If You Only Knew How Bad Things Really Are. [2777x2700 - 1.61MB]

(post is archived)

You are currently inside a comment thread.

Click here to see all the comments (45).

[–] • 0 pt

(edited )

Is there any merit in "lesser of evils" ?

Have come to the same conclusion regarding the popular cryptocurrencies however if we are to compare 'idolotry point systems' for a moment: the one which is based on an open source irreversable ledger (at least very hard to reverse) with a finite cap and a predictable, transparent issuance schedule - seems far better than 18th century version based on paper that can be printed in endless supply at the whim of central banks, no?

And given this comparison, is there not at least some aspect of positive momentum in this modern version? And that the masses of idolorty point worshippers may at least have options; and as such can pick the lesser of two evils so to speak ?

I would love to cancel all bank accounts & idolotry point gathering to instead just adopt 100% barter based on needs as you suggest for example, but there seems to be a need for 'balance' if one is to continue to interface with existing civilization - that balance may include but not limited to: engaging in idolotry point systems to play the game enough to acquire what one needs to build their own ecosystem (or to escape a toxic one ie- to fund relocation outside of major metro); particularly if you need unity you may need cooperation/collaboration from those in your immediate community who may also not be ready to entirely disavow/reject said idolotry point systems.

Furthermore, following along this pattern of iteration; ie- a cycle of lesser evils until reaching perhaps a place in whereby there is not much evil at all (perhaps to the point where it becomes like that of a harmless point system ie- apart of a game of cards amongst friends for example).

As you point out currently Bitcoin is benefiting the energy cartel and those who can simply acquire it on the open market using the previous generation of funny money - but what is to stop us from re-wiring/re-engineering the system to use 'individual power' instead of centralized (((mining))) power? In doing so could we not keep the baby while draining the bathwater?

For example, the system could be reworked for individuals to issue their own units while keeping the existing networking infrastructure in place to facilitate transactions in person or online; just how the system does today. Again - still idolotry point system, but with adapted rules that help level the playing field; and not necessarily better than barter or direct trade for what one needs immediately; ie- food for labour or equipment for food, etc but again the notion here I am eluding to is a trajectory of lesser of two evils such that we can slowly but surely 'onboard the masses to rejection of idolotry completely'.

Maybe when/if money could be successfully 'individualized' in a fun, effective, open system then maybe more people would begin to comprehend that the units are just imaginary and that it really is just a game that should be thought of as such: a game to play. Who may at which point clue in to their needs; shift the focus of their productive efforts on their immediate needs & building/maintaining ecosystems. Engaging in trade not primarily based on acquiring/selling 'units' but by mutual trade with those in and around said immediate ecosystems; maybe even using a hint of the very idolotry technology to accommodate said barter in a modernized way (ie- an app that could give you an approx realtime exchange rate for goods vs other goods or services in your local area).

Is there any merit in "lesser of evils" ? Have come to the same conclusion regarding the popular cryptocurrencies however if we are to compare 'idolotry point systems' for a moment: the one which is based on an open source irreversable ledger (at least very hard to reverse) with a finite cap and a predictable, transparent issuance schedule - seems far better than 18th century version based on paper that can be printed in endless supply at the whim of central banks, no? And given this comparison, is there not at least some aspect of positive momentum in this modern version? And that the masses of idolorty point worshippers may at least have options; and as such can pick the lesser of two evils so to speak ? I would love to cancel all bank accounts & idolotry point gathering to instead just adopt 100% barter based on needs as you suggest for example, but there seems to be a *need* for 'balance' if one is to continue to interface with existing civilization - that balance may include but not limited to: engaging in idolotry point systems to play the game enough to acquire what one needs to build their own ecosystem (or to escape a toxic one ie- to fund relocation outside of major metro); particularly if you need unity you may need cooperation/collaboration from those in your immediate community who may also not be ready to entirely disavow/reject said idolotry point systems. Furthermore, following along this pattern of iteration; ie- a cycle of lesser evils until reaching perhaps a place in whereby there is not much evil at all (perhaps to the point where it becomes like that of a harmless point system ie- apart of a game of cards amongst friends for example). As you point out currently Bitcoin is benefiting the energy cartel and those who can simply acquire it on the open market using the previous generation of funny money - but what is to stop us from re-wiring/re-engineering the system to use 'individual power' instead of centralized (((mining))) power? In doing so could we not keep the baby while draining the bathwater? For example, the system could be reworked for individuals to issue their own units while keeping the existing networking infrastructure in place to facilitate transactions in person or online; just how the system does today. Again - still idolotry point system, but with adapted rules that help level the playing field; and not necessarily better than barter or direct trade for what one needs immediately; ie- food for labour or equipment for food, etc but again the notion here I am eluding to is a trajectory of lesser of two evils such that we can slowly but surely 'onboard the masses to rejection of idolotry completely'. Maybe when/if money could be successfully 'individualized' in a fun, effective, open system then maybe more people would begin to comprehend that the units are just imaginary and that it really is just a game that should be thought of as such: a game to play. Who may at which point clue in to their needs; shift the focus of their productive efforts on their immediate needs & building/maintaining ecosystems. Engaging in trade not primarily based on acquiring/selling 'units' but by mutual trade with those in and around said immediate ecosystems; maybe even using a hint of the very idolotry technology to accommodate said barter in a modernized way (ie- an app that could give you an approx realtime exchange rate for goods vs other goods or services in your local area).

parent
link

[+] [deleted] • 1 pt

[–] • 0 pt

(edited )

in a fun, effective, open system

You try to use "wants" to incentivize the selfish to comprehend their "needs"...that's what the happy merchant does. Control by deception.

Your friend is a chain-smoker who smokes a pack a day.
Do you recommend he goes cold turkey? Or maybe try a week at half-a-pack per day first?

And regarding this same example, the point being to create a form of 'interactive entertainment' for others to enjoy; like a book or a videogame or a movie can do the same and even inspire people as much as it can also be a source of ignorance; of course in the end it is just fiction. There are (((movies))) that have negative intent and movies that were created with positive intent. Just as a book, a game, or a 'money alternative' can be created with either intent.

Furthermore, if you are open with your intent while you create it perhaps you may also inspire & attract others to your ecoysystem. You say yourself that the highest value of ONE is ONE's ability to evaluate ALL. Perhaps I value the creation process of something unique that can be engaged in by those seeking entertainment - whatever their intent; be it selfishness or boredrom or perhaps as a misguided notion that they can get what they need out of this creation - whatever the case, the intended result is that they become inspired and perhaps can learn from the experience. It is therefor up to the creator to deliver an impact; to help leave a lasting impression. One that doesnt' exert authority or proclaim but that inspires - maybe the kind of very inspiration you share here on Poal. To get people's gears grinding and pondering on our selfish destructive nature. So that maybe perhaps they will eventually realize they do not need the game, the movie, the system - to get what they need. Or do you see no value in this exercise?

Do you need to play cards with your friends or do you want to play cards with your friends...

If you don't play cards with friends, you may end up not having any friends - therefore if you want friends depending on the type of friends they are then sure, you need to play cards with your friends.

Do you suggest tending to the fields 15 hours a day, 7 days a week? Surely at some point you willl have what you need - for both you and your family, maybe even for your local community too. At what point do you 'stop and smell the roses' or shoot the shit with some pals?

> > in a fun, effective, open system > You try to use "wants" to incentivize the selfish to comprehend their "needs"...that's what the happy merchant does. Control by deception. Your friend is a chain-smoker who smokes a pack a day. Do you recommend he goes cold turkey? Or maybe try a week at half-a-pack per day first? And regarding this same example, the point being to create a form of 'interactive entertainment' for others to enjoy; like a book or a videogame or a movie can do the same and even inspire people as much as it can also be a source of ignorance; of course in the end it is just fiction. There are (((movies))) that have negative intent and movies that were created with positive intent. Just as a book, a game, or a 'money alternative' can be created with either intent. Furthermore, if you are open with your intent while you create it perhaps you may also inspire & attract others to your ecoysystem. You say yourself that the highest value of ONE is ONE's ability to evaluate ALL. Perhaps I value the creation process of something unique that can be engaged in by those seeking entertainment - whatever their intent; be it selfishness or boredrom or perhaps as a misguided notion that they can get what they need out of this creation - whatever the case, the intended result is that they become inspired and perhaps can learn from the experience. It is therefor up to the creator to deliver an impact; to help leave a lasting impression. One that doesnt' exert authority or proclaim but that inspires - maybe the kind of very inspiration you share here on Poal. To get people's gears grinding and pondering on our selfish destructive nature. So that maybe perhaps they will eventually realize they do not *need* the game, the movie, the system - to get what they need. Or do you see no value in this exercise? > Do you need to play cards with your friends or do you want to play cards with your friends... If you don't play cards with friends, you may end up not having any friends - therefore if you want friends depending on the type of friends they are then sure, you need to play cards with your friends. Do you suggest tending to the fields 15 hours a day, 7 days a week? Surely at some point you willl have what you need - for both you and your family, maybe even for your local community too. At what point do you 'stop and smell the roses' or shoot the shit with some pals?

parent
link

[+] [deleted] • 0 pt

[–] • 0 pt

Crypto (crypt) means I'm inside the (digital) van with the pedophiles who can fuck me whenever they want, because I can't get out....I'm now inside their digital crypt. They now have no need for incentives anymore, because they will make digital fiction mandatory, while using our self imprisonment to take access to physical reality away from us. They now want me to play along to gain access to the outside.

Good call - and we can also see the early stage unfolding with access/restriction to travel/international flights that will soon require the 'Covidpass' or whatever digital ID/credit/crypt/idolotry point system they are rolling out next.

The question always remains however, to what end? You effectively & consistently sumrise it in a big picture way - ie; endless conflict and distraction amongst the goy to keep them fighting amonst each other and to ensure they remain ignorant to their own individual power - for the benefit of endless control. Yet it would be nice to get more specific. And to maybe understand if at some point the parasites will not have 'enough'? Or will they stop at nothing short of destruction of all civizliations until reaching their 'one world' ? Can we really stop it by simply just 'not playing along'?

the one which is based on an open source irreversible ledger... seems far better than 18th century version based on paper ...no?

Who is offering? (they) and who consents? (you). Did anything change that foundation? No? Then the consequences of that action will always be the same (against you and for them).

Disagree to some extent here. The foundation is based on open technology and auditable ledger that is near impossible to modify. In the case of both the internet and cryptocurrency you seem to imply military industrialists/Rothschild financing of the development and that may very well be the case but without direct evidence such an implication is merely a belief, no? Are you not engaging in idolotry by beliving in the all powerful East India Company who creates all grand innovations, and that none of us lowly goy have the capability on our own to advance such things? Of course, it may be a combination thereof - as the two technologies are made possible by the likes of intelligent people who are personally engaged by the work & said technology; even if the internet & Bitcoin were designed/developed by military initially that aspect is only a fraction of the total man effort invested into making what it is today; today it is a culmination of co-operative efforts & engineering by mostly peaceful individuals who care about building & maintainining high speed communication and/or payment networks. Misguided or not, most of these engineers would not be motivated to nor build or maintain if the foundation was not based on open-ness and unity.

Will (((they))) corrupt this creation, will they attack/destroy it, will they hijack it for their own selfish gains - of course and much of that will be made possible by those same misguided engineers who falsely 'believe' in whatever is being sold to them.

> Crypto (crypt) means I'm inside the (digital) van with the pedophiles who can fuck me whenever they want, because I can't get out....I'm now inside their digital crypt. They now have no need for incentives anymore, because they will make digital fiction mandatory, while using our self imprisonment to take access to physical reality away from us. They now want me to play along to gain access to the outside. Good call - and we can also see the early stage unfolding with access/restriction to travel/international flights that will soon require the 'Covidpass' or whatever digital ID/credit/crypt/idolotry point system they are rolling out next. The question always remains however, to what end? You effectively & consistently sumrise it in a big picture way - ie; endless conflict and distraction amongst the goy to keep them fighting amonst each other and to ensure they remain ignorant to their own individual power - for the benefit of endless control. Yet it would be nice to get more specific. And to maybe understand if at some point the parasites will not have 'enough'? Or will they stop at nothing short of destruction of all civizliations until reaching their 'one world' ? Can we really stop it by simply just 'not playing along'? >> the one which is based on an open source irreversible ledger... seems far better than 18th century version based on paper ...no? > Who is offering? (they) and who consents? (you). Did anything change that foundation? No? Then the consequences of that action will always be the same (against you and for them). Disagree to some extent here. The foundation is based on open technology and auditable ledger that is near impossible to modify. In the case of both the internet and cryptocurrency you seem to imply military industrialists/Rothschild financing of the development and that may very well be the case but without direct evidence such an implication is merely a belief, no? Are you not engaging in idolotry by beliving in the all powerful East India Company who creates all grand innovations, and that none of us lowly goy have the capability on our own to advance such things? Of course, it may be a combination thereof - as the two technologies are made possible by the likes of intelligent people who are personally engaged by the work & said technology; even if the internet & Bitcoin were designed/developed by military initially that aspect is only a fraction of the total man effort invested into making what it is today; today it is a culmination of co-operative efforts & engineering by mostly peaceful individuals who care about building & maintainining high speed communication and/or payment networks. Misguided or not, most of these engineers would not be motivated to nor build or maintain if the foundation was not based on open-ness and unity. Will (((they))) corrupt this creation, will they attack/destroy it, will they hijack it for their own selfish gains - of course and much of that will be made possible by those same misguided engineers who falsely 'believe' in whatever is being sold to them.

parent
link

[+] [deleted] • 0 pt