"You were abused for your entire childhood and now here you are older and totally fucked up but it’s normal"
I feel that the next chunk provides the answer: "and you understand how others are fucked up too"
Instead of going "one solution is the trauma therapy etc" I would tend to go one step further and express something like "but the problem is that if you see yourself that much fucked up, and others too, there is no reason such thing would stop. Think about the implications, and the institutions in motion right now etc etc"
This makes the trauma healing less relevant in the light of your article. This being said, and finding myself in the fucked up situation you mentioned, I surely, definitely, whole-hearthedly, agree with the trauma therapy, the need for trauma therapy. it's actually a "Yes! Any trauma therapy, whatever trauma therapy". Truly relieving any ounce of trauma, in such setting, becomes invaluable, is rare occurence. On that one, I may say that the real one is the one you succeed by yourself, not something a psy can trigger. But I may be wrong. To me most psys are Freudian bullshits
I would be eager to know how you do in general as you seem familiar with what you express. For me, it's just accepting the trauma and keeping in mind that each day can be sometimes very rude. In so I completely let the trauma therapy on the side, any hope for it. It's that if it happens, it's a bonus; first top priority is to remain standing on my two legs. So strength and hope for something far away that I rarely experience. Becoming rough and rough, a bastard sometimes, but in the end one sincerely looks for some "Christ" or so
When I was writing this and especially the last section, I assumed that animals don't carry mental trauma; the article I linked about the snowshoe hare population in the Canadian Yukon was a surprise to me and it sorta changed my final point (an anecdote does not make a trend, I know, but I'm not a peer-reviewed media talking-point idea node (or am I?)): in wild animals (or at least the snowshoe hare population in question, but it makes sense to me as a general trend) birth rates decline in the face of sustained predation even after the predation diminishes, the animals possibly carry some "mental trauma" and as such their birth rate declines as an evolutionary adaptation. And here right now we observe declining birth rates in humans in even ostensibly religious places (some tight, small communities excluded, of course) and it made me think that perhaps this is an evolutionary adaptation (declining birth rates) in the face of sustained trauma (industrial modernity) which also jives with the notion of cycles, which I am drawn to as a model, in general. If industrial modernity is traumatizing, what are you gonna do? (He typed on the computer.) I don't really have answers and I think we're all trying to figure that out. On a personal level, trauma-therapy might be good, I dunno I've had bad experiences with therapy. I think that probably a lot of functions of a therapist are sorta part of industrial modernity's solutions to things that were not a problem prior to the growth of industrial modernity ie: talking to friends and family (and having friends and family, at all.) And I'm also not really a fan of identifying industrial modernity as some sort of unnatural imposition onto the world: we fucking did it, are we not natural? And so I always come back to judgement: there are even some parts of industrial modernity that are pretty good (like finding writers on Substack) and if I'm going to find some way to live well or stop using or creating technology then I'm judging. (Much more to say on this point, but I'm gonna go for a walk.) Anyway, thanks for reading.
I see how you have progressed through a lot of intellectual/spiritual concepts accurately and that you are bumbing into common occurences. I express you all my sympathy in regard of the various "did not found an answer to it yet"; I will link you a very nice article intending to provide you an example of such a person, thinking, elaborating. Thsi is creative, I believe it helps than to find ways and see how people think about it and try to find solutions:
There is a concept allowing to reconciliate much of the troubles out there, Andrew M. LOBACZEWSKI, polish psy, speaks of "psychopaths". Let's take, for instance, a sane social structure, the legal building, with judges, etc. It's at the very basics an empty shell intended to serve one goal. One function and, overall, it's meant to serve a society. It's never meant to "go rogue" or else. It has meaning in a wider framework, society, and it's a healthy function.
Now let's say that some people found out that in becoming the boss he would be able to influence things (etc etc).
Lobaczewski says that there exists a very tiny fringe in the population who are definitely not into the same stuff than "let's build a cool society".
Lobaczewski explains that for most people, psychopaths are some kind of Hannibal Lecter, while Maddof did a lot of damage and did not match Lecter. Most people attach "psychopath" to "Crazy" or "Down syndrome" while it's as well the "whark of wall street" attitude, as well the "let's play poker", "let's get drunk every sunday", "let's pick chicks and have casual sex with strangers" etc etc All of this is "psychopathological" (=exact word hinting at psychological "affection", ilness, pathology) and we can sense it: something is imbalanced, and it smells bad.
Some people seem to have been born with a native deficit; some express that they have a different "apparatus" than ours, and that their apparatus does not feature "love", "empathy". If so, so be it, I don't care. Overall idea is to have two strategies at hand, one for fellow humans, and one for the few occurences where the person facing us won't be able to meet our "love, empathy" reflection processes. We have to close the door, and act very differently. This hints at the answer of the folk wisdom going by "too good too stupid". We will never be good enough with a fellow human, and should never accept, in ourselves, to have some brake of any sort regarding "love". But some require to "shut the door" and not go "full love". So, never full love all the time, but most of the time. And. Most people have been badly affected with some "let's get drunk and go to the nightclub" stuffs, so "full love all the time" may become damaging even if it's a fellow normal person.
I guess I was able to sum up concepts that may be of interest for your own world view that seem very much intelligent and great. up to you to check about if those things match anything in your will.
Of course, those "psychopaths" seek domination & co, that's their native mode of functioning. Without love and stuff they have low level drives all the time. They don't lack a brain. In so, Lobaczewski expresses how EVERY normal and positive gathering, association, buildup, building, institution, church, university, city, society, civilization (!)(look for "pathocracy" on that one) will invariably see some coming by. The rest is history and it depends on the knowledge about psychopathology. Two strategies or not?
Lobaczewski expresses that the default mode, in one-strategy mode, is "intuition and the pursuit of happiness". That's the natural human world view dock. It's good but does not prevent a person who has in mind something different. People tend to see any other as they are. That's the problem. If the psycho acts bad, normal one-strategy people will do... moralization. A tool restricted to their fellow humans.
Well, just wanted to express a framework which makes sense to me. the ponerology substack from Harrison Koehli now expresses those things way better than I am. But I feel Lobaczewski nailed down core reality features. He went to the very top of things.
Back to the animals, I have been caring about them more and more. They are the unknown voice. Too much scientifical buildings where they die by millions if not more. Take a dog, your cat or whatever. They just love. they have kids and they care. They are intelligent enough. The mass of what's happening to them is terrific. They have no voice tat all. It would be wrong than to think that all their deaths would remain with no counterpart. SOmehow, the question is that we require a certain amount of food, and that all that is above that treshold is subjected to divine retribution, because not necessary. Same for scientifical research. At the present level I am doubtful that the lab rats don't meet an imbalanced situation. Nobody knows what happens there, and it just goes on. People stopped giving a fuck about the animals. Completely. But it's going on. They keep dying en masse in absurd experimentations. I believe too many and this has to go somewhere. I feel its' good to keep a voice for them. It helps and "goes somewhere", today. That's because nothing has been done and it went on in the same direction, during decades. How are things, today? We don't know much. As well, there is the consideration of the Planet, that this is something that came "in the package". If it's spoiled, then it is. See the "anthropo-cosmic" connection that hints at the cleansing mecanism of the planet earth: very interesting. "When a level of corruption big enough is met, the cleansing mecanism occurs". Some say that it's a slow process, and that it's that slow increase of hurricanes and stuffs. Sott.net has a monthly forecast that hints at the steady increase of such things. Seems to be happening since 9/11.
Food for thoughts! You seem to be a person cultivating his own understanding of things, so I wanted to present you some ideas, that you will dispose at your will. Discard, reflect, etc. That's all good. I see you are positively thinking, so I dared to tell you about the things that made sense to me, just in case.
On that note, I surely feel you are onto something with what you expressed in your above answer, your study of predation. I encourage you to keep it your own baby and discern a template, a framework, for others. Best outcomes, such stuffs! Personal and intelligent, creative. All the best, sorry for this long message! Thank for your reply! I expressed my first post before on suffering because you have been touching a nerve in myself, you have been expressing things that match my own experience. Thank you I feel relief in knowing that there are words for such things.
Thanks for your consideration. I read Harrison Koehli's Substack too, he's good. I'm skimming through the post-imperialism link you sent and here's a couple thoughts I'm having: the writer is specifying policy for a hypothetical order and I think that's just kinda a fool's errand. I don't think it's possible to be that rigid in designing complex systems in general, in fact I don't think you can at all: robust complex systems develop organically (enter the question of man's "organic"/"natural" status). And where the writer really goes off the rails for me is his consideration of money and how it functions: he says there will be a single gold-backed currency (only used for trade and with a wealth cap) and states can issue money without interest. He also later in the piece says that computers will be "allowed" only for "the acquisition of knowledge and communication." My views on this are strongly influenced by the ideas expressed in the book The Sovereign Individual, namely, the logic of violence dictates the manifestation of sovereignty. IMO money is an emergent technology that arises to satisfy the coincidence of wants between individuals and groups in any society exchanging goods and services beyond bartering (put another way, money is inevitable if people are trading peacefully beyond a local threshold). If there is an entity issuing money, the incentive to print beyond one's reserves is too powerful to resist (that's what we've seen historically and are living through). The "logic of violence" during the industrial era (amassing armies and weapons to plunder wealth and issue taxes) (this is an idea expressed in The Sovereign Individual) meant that Nation-States emerged as sovereign entities: they were the entities most able to wage war, issue taxes, manufacture (goods and services and consent, etc.) (I am reminded of a comment I saw Zero HP Lovecraft say: any sufficiently advanced market is indistinguishable from government.) One of the key drivers of "the logic of violence" is technology--the book was published in 1997 and the writers saw computers as the new technology that would dramatically alter "the logic of violence" and therefore the manifestation of sovereignty. If wealth could be stored on a computer (no longer was an army necessarily the key factor in the "logic of violence" (wishful thinking?)) then individuals might be better able to protect their wealth from predatory taxation and localities which were friendlier to these "sovereign individuals" would over time thrive while nation-states would atrophy as sovereign entities (I think one could easily interpret this as a nightmare scenario, regardless of my personal feelings on the matter, I think it's a good model.) The book might better be called "The Sovereign Corporation" but I'm a bit of a pessimist.
The book you are referring to seems very interesting
"...wealth could be stored on a computer"
:)
I am definitely and strongly opposed to "bitcoin" and "cryptocurrencies". I may have been using "crypto" but it would grant that stuff too much honour.
My oh my - and you know, when Bitcoins popped up I was busy "studying UFO" material that some "friend hinted me at". That "friend" had hinted me as well at the book "a course in miracles", a spiritual handbook actually written by the CIA. That very same "friend" (...). Well I felt for Bitcoins at that time and as I am not pretty much in my bath with anything "wall street" stuffs - I lost my bitcoins that were worth 0.0001$ at the time and let go. What a great occurrence than to get suddenly very rich! How many fucked up people who were just computer nerds and closed minds suddenly had a voice! But in the end it was just "me-made-money". Since when the accumulation bucks, or even money deserves that much of a focus? I agree with the concept of bucks being a way for trading and especially in a the context of global trade requiring it as you stated.
To tell you I very lately changed my Substack description for the following:
Darren Allen ("Expressive Egg" Substack):
"Lovely guy, so much promise, tragically cut down in the prime of his life with home ownership"
I cannot fathom how people fell for cryptocurrencies. Really. I noticed many intelligent people just giving in. Not to mention "Russia developing his own platform". This is truly frightening to see such lack of discernment IMO. But as I reflect on myself at the time of the Bitcoin, I may understand "how it may happen" and that "it may happen". But to me this is absolute true 100% useless bullshit. Society was already hinting us all so much at Snoop Doggy Dog's Dollar bill and we did not need an additional lord-of-the-ring's "my precious". Of course this makes me a Thoreau but I am fine with it.
The author of the book you mentioned was probably a visionary. And the title shows how he's onto something.
"the logic of violence dictates the manifestation of sovereignty"
I would say that the guy accurately spotted "the logic of violence" as being present and even being some "main part" of today's functioning, but that it wouldn't prevent the hypothesis of being due to something external and not tied to an intrinsic human feature. Wiping the logic of violence, in this perspective, would see it coming back if it's some external source. It wouldn't address the core issue.
"the incentive to print beyond one's reserves is too powerful to resist (that's what we've seen historically and are living through)"
I understand the author makes a distinction and does not say that this is how humans natively are, but that they would tend to "opt for temptation", which is thus different. I believe that such temptations are not natively present in human people and that some negative people come by and whisper to them, wrong ideas, far from who they are. A network of positive individuals seems to be the trick for preventing such occurrences to gain more weight. I believe this is how the "post-imperialism" author intends to deal with such occurrences, thanks to a "counsel of wise", for example.
I might just be pessimistic! In the post-imperialism piece, the writer mentioned money functioning for trade and the presence of computers, hence my mentioning the book The Sovereign Individual. Unfortunately, IMO, how money functions is crucial in predicting future scenarios (and understanding contemporary and past geopolitical occurrences). It's outside the scope of what I write about but if you're interested, Neoliberal Feudalism (Substack writer) has written some good primers on the subject: https://substack.com/@neofeudalism/p-141669647
You appear to be realistic and practical enough for me not to go on that one. I wish things were different etc etc That's just the most sane way in our circumstances etc etc.
I wish you courage and strength.
The Neoliberalism stack is much quoted I visit it often, but for now I tend to not be able to put a face on all those great blogs. As soon as I will visit it I will say "oh that one!".
I know rounding the earth because I recently enjoyed a quick conversation with the author. I liked his logo and his overall stack, it breathes something positive.
fucking banger
thank you
"You were abused for your entire childhood and now here you are older and totally fucked up but it’s normal"
I feel that the next chunk provides the answer: "and you understand how others are fucked up too"
Instead of going "one solution is the trauma therapy etc" I would tend to go one step further and express something like "but the problem is that if you see yourself that much fucked up, and others too, there is no reason such thing would stop. Think about the implications, and the institutions in motion right now etc etc"
This makes the trauma healing less relevant in the light of your article. This being said, and finding myself in the fucked up situation you mentioned, I surely, definitely, whole-hearthedly, agree with the trauma therapy, the need for trauma therapy. it's actually a "Yes! Any trauma therapy, whatever trauma therapy". Truly relieving any ounce of trauma, in such setting, becomes invaluable, is rare occurence. On that one, I may say that the real one is the one you succeed by yourself, not something a psy can trigger. But I may be wrong. To me most psys are Freudian bullshits
I would be eager to know how you do in general as you seem familiar with what you express. For me, it's just accepting the trauma and keeping in mind that each day can be sometimes very rude. In so I completely let the trauma therapy on the side, any hope for it. It's that if it happens, it's a bonus; first top priority is to remain standing on my two legs. So strength and hope for something far away that I rarely experience. Becoming rough and rough, a bastard sometimes, but in the end one sincerely looks for some "Christ" or so
When I was writing this and especially the last section, I assumed that animals don't carry mental trauma; the article I linked about the snowshoe hare population in the Canadian Yukon was a surprise to me and it sorta changed my final point (an anecdote does not make a trend, I know, but I'm not a peer-reviewed media talking-point idea node (or am I?)): in wild animals (or at least the snowshoe hare population in question, but it makes sense to me as a general trend) birth rates decline in the face of sustained predation even after the predation diminishes, the animals possibly carry some "mental trauma" and as such their birth rate declines as an evolutionary adaptation. And here right now we observe declining birth rates in humans in even ostensibly religious places (some tight, small communities excluded, of course) and it made me think that perhaps this is an evolutionary adaptation (declining birth rates) in the face of sustained trauma (industrial modernity) which also jives with the notion of cycles, which I am drawn to as a model, in general. If industrial modernity is traumatizing, what are you gonna do? (He typed on the computer.) I don't really have answers and I think we're all trying to figure that out. On a personal level, trauma-therapy might be good, I dunno I've had bad experiences with therapy. I think that probably a lot of functions of a therapist are sorta part of industrial modernity's solutions to things that were not a problem prior to the growth of industrial modernity ie: talking to friends and family (and having friends and family, at all.) And I'm also not really a fan of identifying industrial modernity as some sort of unnatural imposition onto the world: we fucking did it, are we not natural? And so I always come back to judgement: there are even some parts of industrial modernity that are pretty good (like finding writers on Substack) and if I'm going to find some way to live well or stop using or creating technology then I'm judging. (Much more to say on this point, but I'm gonna go for a walk.) Anyway, thanks for reading.
I see how you have progressed through a lot of intellectual/spiritual concepts accurately and that you are bumbing into common occurences. I express you all my sympathy in regard of the various "did not found an answer to it yet"; I will link you a very nice article intending to provide you an example of such a person, thinking, elaborating. Thsi is creative, I believe it helps than to find ways and see how people think about it and try to find solutions:
https://www.sott.net/article/313787-Post-imperialism-A-Template-for-a-New-Social-Order
There is a concept allowing to reconciliate much of the troubles out there, Andrew M. LOBACZEWSKI, polish psy, speaks of "psychopaths". Let's take, for instance, a sane social structure, the legal building, with judges, etc. It's at the very basics an empty shell intended to serve one goal. One function and, overall, it's meant to serve a society. It's never meant to "go rogue" or else. It has meaning in a wider framework, society, and it's a healthy function.
Now let's say that some people found out that in becoming the boss he would be able to influence things (etc etc).
Lobaczewski says that there exists a very tiny fringe in the population who are definitely not into the same stuff than "let's build a cool society".
Lobaczewski explains that for most people, psychopaths are some kind of Hannibal Lecter, while Maddof did a lot of damage and did not match Lecter. Most people attach "psychopath" to "Crazy" or "Down syndrome" while it's as well the "whark of wall street" attitude, as well the "let's play poker", "let's get drunk every sunday", "let's pick chicks and have casual sex with strangers" etc etc All of this is "psychopathological" (=exact word hinting at psychological "affection", ilness, pathology) and we can sense it: something is imbalanced, and it smells bad.
Some people seem to have been born with a native deficit; some express that they have a different "apparatus" than ours, and that their apparatus does not feature "love", "empathy". If so, so be it, I don't care. Overall idea is to have two strategies at hand, one for fellow humans, and one for the few occurences where the person facing us won't be able to meet our "love, empathy" reflection processes. We have to close the door, and act very differently. This hints at the answer of the folk wisdom going by "too good too stupid". We will never be good enough with a fellow human, and should never accept, in ourselves, to have some brake of any sort regarding "love". But some require to "shut the door" and not go "full love". So, never full love all the time, but most of the time. And. Most people have been badly affected with some "let's get drunk and go to the nightclub" stuffs, so "full love all the time" may become damaging even if it's a fellow normal person.
I guess I was able to sum up concepts that may be of interest for your own world view that seem very much intelligent and great. up to you to check about if those things match anything in your will.
Of course, those "psychopaths" seek domination & co, that's their native mode of functioning. Without love and stuff they have low level drives all the time. They don't lack a brain. In so, Lobaczewski expresses how EVERY normal and positive gathering, association, buildup, building, institution, church, university, city, society, civilization (!)(look for "pathocracy" on that one) will invariably see some coming by. The rest is history and it depends on the knowledge about psychopathology. Two strategies or not?
Lobaczewski expresses that the default mode, in one-strategy mode, is "intuition and the pursuit of happiness". That's the natural human world view dock. It's good but does not prevent a person who has in mind something different. People tend to see any other as they are. That's the problem. If the psycho acts bad, normal one-strategy people will do... moralization. A tool restricted to their fellow humans.
Well, just wanted to express a framework which makes sense to me. the ponerology substack from Harrison Koehli now expresses those things way better than I am. But I feel Lobaczewski nailed down core reality features. He went to the very top of things.
Back to the animals, I have been caring about them more and more. They are the unknown voice. Too much scientifical buildings where they die by millions if not more. Take a dog, your cat or whatever. They just love. they have kids and they care. They are intelligent enough. The mass of what's happening to them is terrific. They have no voice tat all. It would be wrong than to think that all their deaths would remain with no counterpart. SOmehow, the question is that we require a certain amount of food, and that all that is above that treshold is subjected to divine retribution, because not necessary. Same for scientifical research. At the present level I am doubtful that the lab rats don't meet an imbalanced situation. Nobody knows what happens there, and it just goes on. People stopped giving a fuck about the animals. Completely. But it's going on. They keep dying en masse in absurd experimentations. I believe too many and this has to go somewhere. I feel its' good to keep a voice for them. It helps and "goes somewhere", today. That's because nothing has been done and it went on in the same direction, during decades. How are things, today? We don't know much. As well, there is the consideration of the Planet, that this is something that came "in the package". If it's spoiled, then it is. See the "anthropo-cosmic" connection that hints at the cleansing mecanism of the planet earth: very interesting. "When a level of corruption big enough is met, the cleansing mecanism occurs". Some say that it's a slow process, and that it's that slow increase of hurricanes and stuffs. Sott.net has a monthly forecast that hints at the steady increase of such things. Seems to be happening since 9/11.
Food for thoughts! You seem to be a person cultivating his own understanding of things, so I wanted to present you some ideas, that you will dispose at your will. Discard, reflect, etc. That's all good. I see you are positively thinking, so I dared to tell you about the things that made sense to me, just in case.
On that note, I surely feel you are onto something with what you expressed in your above answer, your study of predation. I encourage you to keep it your own baby and discern a template, a framework, for others. Best outcomes, such stuffs! Personal and intelligent, creative. All the best, sorry for this long message! Thank for your reply! I expressed my first post before on suffering because you have been touching a nerve in myself, you have been expressing things that match my own experience. Thank you I feel relief in knowing that there are words for such things.
Thanks for your consideration. I read Harrison Koehli's Substack too, he's good. I'm skimming through the post-imperialism link you sent and here's a couple thoughts I'm having: the writer is specifying policy for a hypothetical order and I think that's just kinda a fool's errand. I don't think it's possible to be that rigid in designing complex systems in general, in fact I don't think you can at all: robust complex systems develop organically (enter the question of man's "organic"/"natural" status). And where the writer really goes off the rails for me is his consideration of money and how it functions: he says there will be a single gold-backed currency (only used for trade and with a wealth cap) and states can issue money without interest. He also later in the piece says that computers will be "allowed" only for "the acquisition of knowledge and communication." My views on this are strongly influenced by the ideas expressed in the book The Sovereign Individual, namely, the logic of violence dictates the manifestation of sovereignty. IMO money is an emergent technology that arises to satisfy the coincidence of wants between individuals and groups in any society exchanging goods and services beyond bartering (put another way, money is inevitable if people are trading peacefully beyond a local threshold). If there is an entity issuing money, the incentive to print beyond one's reserves is too powerful to resist (that's what we've seen historically and are living through). The "logic of violence" during the industrial era (amassing armies and weapons to plunder wealth and issue taxes) (this is an idea expressed in The Sovereign Individual) meant that Nation-States emerged as sovereign entities: they were the entities most able to wage war, issue taxes, manufacture (goods and services and consent, etc.) (I am reminded of a comment I saw Zero HP Lovecraft say: any sufficiently advanced market is indistinguishable from government.) One of the key drivers of "the logic of violence" is technology--the book was published in 1997 and the writers saw computers as the new technology that would dramatically alter "the logic of violence" and therefore the manifestation of sovereignty. If wealth could be stored on a computer (no longer was an army necessarily the key factor in the "logic of violence" (wishful thinking?)) then individuals might be better able to protect their wealth from predatory taxation and localities which were friendlier to these "sovereign individuals" would over time thrive while nation-states would atrophy as sovereign entities (I think one could easily interpret this as a nightmare scenario, regardless of my personal feelings on the matter, I think it's a good model.) The book might better be called "The Sovereign Corporation" but I'm a bit of a pessimist.
Hello,
The book you are referring to seems very interesting
"...wealth could be stored on a computer"
:)
I am definitely and strongly opposed to "bitcoin" and "cryptocurrencies". I may have been using "crypto" but it would grant that stuff too much honour.
My oh my - and you know, when Bitcoins popped up I was busy "studying UFO" material that some "friend hinted me at". That "friend" had hinted me as well at the book "a course in miracles", a spiritual handbook actually written by the CIA. That very same "friend" (...). Well I felt for Bitcoins at that time and as I am not pretty much in my bath with anything "wall street" stuffs - I lost my bitcoins that were worth 0.0001$ at the time and let go. What a great occurrence than to get suddenly very rich! How many fucked up people who were just computer nerds and closed minds suddenly had a voice! But in the end it was just "me-made-money". Since when the accumulation bucks, or even money deserves that much of a focus? I agree with the concept of bucks being a way for trading and especially in a the context of global trade requiring it as you stated.
To tell you I very lately changed my Substack description for the following:
Darren Allen ("Expressive Egg" Substack):
"Lovely guy, so much promise, tragically cut down in the prime of his life with home ownership"
I cannot fathom how people fell for cryptocurrencies. Really. I noticed many intelligent people just giving in. Not to mention "Russia developing his own platform". This is truly frightening to see such lack of discernment IMO. But as I reflect on myself at the time of the Bitcoin, I may understand "how it may happen" and that "it may happen". But to me this is absolute true 100% useless bullshit. Society was already hinting us all so much at Snoop Doggy Dog's Dollar bill and we did not need an additional lord-of-the-ring's "my precious". Of course this makes me a Thoreau but I am fine with it.
The author of the book you mentioned was probably a visionary. And the title shows how he's onto something.
"the logic of violence dictates the manifestation of sovereignty"
I would say that the guy accurately spotted "the logic of violence" as being present and even being some "main part" of today's functioning, but that it wouldn't prevent the hypothesis of being due to something external and not tied to an intrinsic human feature. Wiping the logic of violence, in this perspective, would see it coming back if it's some external source. It wouldn't address the core issue.
"the incentive to print beyond one's reserves is too powerful to resist (that's what we've seen historically and are living through)"
I understand the author makes a distinction and does not say that this is how humans natively are, but that they would tend to "opt for temptation", which is thus different. I believe that such temptations are not natively present in human people and that some negative people come by and whisper to them, wrong ideas, far from who they are. A network of positive individuals seems to be the trick for preventing such occurrences to gain more weight. I believe this is how the "post-imperialism" author intends to deal with such occurrences, thanks to a "counsel of wise", for example.
I might just be pessimistic! In the post-imperialism piece, the writer mentioned money functioning for trade and the presence of computers, hence my mentioning the book The Sovereign Individual. Unfortunately, IMO, how money functions is crucial in predicting future scenarios (and understanding contemporary and past geopolitical occurrences). It's outside the scope of what I write about but if you're interested, Neoliberal Feudalism (Substack writer) has written some good primers on the subject: https://substack.com/@neofeudalism/p-141669647
and Mathew Crawford has written about it: https://www.campfire.wiki/doku.php?id=rounding_the_earth:empire_-_the_military_occult_banking_syndicate_mobs
&
https://roundingtheearth.substack.com/archive
"I might just be pessimistic!"
You appear to be realistic and practical enough for me not to go on that one. I wish things were different etc etc That's just the most sane way in our circumstances etc etc.
I wish you courage and strength.
The Neoliberalism stack is much quoted I visit it often, but for now I tend to not be able to put a face on all those great blogs. As soon as I will visit it I will say "oh that one!".
I know rounding the earth because I recently enjoyed a quick conversation with the author. I liked his logo and his overall stack, it breathes something positive.
I will check your links, thank you.
I wish you all good, and see you around one day.
FURTHER RECOMMENDED READING ALONG SIMILAR LINE: https://michaellindsey.substack.com/p/the-ritual-of-the-end-times