Let me explain how men are clowns in this circus:

… because women prioritize feelings over logic and thus fall into the defection of what is written in bold at the end of this paragraph.

Michelle asked me tonight how she can get into animal rescue. OMFG! After two decades of my (20 years older than me) mother expending untold amount of resources on her animal rescue mission, including for example prioritizing the $1500 hip surgery of one of her dogs in 1996 when I had begged for even $100 loan to help buy milk for my infant son when I was destitute and living in squalor in the Philippines.

My tumultuous youth aside ^{_{(because I was raised in a clusterfuck!)}}, my point is the priorities of females are driven by their hindbrain, not their pre-frontal cortex, and this is destructive to society. For example, this video exemplifies how equality of the genders destroys patriarchy and converts society into a globalized, dysfunctional brothel:

The dilemma that caring, K strategy loving men face, is that they want to fulfill the dreams of the females, but in doing so they destroy the patriarchy and allow progressive clusterfuck camel’s nose under the tent, i.e. they become clowns in a circus.

A society in which women have the enforced right to:

… theft from husbands when they disobey and decide to do it their way … that females in our modern society want the benefits of being free and charge the costs to collective. Which is exactly what the banksters do also.

Is a society that diverges into a George Soros manipulated clusterfuck:

Everything can be explained as a power vacuum. When patriarchy is in control, defect-defect dilemma between genders isn’t a component of the power vacuum of political-economic control. But once the patriarchy is subverted, the political-economic power vacuum of who can best manipulate the masses is amplified, thus resulting in a societalcide, amplified defection, clusterfuck.

I was curious to understand what is inside George Soros’s mind, i.e. what is the logic, philosophy, and motivation driving his activism.

The underlying motivation of his activism really is to destroy the “power vacuum” of nationalism because he thinks we need global discipline for stability of cooperation, as noted about his funding for the People's Climate March:

The presence of many non-climate organizations leading the march suggests that the People's Climate March (like the March for Science and the Women's March before it) is more about opposing President Donald Trump than about supporting a single issue.

And because he’s a utilitarian, sociopath, any means he must employ to achieve his goal are rationalized:

The 60 Minutes interview was insightful, but not incriminating. Here's what I took away from the interview.

• George Soros feels no personal responsibility for any of his actions. He believes that if something is going to happen, it's going to happen whether or not he is personally involved; that if George Soros isn't there to benefit from something, then it will simply be somebody else doing the same thing.

• The actions of George Soros become self-fulfilling prophecies simply because he is so financially powerful. If he says the Russian Ruble is overvalued, then instantly the Russian Ruble is overvalued. Despite his now tremendous power and influence, Soros still believes that he is not personally responsible for anything that he benefits from.

Presently, George Soros has invested at least one billion dollars betting against the US economy.

Interestingly Soros wants to regulate derivatives, and I had explained several months ago that short-selling is fundamentally incompatible with non-corruptible, decentralized exchange. IOW, derivatives are congruent with a power vacuum and top-down control.

Twenty years ago when he was 65 years old, Soros stated that we needed to unify the world around a common value of pluralism (i.e. respect of diversity and multiculturalism). Ironically his activism is attempting to destroy diversity by undermining patriarchy which is the only way that groups of men can maintain a distinct culture. IOW, what Soros effectively wants is a homogeneous defect-defect society, but he illogically deceives himself. He admitted to himself earlier in the interview that charitable activism is full of paradoxes. This is yet another example of how top-down power is inherently corrupt, because it can’t be omniscient and optimize fitness of all the diverse actors in a free market.

@‍CoinCube wrote:

There is little point in talking about theorital decentralized groups in society unless you simultaneously talk about the fundamental organizational principles that would bind these groups together and allow them to cooperate with each other. In the long run the organizing principle that maximizes voluntary cooperation across groups while minimizing defection will win out over less viable alternatives.

Global cooperation can be maximized with decentralization technology. The main impediment to cooperation is risk of being trampled by centralized power. Those who think we need a common ideology to top-down control the world in one homogeneous clusterfuck, are just deceiving themselves. What we need is decentralization technology to provide risk-free (from top-down threats) cooperation.

Some recent Soros communications:

_{In 1947, I escaped from Hungary, by then under Communist rule, to England. As a student at the London School of Economics, I came under the influence of the philosopher Karl Popper, and I developed my own philosophy, built on the twin pillars of fallibility and reflexivity. I distinguished between two kinds of political regimes: those in which people elected their leaders, who were then supposed to look after the interests of the electorate, and others where the rulers sought to manipulate their subjects to serve the rulers’ interests. Under Popper’s influence, I called the first kind of society open, the second, closed...}

_{...The rise of anti-EU movements further impeded the functioning of institutions. And these forces of disintegration received a powerful boost in 2016, first from Brexit, then from the election of Trump in the US, and on December 4 from Italian voters’ rejection, by a wide margin, of constitutional reforms.}

_{Democracy is now in crisis. Even the US, the world’s leading democracy, elected a con artist and would-be dictator as its president. Although Trump has toned down his rhetoric since he was elected, he has changed neither his behavior nor his advisers. His cabinet comprises incompetent extremists and retired generals...}

_{...But the US will be preoccupied with internal struggles in the near future, and targeted minorities will suffer. The US will be unable to protect and promote democracy in the rest of the world. On the contrary, Trump will have greater affinity with dictators. That will allow some of them to reach an accommodation with the US, and others to carry on without interference. Trump will prefer making deals to defending principles. Unfortunately, that will be popular with his core constituency.}

_{I am particularly worried about the fate of the EU, which is in danger of coming under the influence of Russian President Vladimir Putin, whose concept of government is irreconcilable with that of open society. Putin is not a passive beneficiary of recent developments; he worked hard to bring them about. He recognized his regime’s weakness: it can exploit natural resources but cannot generate economic growth. He felt threatened by “color revolutions” in Georgia, Ukraine, and elsewhere. At first, he tried to control social media. Then, in a brilliant move, he exploited social media companies’ business model to spread misinformation and fake news, disorienting electorates and destabilizing democracies. That is how he helped Trump get elected.}

_{The same is likely to happen in the European election season in 2017 in the Netherlands, Germany, and Italy. In France, the two leading contenders are close to Putin and eager to appease him. If either wins, Putin’s dominance of Europe will become a fait accompli.}

_{I hope that Europe’s leaders and citizens alike will realize that this endangers their way of life and the values on which the EU was founded. The trouble is that the method Putin has used to destabilize democracy cannot be used to restore respect for facts and a balanced view of reality.}

_{With economic growth lagging and the refugee crisis out of control, the EU is on the verge of breakdown and is set to undergo an experience similar to that of the Soviet Union in the early 1990s. Those who believe that the EU needs to be saved in order to be reinvented must do whatever they can to bring about a better outcome.}

Soros claims to be for what he calls open societies, which are supposed to represent the interests of the electorate. However, due to his meddling (being a driving force for the Muslim invasion of Europe and America), that is exactly what is being undermined. He dislikes Germany and blames it for Europe's problems. He seems to actually hate Donald Trump, referring to him as a con artist and would be dictator. He can't understand Putin's dislike for his 'wonderful color revolutions' in Ukraine, Georgia and elsewhere. He also fears the EU coming under the nefarious influence of Vladimir Putin. He apparently believes the idea that Vladimir Putin helped Donald Trump into the White House with 'fake news', but I think it more likely he helped to create and spread that false idea. He further thinks the EU must be saved to be reinvented.

We ended up with a senile, old man who has no valid, stable principles of merit.

Some quotes from The Mind of George Soros:

“I have made rejection of the bush doctrine the central project of my life,” announced George Soros in January. “I am determined to do what I can,” he added, to assure that President Bush is not reelected.

…

According to reports last November, Soros had already pledged $18 million to three liberal anti-Bush groups of this kind, announcing that “If necessary, I would give more.” As he sees it, “America, under Bush, is a danger to the world. And I'm willing to put my money where my mouth is.”

…

… the parents decided to change the family name and chose the Hungarian-sounding but in fact obscure Soros. It means “soar” (in the future tense) in Esperanto, the made-up, trans-European language promoted by those who dreamed of a world free of nationality.

…

As a recent New Yorker profile put it, he was “adept at finding tax loopholes and operating in gray areas where oversight is scant and maneuverability wide.”

As late as the early 1980's, Soros was telling interviewers that he did not believe in philanthropy. He had already created the Open Society Fund, the first of what would become a constellation of foundations through which he was to channel his generosity. But the original motive, he explained, was not primarily benevolent. The fund was set up as what the law calls a charitable lead trust, which Soros described as “a very interesting tax gimmick” allowing him to pass large sums to his heirs untaxed.

And it he hasn’t yet learned that from a fundamental Physics analysis, that instability (i.e. cycles) are necessarily for our existence:

This insight has been, in turn, the basis for Soros's theory of history, which revolves around “boom-bust cycles.” When a social enterprise of some kind—a business, a movement, a nation—is doing well, Soros argues, this creates a bandwagon effect that leads inevitably to overvaluation or overreaching, producing an artificial “bubble” that must eventually burst.

Instability is increased by promoting the destruction of patriarchy, the destruction of diversity, by enabling defect-defection.

He fancies himself a philosopher, yet all he accomplishes is destructive:

At some point in the late 1990's, after years of devoting himself to the former Communist world, Soros decided that his attention was required in America. His first major venture into domestic issues was in support of the campaign to decriminalize drugs. He credits the poet Allen Ginsberg, an apostle of sexual and chemical liberation whom he befriended in the 1980's, with having alerted him to the injustice of American drug laws.

Duplicitous:

If blaming Jewish organizations—or Israel—for the works of the Nazis is hard to fathom, his attitude toward the Board of Guardians is no more explicable. It seems he appealed to it for financial support after breaking a leg, but the board arranged instead for him to receive a British-government stipend. When he wrote an aggrieved letter deploring this as a tawdry way for “one Jew [to] treat . . . another in need,” the board backed down and provided him with a cash allowance for the duration of his recovery. Later, he would confess insouciantly to his biographer the reason he had been so angry: he had already arranged to receive the government payment and had hidden this fact from the board in the hope of receiving duplicate benefits. It was, he said, “a double-dip,” and one that “solved all my financial problems.”

More remarkable still in this connection is Soros's frequent comment that 1944 was “the best year of my life.” It is easy to see how a boy of fourteen might have been “excited” by the “adventure” of evading the Nazis with an assumed identity, as he says he was. But 70 percent of Soros's fellow Jews in Hungary, nearly a half-million human beings, were annihilated in that year. They were dying and disappearing all around him, and their numbers no doubt included many whom he knew personally. Yet he gives no sign that this put any damper on his elation, either at the time or indeed in retrospect.

“My Jewishness [does] not express itself in a sense of tribal loyalty,” Soros explains.

…

Soros has admitted to having “carried some rather potent messianic fantasies with me from childhood, which I felt I had to control, otherwise they might get me in trouble.” Having made his mark, he now seems to give them free rein. He told one interviewer that he had “godlike, messianic ideas,” and another that he sometimes thought of himself as “superhuman.” To still a third he explained that his “goal is to become the conscience of the world.”