Category Archives: capitalism

Alliancism

choice

There is a problem with political progress today.  There is no word but fascism to describe a  change of government into a system of always putting subsidies for corporate profit ahead of freedoms, markets, or property, controlled by one person.  A trivial point, an oligarchy as the fascist is possible here too.  While the properties of fascism appear on a regular but limited basis, it’s absolute properties (absolute control) may not be present.  The transition can take place at any speed.  Freedoms can be lost for temporary profit, one freedom at a time.

Alliancism to fascism is much like socialism to communism.   In small doses both can have good short term consequences, but only for a temporary period of time.  Bringing in fractional banking in where there was none before, but cannibalizing the money supply to do it.  Growing economy of scale by ending trade disputes via hard power and eroding citizen rights to reach that goal.  Masking the tragedy of the commons with consumerism and gentrification.  Incrementally replacing debate with marketing, public relations and ultimately propaganda.   Replacing war with police action (conquest by peace).   Meant as a staged scale like socialism, alliancism is a partial implementation of fascism in a capitalist democracy (including republics) as it transitions between the optimal psychopathic cooperative (rights AND shortcuts) to rapid simplification and localization.  Ultimately, collapse.

I’m naming it after the alliance.  The closest relationship a person without a conscience (a psychopath) can have to a friendship.  Temporary and transitory in nature alliances can only exist while at each party thinks they are using the other to their ultimate advantage.  Where fascism immediately assumes all rights to it’s leader class, alliancism can erode rights one at a time.  Cashing in freedoms for temporary pricing advantages via market distortions.   This continues until the faith in currency and property are lost, and trust and investment ceases.

Economics of complexity

legal-complexity

“The chief cause of problems is solutions.”  –Eric Svareid
(shamelessly stolen)

The general who advances without coveting fame and retreats without fearing disgrace, whose only thought is to protect his country and do good service for his sovereign, is the jewel of the kingdom.” –Sun Tzu

Looking at the world through a caloric lens, complexity increases economic cost.  To further explore this please see this talk by Dr. Joseph Tainter.  Please keep the volume control handy as there are audio anomalies.  It is long but well worth your time.

This is important because it deals with what collapse looks like.  Rome didn’t collapse as some sort of surprise or in a vacuum.  It suffered from growing and unsustainable complexity.  Civgene can provide the ‘why’ for this problem.  Why did complexity occur?  The most obvious answer is corruption.  Why does corruption continuously increase?  Civgene indicates increasing proportions of psychopaths.  Rent seeking correlates to a genetic pool that grows over the life of a civilization and then collapses once that civilization dies.

As corruption increases complexity, economy of scale multipliers provide diminishing returns.  Further as rent seeker revenues fall, they add complexity simply for the sole purpose of seeking additional loopholes to graft from.  The only mechanism for ending corruption created by adding complexity is adding yet more complexity in the form of additional laws.

If you are familiar with legal distribution you can see where this is going.  There needs to be a way to reduce this complexity to spare limited resources.  No historical law making process can provide this.  The video lays out the need for a new kind of legal mechanism, to cope with the real problem behind complexity.

A growing pool of rent seekers grafted onto the core of the system.  The law making rent seekers find marginal problems to combat in public, while their real goal is to seek new revenue from the hidden effects and loopholes of the new law.   Instead we should reduce complexity by distributing laws.  This should create competition for programs that have grown pointlessly bloated solving small scale locally addressable problems.  Naturally reducing the jurisdiction of laws should be under a populist control, since the vast majority of the population are still good economic actors, with the desire to protect the system from the graft at the center in a selfless way.  So while overall “the process of increasing complexity is inexorable”, we don’t need to make things more complex than necessary for the time.

Dr. Tainter calls political ideology a faith. He is correct!  All politics are based at least in part on faith, because testing political theories on humans is impossible (without an epic immoral cost).  Faiths are critical to reason and therefore civilization, but without recognition of the risks of cult that faith brings, they are simply a collar to click a leash onto.

He does equate logic to ethics saying “Everything the Roman emperors did was a logical response to circumstances.”  While explicitly true this is not complete.  This again proves logic is NOT a panacea.  Sociopath stage psychopaths are perfectly logical, to their own needs.  Markets need to be protected to provide good data to build sound logic on.  Reason (the logical mind + the metamind) is available reliably only from the public, away from the center of power.  The public and their subconscious risk management are needed to keep destructive needless complexity from harming those markets.  Logic and subsequently reason can’t accomplish good law without good data.  Unchecked, complexity and graft slowly smothers true cost.

Intro to marketing and thoughts on Trotter

 

Marketing uses logical conscious decision making (available to both empaths and psychopaths) to override the subconscious risk analysis machine (the metamind.)

One correction.  While Bernays and Freud believed him, this idea of humanity as a crazy herd was actually Dr. Totter. His ideas were not just used by the capitalist marketers as the example above, but simultaneously by the communists as well. So while marketing must obviously have some true premise, the cornerstone of it’s blanket justification have been used by the full spectrum of left and right to justify the destruction of the other.

Communists justified manipulation of ‘the herd’ to destroy capitalism, and capitalists justified manipulating ‘the herd’ to destroy communism.  Trotter outright fails the test for legitimate principle since it is wholly dualistic.  The dark side of Darwin, our new (new to Trotter and his well heeled followers) status as animals can mean anything, at any time, to anyone.  ‘Instincts of the herd in war and peace’ can be used to justify any action by either side in a conflict with diametrically opposed sides, so it must not justify anything at all.

What is happening to the global economy?

Econ-tech-subsitute-v2

Psychopaths are exerting disproportional influence on the economy.  Some empaths have been captured  either by cult or by  political ideologies, becoming temporary proto-psychopaths.  This  leads to collapse, and a  rout of genetic psychopaths.   A brutal but effective means to reversion to a trust and metamind based economy.

We broke that mechanism when we split the atom.  If we let that happen again, the nuclear power plants could melt down, as they will fail disaster not fail safe when their daily mechanizations are no longer attended by knowing employees.  Perhaps this was by design as part of MAD, but it’s guillotine hanging over the planets head now.

Green loosely matches the Adam Smith model.  As we approach the red psychopathic supplements for trust behaviours, (substituting debt for money for example) we approach the dystopia Marx and Engels observed but lacked to data to understand.   Just in time, open source has demonstrated the vital importance of the right to fork.   If we support that right through systemic changes we can back away from the edge of the cliffs of collapse.

Discuss this with your families this Thanksgiving and perhaps we can make a change for the better.  Please share your ideas and comments.

EDIT: I left this post up for completeness but there is a newer superior 3d graph.

 

How does legal distribution work?

Legal distribution is the right to veto laws passed by representatives by popular vote, not by abolition, but by moving a law to next smallest legal jurisdiction.  The distribution (federal United States of America for example) means 50 copies of the law are made (one for each state) and the funding is divided 50 ways as designated by percentage by the original bill.  Now each state can change and adapt the law to suit their needs and the funding stream is secure.  Even in the case of state abolition funding flow is guaranteed unless the original now distributed law is abolished by lawmakers at the federal level.

This can be undertaken at any scale and be reduced down to the next smallest jurisdiction.  Including the sovereign individual.

A legal distribution would trump all contracts with the state.  Contracted works would have to be rebid by each distributee.  Contracts with individuals would be exempt as no jurisdiction can be lower than a single sovereign individual.

This attacks centrists, power seekers, and the corrupt would be oligarchs who would raid the treasury without the people.  It discourages secret deals in lawmaking by greatly increasing the risks as works bribed in secret can no longer be delivered reliably.

It suits the goals of 3 of the 4 sectors on the political compass including the majority of republicans and democrat populations (only the statists suffer)

It addresses the problems of the inevitable collapse of government due to growing corruption, corporate lawmaking outrunning civic players, lack of market data in government regulation (state level competition), it solves scapegoat populism driven by propaganda, and if proven as fact it solves growing psychopath populations hijacking the political process to destruction for short term personal gain.

It is based on the human right to fork, which derives from the inherent human rights (property, currency, freedom, friendship, and investment), which form civilization and from which markets derive.  In this it is a direct antidote to the form of propaganda known as the Hegelian dialectic, by always offering a third choice (bad, less bad, localities compete to produce better data) in civic decision making.

It appears superficially socialist, but is actually is a localist antidote to socialism’s observed inequity and graft.  It respects and preserves the hard the hard won balance of rights and common good of distributed laws, but returns the power to oversee that law to a smaller more manageable scale.

The reduction of waste and the restored economy of scale should make voluntary type one civilization participation significantly more feasible.  The right to veto means unexpected corruption in global agreements can be rapidly retracted, and reworked in a competitive fashion and in time a new law can be passed with the data resulting from variation of the distributed competing implementations.

This does not solve the tragedy of the commons directly but instead solves the problem that causes it, aversion to corruption.  The risk of unexpected (to the population of citizens) consequences is near negligible as laws with purposely or unintentionally hidden results can quickly be revoked.  In other words the risk that state defectors will do more damage than defectors at large.  Power as an end to itself is far less feasible at any scale.

Legal distribution should be compatible with any government type like republic, monarchy, technocracy, communism, etc.  Two notable exceptions are theocracy or anarchy.

Psychopaths and ex-military in the workplace

guru

Someone asked what can be done about some ex-military coworkers who where acting in a psychopathic fashion (competing and not cooperating) and failing in their aggressive technical goals.

True psychopathy is genetic.  This will be fact one day I’m certain.  Psychopaths have only their rational mind to cope with the world.  Most people have both a metamind (conscience) and rational mind and when they use both that is reason.  If empath vs psychopath behavior where a venn diagram psychopaths behavior would be completely enclosed inside empaths much larger circle.

Military are almost always empaths.  They are almost always proto-psychopaths or meta-psychopaths.

Proto-psychopaths are created.  The conscience is trained to essentially get out of the way so the person will act like a dutiful psychopath.  (They make great but unstable slaves) The conscience is doing some problem solving but it’s main role is to keep the rational mind on the  ‘straight and narrow,’ stabilizing the rational ‘psychopath’ part.  This is why some ex-mil types are less creative.  All the creativity their brain has to offer is reenforcing loyalty to a service they’ve since retired.

Some soldiers create themselves as meta-psychopaths.  Meta-psychopaths also suspend their conscience.  The difference is who is in charge of the change, their drill instructor, or themselves. Meta-psychopaths are very much like a guru.  So they will be MUCH more effective in the private sector later on.  They enjoy the full set of human behavior.  They can be ruthless like a psychopath and creative like empath.  These are the soldiers that go on to become special ops and accomplished technicians in the service.  This is the outcome the military increasingly wants.

Actual genetic psychopaths make terrible soldiers.  They dutifully follow orders while watched, but are more interested in promotions and self gratification.  They are constantly trying to one up their superiors even when it could cost lives.  (The psychopath slave always wants to become the master)  When faced with battle/real danger they look for any opportunity to desert as survival is the only (selfish) logical choice.  BTW they can make great warriors ah la the Vikings but raping and pillaging is about self gratification, not service, duty and strategic progress of the whole group.

I frequently see proto-psychopath ex-soldiers wrongly accuse meta-psychopath soldiers (or any other non proto-psychopaths) of being psychopaths.  Their creative process is seen as an attack on their hierarchical superiors.  They simply don’t understand and therefore respect their creative use of their metamind.  They see self direction as insubordination.  This is part of the cost of intentional proto-psychopathy.

‘what is to be done.’

Ideally you want non psychopathic emapths in your company.   So the best thing you can do is avoid creating a psychopathic culture.   How?  Simple.  Psychopaths only compete, so reward cooperation.  Yes unfortunately those condescending ‘team building’ things do work, at least for the cooperators.

Avoid hiring psychopaths in the first place.  Follow up on all references!  If HR doesn’t, fire them.  Psychopaths lie constantly (to survive) so they will be caught in little lies.  It’s less important if they’ve made some mistakes in their past and WAY more important that they don’t lie about them.  Don’t accept blank spots in a resume.  They can be anything but blank.  ‘I went on a kayaking tour across the country for 6 months’ or ‘I just couldn’t find a job’ or ‘my son had cancer’ ‘I was tired of the daily grind’ is way better than ‘personal matters.’  If they lie to you ever, drop them like they’re hot.

Only hire proto-psychopaths for operational roles.  Give any ex-military  proto-psychopath a goal with enough authority and vigor and she will say, ‘I will accomplish it.’   Even if the goal is absurdly unobtainable.  This behavior is usually not helpful in business.  Remember creativity and questioning authority are disreputable to them.  They have no social mechanism to say no to ‘orders.’  They are cannon fodder for any lurking psychopaths, who are naturally serving their own ends.  They should be easy to pick out in the interview process as a little too eager to please.

There are some advantages to having competitive people in sales positions, and to less of a degree operations.  The important characteristic is these jobs solve specific, well understood problems.  These are good positions for your proto-psychopaths, but never a psychopath.  They will usually sacrifice the companies future for personal gain now.   They will probably be caught and fired, but at what total cost.

How about the psychopath that is already there but hidden?  Create false golden opportunities and watch who takes them.  They are your problem.  Psychopaths will only be restrained by their short term rational analysis of risk.   They will lie cheat and steal as the opportunities are perceived to present themselves.

Creating a false prize to see who claims it is called a honeypot.  Keep in mind the honeypot will need to be very clever to outwit the smartest sociopaths (psychopath limits stage)   Hand known information to trusted workers and see if their boss takes credit for it.  Create false contacts for industrial espionage.  Leave company credit cards (with tight limits) and equipment where employees can ‘find’ them.  Offer impossibly hard projects (no money, no market, tight deadlines) with a promotional promise and see who nibbles.   Feign illness, retreat to the security room, and watch your next in command as she fills your shoes for a few days.

Companies are moving toward a split model of operations and sales (understood problems) as the functional side and dev-ops or creative work on the other.  This is a wise move.  A small group of people competing with everyone and everything can destroy a company.  Jealousy has a very limited scope of risk analysis.  Remember ‘everything’ includes your company’s interests as well.  Cooperation isn’t a natural choice for psychopaths, only alliance.

Change robber barrons into robin hood

hood

How do we stop psychopaths in government?  If we ‘kick their ass’ aka: kill them, it won’t solve the real problem and law will be subverted to societal destruction again.  The problem is humans are two behavioral sets, and one of the sets seeks power strictly as an end to itself. This is true if it’s behavioral or genetic(civgene).

We need the power of popular citizen veto.  The right to fork is basic human right.  Why?  Psychopaths will take over ANY system we make because making mistakes, even for the smartest or the wisest, is a required part of learning.  That’s how the conscience works.  No conscience, no concept of risk, half your decision making power is in the toilet.  Those mistakes feed critical data into subconscious risk calculator.  Yes a wise person will keep their error impact small, but they still must make them.  To err is human, ergo, forgiveness is divine.

The problem with the Austerity/Tea Party solution is the Big Bird(PBS) problem.  Not all government spending is negative or useless.  Even moments before inevitable economic collapse some new laws still reflect use to the society.  This solution (sometimes) can throw the baby out with the bathwater.  Instead we must reduce the jurisdiction of a law solving the real problem, politicians grabbing power and money for themselves and not sharing   aka:unchecked federalization.  Psychopaths are adult children, it’s just like taking the toy from jealous children and saying, ‘now I’m going to keep it.’  Likely you don’t want their toy, but now they’ll think REAL hard before not sharing.

This is the essence of legal distribution.  The power of popular citizen veto over power politics.  If the corrupt abuse their seats to rob the treasury, at least they have to share.

If a law is sane at the largest jurisdiction, it will still be sane at the next smallest (or the next).  It lets people closer to a problem separate the wheat from the chaff.  Yes you will loose some economy of scale at a smaller jurisdiction, but you will also loose all the corruption in the author’s secret ill intent.  That is a choice the citizen of a republic has a right to weigh themselves.  The power of the purse strings is gone.  Watch the power hungry hem and haw and try to beat the common sense out of your brain on this.   National security, they’ll cry.  Tyranny of democracy they’ll scream.   No.  The law will be just as unsafe and unjust as it was when they controlled it directly, but now you know who they are.

Time to let the social ‘marketplace’ of the states or cities shine some sunlight on the dark favoritism of shady republic law.

When is money just favour?

cash

Money is currency with the additional simultaneous attributes of property.  Inherent value and therefore purchasing power beyond the lone trust of either set of attributes.  An insurance policy against corruption of either.  It likely came about from attempts at corruption from psychopathic forces.  Creating a dual trap of the conscience to block animalistic regression back to territory or favour.  Each element protecting the other.  Money was invented to make both property and currency resistant to corruption from short term thinkers.

As discussed property and currency are derived from the conscience.  This stems from our discussion of the behavioural differences between animals (and psychopaths) and conscionable human beings.  As a a result we can assert what property and currency can not be.

Property can not be a territory.  Currency can not be favour.  The primary difference between both is the internalized will of the conscionable human being to respect both ownership and accomplishment in the present and future without further work.  In the case of property and currency, if you add the work of defense back in the result is, territory and favour.

This is why debt based money is a fallacy.  It functions on the premise that any currency can be made into money simply by promising it in the future.   ‘Money’ is created by saying the property is the promise of future human labor.  Money can never be debt because it completely undermines a conscionable construct and replaces it with it’s psychopathic social structure.  Debt based money is based on the concept that human beings, or at least their labor can be property.  Unreasonable on it’s face.

A debt based money turns property into territory.  Currency into favour.  Property and currency, which long term risk weighs as beneficial to the whole, becomes more subject to the whims of nature and man.  They are no longer the pillars of investment and economy of scale, but a transient permission to persue them.  A favour.  In a way debt-money is psychopathic commentary on the conscience itself.  The lender with a short term jealousy based risk management borrows the wisdom of a holistic conscience long term risk management system in exchange for the only thing they can give, territory and favour.  ‘You may continue to produce widgets to pay off your business debt.  You may continue to maintain the banks house.  You thought you were so smart about risk.  I don’t care what happened, your labor is mine.  Pay me.’

Systemically the reason the self contradicting nature of debt as money is not detected earlier is the competition it inspires.  During the transition from property and currency to territory and favour society can benefit from the attributes of both cooperation and competition.  Guiding and applying each to a perpetually lessening degree.

Eventually cooperation fails.  The mechanism is simple.  Compound interest, once introduced, demands growing competition.  Investment itself becomes no longer wise and eventually no longer possible.  Currencies and property begin to evolve outside of the system.  The debt-money loses trust, and the economies of scale, which need some degree of systemic cooperation, collapse.

I know of the properties that couple well with currencies now, but can’t imagine what they will be in the future.  I do know they need little defense.  I know true currency forces no hierarchy, and fiat can never be money.  I know people, and their labor can never be property.  Money was imagined to resist reversion to an animalistic society.  The day we discover the perfect money, will be the day we no longer need it.

Edit 6/10/15: Added a link.