of the entirety of truth in whatever statement that follows, in the case that the statement is demonstrably associated with state power. If the statement involving an element of truth is critical of the state (excluding space for orchestrated ostracization of non-rehabilitated politicos), however, this is evidence of the general dishonesty of whatever follows.

5) Those who criticize or identify shortcoming in police or intelligence in any manner (other than those which legitimize to give them larger budget allocations or greater freedom to abuse their position) are immediately deemed suspect, to be investigated until neutralized including by setup and/or outright fabrication if necessary (excluding police states where people simply disappear when they criticize the state).

6) Independent civilian capacity to resolve various social, economic and political issues is zero or near to zero, in preference for highly exclusionary practices with regard to access to human, financial and other resources which would enable civilians to independently resolve said issues. Independent civilian activities are suppressed vigorously (Zersetzung is one naming and example of this) using any rationale that can be enforced to the broader public.

Posted in Arts, media & society, Courts/police/justice, History, International, Political philosophy | Leave a comment

Earning some extra cash in 1997 vs. 2017

1997 process to earn some extra cash. Sign up with temp agency for … whatever … some work. Start work within the day or week. Alternatively, print off a few CVs, go for a walk, literally just walk into any place with a “help wanted” sign and be employed on the spot or within the day.

2017 process to earn some extra cash. Send out hundreds or thousands of applications (not in person please) including registering with very numerous employment agencies, but only obtain replies for positions which either do not in fact exist or which require additional psychometric or other screening requirements that you only learn about after submitting all your data.

Apparently the job markets are similarly strong in 1997 and 2017. But either that is complete bullshit and some mirage of statistics, or, someone is royally fucking with me to prevent even the tiniest opportunity from coming to fruition. Or, both.

Posted in Arts, media & society, Economics, social and commercial policy, History, International, Physics, Political philosophy, Quotidian, Science, Web and computing | Leave a comment

How to save culture in an unbiased manner

Take it upon oneself, from an external position, to model out all identified cultural entities according to specified criteria, and then having discovered all knowledge relating to those cultural entities which enable to be informed about all specifications, reinforce the identity and perception related to the existing list of cultural criteria, in particular in manners highly amenable to dichotomous (or similarly well-defined) treatment.

For those lost souls whose modelled cultural identification displays shortcomings or confusion, it may be necessary for the government to step in to save culture, for example via psychological campaigns to enforce and/or pin down specific packages and/or (in rare allowable cases) relatively varied combinations of packages of cultural identifications and/or preferences. The preceding may not be required for those whose abberrant modelled identification is proven to be a flawed estimate, for example if good mental health is regularly proven through 9-5 economic activity and sufficiently mainstream media consumption.

The top threat to saving culture is thus a refusal of any individual to provide sufficient information to enable the documentation required. Such threats to culture must be assisted to overcome their shortcomings and/or confusion to the point that they can be reliably counted upon to demonstrate non-loss of culture at predictable times and places.

If implementing the above, society will benefit generally if the ability to regulate culture can serve for its protection. This will be all the more true if generally mathematical procedures are applied, as this will assist in implementation of politically unbiased cultural regulation.

Bonus edition: Regulating the above at the level of one’s own language (for example via a library of pre-approved thoughts operated via mandatorily-mutually-sanctioned and remotely-applied neurotechnolgy) will assure its vitality and integrity, in particular if regulated widely within acceptable margins of error and variation. In this case, governmental control over the specific neural activities of the population can be assured for good mental health and cultural protection purposes at the same time, as legitimized by the notional similarity to the production of dictionaries and their historically frequent use in educational, learning and other activities.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Macho macho man … : female edition

Teaching people that using and abusing them is a problem that will cause them to be weak.

For example, if a girl or women is “taught” that another person (such as a man) using and abusing her body, mind or spirit is a bad thing, this will make her weak. For example, this may cause her to cry if someone perpetrates such abuse.

To protect people from such ills, desensitization to and regularization of diverse forms of mental and physical abuse should be undertaken to make them stronger. For example, this sort of help can be administered by narrations related to sexual violence, and expressions of anger towards those who taught that there was some wrong thing about that.

“Being stronger” is when people use and abuse your body, mind and spirit, and you not only do nothing for yourself but try to enforce that others do the same.

 

(PS: As a line of direct and/or indirect questioning, it is unambiguously hostile for the fact of obviously belonging to a package of interrogation and potentially serving as input for various forms of coercive persuasion, aka, brainwashing.)

Posted in Arts, media & society, Courts/police/justice, Epistemology, Philosophy, Physics, Quotidian, Science, Web and computing | Leave a comment

People suck 2017. A.k.a., reasons for words like “Sovietesque”

New roommate. Located above. Low expectations. Expectations not exceeded.

 

Except, that (the timing of) this new neighbour of the same ethnic background as the landlord has been temporally associated with the landlord and her son apparently demonstrating belief that it is OK to monitor tenant’s online activities. (They may be unclear on the difference between, say, a) visiting some publicly available writings of a person or b) periodic general account overview, as contrasted with c) actively monitoring the online activities of a person. The EFF primer on metadata is illustrative of how problematic this could be, and could help to understand why the general importance of this and related issues). Consuming public content or general account overviews are fundamentally different from spying on a person’s online activity. One of these things is fairly normal, the other in most cases criminal.

Specifically, yesterday afternoon, passing by my window and commenting “all we know is that he’s not online” (i.e., if I’m at home, I’m not online, so may or may not be at home – as a way to express about the monitoring my internet activities in a way that provides avenue for denial), and then a relative (who occupies one of the 5 apartments in the house) around pre-midnight commenting as he gets his laundry that he is monitoring my internet activities. (Pausing for the range of extremely plausible to extremely imaginative alternative explanations … all other than what what happened … )

Creepy as fuck (heavily promoted – by certain forces – as a precondition to basic survival these days), although thankfully in this case not accompanied by the outright hostilities oriented to carefully calculated and orchestrated psychological domination routinely perpetrated in the present era of relatively expansive Sovietesque practices.

I think this is because they disagree with some of my internet activities, partly related to having incomplete knowledge about precisely what all those activities might be. (Some bandwidth, often in the range of a full 5% or so of max speed on the network, is used outside of me accessing urls on the www.)

There seems to be a belief that the means to achieve the desired internet activity of people who rent is to position by windows or doors of tenants and comment disapprovingly (in basically a blackmail-oriented manner) about whatever is discovered by invasions of privacy and harassment related to internet usage which exceed that anticipated by law (contravening some numbers of laws in a non-negligible manner). I believe that this is mainly related to a belief that this online activity may be blackmailable on my part (I mean, if you don’t know, you don’t know … might just need to fully monitor someone on the possibility that you might come to know). This may not be entirely unrelated to a certain tendency not uncommon in the human species which appear more broadly manifest in 2017 than in 2007 or in 1997 which basically amounts to fucking with people if the belief is of low/no consequences.

Police action would be time consuming. And, there’s the matter that I would have to find a new place to live, which would be more time consuming yet, not to mention that in the presently constrained rental market there is not a very high probability of finding a better situation.

 

So … actually I would rather address this kind of thing directly to those who habituate to such acts. However, another one of the lovely things about mobbing culture of 2017 which royally blows, is that a disturbingly high share of people who do such things will then with immediate escalation or pretense to be oh-so-concerned make like you’re mentally ill and crazy if you seek to bring up the topic of their harassment perpetrated from nearby locations such as outside of doors and windows, etc.

It should be very strongly emphasized (regarding the broader situation) that such practices tend to deter/prevent reasonable independent resolution to a variety of situations — even among those with a good predisposition towards such reasonable and independent resolution –, as has historically occurred with some regularity by initiating direct and straightforward face-to-face talk of the non-hostile and solution-oriented variety. Or, for minor things, to just be able to have that short and sweet conversation of the type “There’s this thing I was wondering about … for reason … ” with potential replies such as “Thank for letting me know, I was unaware” or  “Oh, yeah, there’s a simple answer. … ”

Instead, there is unnecessary drama and divisionism.

Posted in Arts, media & society, Courts/police/justice, Political philosophy, Web and computing | Leave a comment