Our purpose is to encourage posts discussing Information War, Propaganda, Disinformation and other false narratives. We currently have over 7,500 Steem Power and 20+ people following the curation trail to support our mission.
Join our discord and chat with 150+ fellow Informationwar Activists.
Sometimes censorship is a boon for the average subjects of a polity. These information only serves to agitate the minds of already troubled people. Better that they remain content and ignorant, rather than anxious and angry.
Well, better for who? It is certainly easier to herd cattle into the chutes to the abbatoir when they're unaware of the destination.
I do not agree that it is better for me to be lied to than to know facts. I have been lied to by those that did so convinced it was better for me to not know the facts.
They were wrong. Their lies compounded, rather than limited or reduced, the harm I suffered.
In reality, whether or not harm to me was reduced or not is immaterial. Liars lie. Void of moral fiber, they are inherently toxic, and are best ignored and excised from one's life.
Good people do exist, and tell the truth. Keep them close, and profit.
Censorship can be accomplished with variety of methods. While the CCP uses obtuse methods, likely due to modern China lacking sociocultural institutions for rulers to leverage, the West have adopted an extremely elegant form of censorship. Rather than limiting information, under the guise of "freedom" of information, too much information is blasted at every moment, into the confused minds of its subjects. The human mind can only process limited amount of information, thus, by overloading the human CPU processing capacity, the West has effectively censored sensitive information.
An average Western man attempting to process the torrent of conflicting and contradictory information being blasted into the airwaves, like some poisonous gas, will become insane. In addition, the subtle encouragement of distrust against the existing information dissemination institutions foster development of misinformed and uninformed drones that are easily manipulated. If only the West has a king with the vision and will to direct such effective tool of governance, the West would continue to dominate this planet for the next thousand years. Sadly, the West is only interested in financial accumulation, dissolute in temperament, myopic in vision, and confused in identity.
Censorship of sensitive information is vital to the survival of a sociopolitical entity. Nationalism, morality, sociocultural matrix, historical identity, and all the factors involved in continuing social cohesion are manufactured fiction. Unless the muck are indoctrinated into believing these lies, can there even be a coherent sociopolitical entity? Sometimes lies are necessary pillars of society, and truth a weapon to destroy peace and cohesion of a people. A wise ruler uses lies as truths and truths as lies, for the benefit of his people.
Your characterization of the use of information overload to censor is spot on.
Regarding kings, and the necessity of censorship and propaganda to the survival of sociopolitial entities, kings die, and I prefer sociopolitical entities do as well. It is the technological improvement in succession that recommends republics over monarchies perhaps most of all, rather than the lip service paid to liberty and the rule of law.
The actuality of reality necessitates that facts will eventually prevail. The truth that we are free will eventuate, in time. In the meantime, it matters not at all if I am harmed for telling the truth, not lying, or simply for fun and profit. What does matter is whether such harm can be effected.
Technology will create immunity. I believe technology currently exists that potentiates that immunity, and presently seek to foster implementations nominal to universal adoption. When that adoption achieves adequate penetration, the lies you believe necessary will not only no longer be necessary, they will no longer be possible.
While you may not agree now, when you are immune to murder, torture, and oppression of any kind, you will like it.
Men need to be governed. "Freedom" for most people is but license to engage in debauchery and criminality. No amount of technical baubles will change man's nature. The lunacy of representative government has given the reigns of power to mercantile scum, whose only purpose in life seems to be compulsive accumulation of things that clink. Freedom from sociocultural control has resulted in unmitigated disaster in the epidemic of addiction. Even if man were created to be "free," it would be necessary to enslave him for his own sake.
Being governed has never done me any good. It has done me considerable harm. That being said, there's plenty of folks that will agree with you, and ya'll are free to submit to any overlords you favor - or whichever can take you as chattel.
You can enslave me at your peril. I don't recommend it.
Edit: It's been done. My posts and work; my present lifelong dedication to taking down that system is the result. I no longer have possessions that potentiate profit from taking me down, nor create tax liabilities. As long as I live I will endeavor to preclude utility to such vermin, and had they not done to me what they did, I'd be far more profitable to them today. Instead, I am not only a liability, but implacable in my quest to destroy their least power over men.
How would a society composed of "free" men function? Who would enforce laws and regulations? In the absence of enforcement, why would anyone adhere to legal statutes? In a world founded upon "free association," how would its members organize themselves against natural disasters or Huns climbing over the hills? What in this society prevents delinquents from raping and pillaging their way across its polity? How would even contract agreements be enforced between parties, in an ungoverned world?
Even within a well-govern society, criminals and delinquents disrupt sociocultural cohesion, how much more so would the muck disrupt functioning of an ungoverned society? Without legal records and regal authority, how would property rights even be conferred upon the members of a "free" society? How will "property" even be defined? Will there even be the commons, or will every morsel of creation be turned into private commodity to be owned and sold? And by what legitimacy will the members of an ungoverned polity claim ownership to portions of creation from another group of "natives" who will claim otherwise?
Society is a legal and cultural fiction that crumbles to dust without enforcement and indoctrination. Collection of "free" people does not make a society, surely as random heaps of building material does not produce a house. Before man can think, he must first be taught; before he can speak, he must first listen; before he can act, he must first observe. While you have clearly mastered yourself, using the principles of civilization and governance to live your life, It is the empty "freedom" of uneducated, immature vulgus that are dismantling Western sociocultural matrix. Freedom is a luxury only for those who have mastered the rules of morality, not confetti to be scattered among the fools; and even this luxury cannot exist without governance that establishes laws, morals, tradition, and religion of a sociocultural entity.
Many of the points and questions you raise, as you certainly realize, have extremely complex and varied answers, dependent on many different factors. In the interests of clarity I will but point to principle, which I suspect we can both understand and agree on.
Regarding men and society, men are not merely the feedstock for a functional society, and that seems to be our most fundamental point of disagreement. While a free man devoid of a society is essentially void of purpose, societies that are imposed involuntarily on free people essentially contravene the purpose of society for all those it is imposed on, benefiting only those imposing it fully. For example the savage Avars sewed cats into the bellies of pregnant women, and while one must presume the Avars benefited from this, there is no possible interpretation of benefit that would find those poor women derived it from that society.
Therefore it is unrealistic to consider society as the purpose of mankind. Rather society is endowed with purpose to the extent it serves it's members.
Due to the rude nature of technology, tyrants leading thugs have been able to craft societies primarily serving themselves, and this is less than optimal. However, technology is potentiating nominal power of individuals to preclude thuggery. Even though technology thus threatens the power of tyrants, it also increases their quality of life to the degree that technological progress will not be eschewed. While the revolution is but beginning, it is inevitable that one free man will be able to manufacture adequate security to prevent even thousands of conventionally armed thugs from oppressing him. This is without use of WMDs.
When this technological revolution matures sufficiently, many of your questions will be answered by those people in practice. Presently almost all industry depends on oppression. Either society will no longer exist when oppression becomes impossible, or men will devise that which seems best to them for their own felicity.
I am confident that the latter course will unfold.
Well put. I had to laugh at all the hopefuls out there thinking this report was somehow going to be something "different" and actually lead to criminal prosecutions of these scum. The Clintons are UNTOUCHABLE, and that is a sad FACT in this sad, sad state of affairs in which this once-proud and free nation finds itself.
As one of those hopefuls, I have come to terms with their untouchable slimy nature. At this point I hold out hope only for the average american to realize and admit the truth of the past. The first of 12 steps is admitting there is a problem. Then I think we, Americans, can move on.
Well said. I think we, as a populace, are too dumbed down and "bread & circus-ed up" to ever recover and demand justice for these scoundrels without a large period of very, very bad and desolate times passing, and without them all dying off first.
Curated for #informationwar (by @wakeupnd)
Our purpose is to encourage posts discussing Information War, Propaganda, Disinformation and other false narratives. We currently have over 7,500 Steem Power and 20+ people following the curation trail to support our mission.
Join our discord and chat with 150+ fellow Informationwar Activists.
Connect with fellow Informationwar writers in our Roll Call! InformationWar - Contributing Writers/Supporters: Roll Call Pt 8
Ways you can help the @informationwar
Sometimes censorship is a boon for the average subjects of a polity. These information only serves to agitate the minds of already troubled people. Better that they remain content and ignorant, rather than anxious and angry.
Well, better for who? It is certainly easier to herd cattle into the chutes to the abbatoir when they're unaware of the destination.
I do not agree that it is better for me to be lied to than to know facts. I have been lied to by those that did so convinced it was better for me to not know the facts.
They were wrong. Their lies compounded, rather than limited or reduced, the harm I suffered.
In reality, whether or not harm to me was reduced or not is immaterial. Liars lie. Void of moral fiber, they are inherently toxic, and are best ignored and excised from one's life.
Good people do exist, and tell the truth. Keep them close, and profit.
Censorship can be accomplished with variety of methods. While the CCP uses obtuse methods, likely due to modern China lacking sociocultural institutions for rulers to leverage, the West have adopted an extremely elegant form of censorship. Rather than limiting information, under the guise of "freedom" of information, too much information is blasted at every moment, into the confused minds of its subjects. The human mind can only process limited amount of information, thus, by overloading the human CPU processing capacity, the West has effectively censored sensitive information.
An average Western man attempting to process the torrent of conflicting and contradictory information being blasted into the airwaves, like some poisonous gas, will become insane. In addition, the subtle encouragement of distrust against the existing information dissemination institutions foster development of misinformed and uninformed drones that are easily manipulated. If only the West has a king with the vision and will to direct such effective tool of governance, the West would continue to dominate this planet for the next thousand years. Sadly, the West is only interested in financial accumulation, dissolute in temperament, myopic in vision, and confused in identity.
Censorship of sensitive information is vital to the survival of a sociopolitical entity. Nationalism, morality, sociocultural matrix, historical identity, and all the factors involved in continuing social cohesion are manufactured fiction. Unless the muck are indoctrinated into believing these lies, can there even be a coherent sociopolitical entity? Sometimes lies are necessary pillars of society, and truth a weapon to destroy peace and cohesion of a people. A wise ruler uses lies as truths and truths as lies, for the benefit of his people.
Your characterization of the use of information overload to censor is spot on.
Regarding kings, and the necessity of censorship and propaganda to the survival of sociopolitial entities, kings die, and I prefer sociopolitical entities do as well. It is the technological improvement in succession that recommends republics over monarchies perhaps most of all, rather than the lip service paid to liberty and the rule of law.
The actuality of reality necessitates that facts will eventually prevail. The truth that we are free will eventuate, in time. In the meantime, it matters not at all if I am harmed for telling the truth, not lying, or simply for fun and profit. What does matter is whether such harm can be effected.
Technology will create immunity. I believe technology currently exists that potentiates that immunity, and presently seek to foster implementations nominal to universal adoption. When that adoption achieves adequate penetration, the lies you believe necessary will not only no longer be necessary, they will no longer be possible.
While you may not agree now, when you are immune to murder, torture, and oppression of any kind, you will like it.
Men need to be governed. "Freedom" for most people is but license to engage in debauchery and criminality. No amount of technical baubles will change man's nature. The lunacy of representative government has given the reigns of power to mercantile scum, whose only purpose in life seems to be compulsive accumulation of things that clink. Freedom from sociocultural control has resulted in unmitigated disaster in the epidemic of addiction. Even if man were created to be "free," it would be necessary to enslave him for his own sake.
Being governed has never done me any good. It has done me considerable harm. That being said, there's plenty of folks that will agree with you, and ya'll are free to submit to any overlords you favor - or whichever can take you as chattel.
You can enslave me at your peril. I don't recommend it.
Edit: It's been done. My posts and work; my present lifelong dedication to taking down that system is the result. I no longer have possessions that potentiate profit from taking me down, nor create tax liabilities. As long as I live I will endeavor to preclude utility to such vermin, and had they not done to me what they did, I'd be far more profitable to them today. Instead, I am not only a liability, but implacable in my quest to destroy their least power over men.
How would a society composed of "free" men function? Who would enforce laws and regulations? In the absence of enforcement, why would anyone adhere to legal statutes? In a world founded upon "free association," how would its members organize themselves against natural disasters or Huns climbing over the hills? What in this society prevents delinquents from raping and pillaging their way across its polity? How would even contract agreements be enforced between parties, in an ungoverned world?
Even within a well-govern society, criminals and delinquents disrupt sociocultural cohesion, how much more so would the muck disrupt functioning of an ungoverned society? Without legal records and regal authority, how would property rights even be conferred upon the members of a "free" society? How will "property" even be defined? Will there even be the commons, or will every morsel of creation be turned into private commodity to be owned and sold? And by what legitimacy will the members of an ungoverned polity claim ownership to portions of creation from another group of "natives" who will claim otherwise?
Society is a legal and cultural fiction that crumbles to dust without enforcement and indoctrination. Collection of "free" people does not make a society, surely as random heaps of building material does not produce a house. Before man can think, he must first be taught; before he can speak, he must first listen; before he can act, he must first observe. While you have clearly mastered yourself, using the principles of civilization and governance to live your life, It is the empty "freedom" of uneducated, immature vulgus that are dismantling Western sociocultural matrix. Freedom is a luxury only for those who have mastered the rules of morality, not confetti to be scattered among the fools; and even this luxury cannot exist without governance that establishes laws, morals, tradition, and religion of a sociocultural entity.
Many of the points and questions you raise, as you certainly realize, have extremely complex and varied answers, dependent on many different factors. In the interests of clarity I will but point to principle, which I suspect we can both understand and agree on.
Regarding men and society, men are not merely the feedstock for a functional society, and that seems to be our most fundamental point of disagreement. While a free man devoid of a society is essentially void of purpose, societies that are imposed involuntarily on free people essentially contravene the purpose of society for all those it is imposed on, benefiting only those imposing it fully. For example the savage Avars sewed cats into the bellies of pregnant women, and while one must presume the Avars benefited from this, there is no possible interpretation of benefit that would find those poor women derived it from that society.
Therefore it is unrealistic to consider society as the purpose of mankind. Rather society is endowed with purpose to the extent it serves it's members.
Due to the rude nature of technology, tyrants leading thugs have been able to craft societies primarily serving themselves, and this is less than optimal. However, technology is potentiating nominal power of individuals to preclude thuggery. Even though technology thus threatens the power of tyrants, it also increases their quality of life to the degree that technological progress will not be eschewed. While the revolution is but beginning, it is inevitable that one free man will be able to manufacture adequate security to prevent even thousands of conventionally armed thugs from oppressing him. This is without use of WMDs.
When this technological revolution matures sufficiently, many of your questions will be answered by those people in practice. Presently almost all industry depends on oppression. Either society will no longer exist when oppression becomes impossible, or men will devise that which seems best to them for their own felicity.
I am confident that the latter course will unfold.
Well put. I had to laugh at all the hopefuls out there thinking this report was somehow going to be something "different" and actually lead to criminal prosecutions of these scum. The Clintons are UNTOUCHABLE, and that is a sad FACT in this sad, sad state of affairs in which this once-proud and free nation finds itself.
As one of those hopefuls, I have come to terms with their untouchable slimy nature. At this point I hold out hope only for the average american to realize and admit the truth of the past. The first of 12 steps is admitting there is a problem. Then I think we, Americans, can move on.
Well said. I think we, as a populace, are too dumbed down and "bread & circus-ed up" to ever recover and demand justice for these scoundrels without a large period of very, very bad and desolate times passing, and without them all dying off first.
LOL