Dystopia -- 21st Century Socio-Political Critique by Mr. Kaiser Basileus (Part 2)

(Disclaimer: The guest posts do not necessarily align with Philosocom's manager, Mr. Tomasio Rubinshtein's beliefs, thoughts, or feelings. The point of guest posts is to allow a wide range of narratives from a wide range of people. To apply for a guest post of your own, please send your request to mrtomasio@philosocom.com) 

(Go to KaiserBasileus@mailfence.com for questions regarding the author's article).

(Philosocom's Kaiser Basileus Articles)

(Part 1)

Article Synopsis by Mr. Chris Kingsley and Co.

"Dystopia -- 21st Century Socio-Political Critique" by Mr. Kaiser Basileus is a comprehensive critique of modern society, focusing on government policies, economic disparities, social norms, and systemic injustices. The author's views are expressed as those of the guest author, are not necessarily those of Mr. Rubinshtein or Philosocom.

The critique covers a wide range of topics, including legal and economic systems, social norms, and systemic injustices.

The piece contains numerous thought-provoking insights, particularly regarding the nature of power, societal norms, and the role of government. Statements like "Rhetoric is the dark art of counting effectiveness more important than truth '' encapsulate deep philosophical critiques that invite readers to reconsider commonly accepted ideas.

In conclusion, "Dystopia -- 21st Century Socio-Political Critique, Part 2" is a valuable contribution to contemporary socio-political discourse, encouraging critical reflection and dialogue.  

(Background music)

**********************************

Mr. Rubinshtein's Description of "Dystopia" (Reminder)

Mr. Kaiser's "Dystopia" is a socio-political critique on contemporary society, covering many aspects of modern life. His unique perspectives offer a refreshing look on many features of our lives in which we learned to accept as completely legitimate. "Dystopia" is here to challenge our beliefs and expand our discourse in contemporary philosophy, from society to ethics to politics.

The original document given to me is extremely long and as such will be divided to several parts. I hope you will benefit from it. Enjoy.

Part 2

Basically, all of America was a for-profit real estate development scam for people to be able to easily access. Inherently negative vices is a problem of the state, for them to want them is a problem of society. (Mr. Rubinshtein's note: Mr. Kaiser's argument is supported by scams such as the Yazoo Land Fraud, the Brooklyn Bridge Scam, and more, throughout the centuries).

Governments tend to always use additive solutions rather than subtractive ones. The US government does not solve my problems, does not allow me to solve my problems, and stands directly in the way of any alternate system that might allow for either.

When police investigate themselves, the question they should be trying to answer is not whether someone did something wrong - that should be obvious. It's whether they did right. They must be held to a higher standard. Enclosure, copyright, usury, civil forfeiture, qualified immunity, derivatives are all immoral.

Protecting fossils, ruins, etc. on behalf of people in the future by making them unavailable to interested people today is morally abhorrent. White men, from good families having even the tiniest overall societal advantage is sufficient that they dominate the upper end of the class system, where the tiniest advantage can "win the game". (That inherent instability is the only reason all power isn't entirely entrenched.)

Modern society sees this demographic discrepancy as representative of the state of society as a whole. However, for ordinary people those advantages are lost in a sea of resource conflicts and lesser evil choices (ie compromise). Cultural norms are always aligned with the past. It's a sadistic assumption that it's ever ok to have to prove something to a government than never attempts to prove itself to you.

Legal contracts only protect those who can afford to litigate. Infrastructure is only improved when it benefits the wealthy. A hard/apocalyptic dystopia is greatly to be preferred to a soft/tyrannical one: You can get a sense of progress that gives you meaning.

Putting paper bags in a landfill is technically carbon capture. The best philosopher of academia will never be the best philosopher because from the tower you cannot understand the mud. Sanctions against a country inevitably harm the innocent poor of that country more than those creating the policies those factions stand against.

Employment is just another way of saying, help someone get benefit who doesn't deserve it as much as you just because they're better positioned in society.

Fines remove power from you so the same fine to a poor person diminishes them much more than it diminishes a wealthier person. No amount of money is appropriate compensation for spending any amount of time doing anything without good cause.

Violence in modern society is more disbursed and more deferred, not lessened. (Mr. Rubinshtein's note: as exemplified in mercenaries existing to this day).

The churn in socioeconomic status is irrelevant if it doesn't happen frequently enough within a typical life span, for an ordinary person to get several chances to move up with honest effort.

UIs are hard to interact with either because they're supposed to be or because they're badly designed. Either is a direct failure on the part of the designer. UIs should never be hard to interact with.

The only way to win a war against bullsh*t is to avoid it entirely. If you can't avoid it on the first try, make a second try. If you can't avoid it on the second try, make a third try. Let this be your life. Might makes right is inherently unstable and therefore anti-civilisation.

Rhetoric is the dark art of counting effectiveness "more important" than truth. Ubiquitous surveillance ensures tyranny or revolution. More of the same can never be what society needs until it's working in some sense for everyone. A system where if everyone worked hard there would still inherently be a large number who would not be able to achieve meaningful success, is not a functional system. It must inevitably crash.

Censorship causes an unnatural shift in language which undermines social stability. When a person can try hard and conscientiously but their ending point still be less than someone else's starting point, that's not a civilized society.

The typical troubleshooting process for an ordinary person in modern technology guarantees loss of time without useful knowledge or progress .

The appropriate way to choose a leader in a democracy is to vote for whomever best represents the issues most centrally important to your well-being. Modern politicians do anything but talk about fundamental issues in a rational framework, making it impossible to make a rational decision.

Liberals aren't fighting for freedom, conservatives aren't fighting for my freedom. Neither election or appointment is sufficiently rigorous for positions of high power such as judgeships. They may be used appropriately only as a stop-gap, in emergencies, or particularly to choose between otherwise sufficient options. The basic requirements for the position must be particular, necessary, explicit, clear and obvious, and the selection of "best" can never be arbitrary or capricious.

The actual best person for the job cannot be known and should not be attempted, except the one whose best practices, well established, might limit sufficient options to one or none.

The injustice of status offenses begin in childhood when authority figures make no allowance for what children are experiencing at home. Teachers must know children personally to serve them effectively. We need to go back to a one teacher system.

Government has legitimacy only to the extent its acts protect the rights of others.

Slight difference in underlying stability between having a working car or not, having a stable living situation, etc., for the poor can have an exponentially greater difference in their future than for ordinary people.

When a cop dies in an illegal act, their life insurance still gives their beneficiaries more in compensation than some citizens can earn in a normal lifetime. This is clearly a caste system. (Mr. Rubinshtein's note: Consider the idea of being born to a parent who is a cop, and you'll better understand)

In America at least, the rise of blacks to normal citizen status corresponded to the lowering of normal citizen status, so blacks on the way up never got to where they were going. Whites on the way down refuse to believe they're privileged when they have less than the generation before.

A public servant should never live better than the people they serve. Police officers have no rights because they all uphold an illegitimate system using illegitimately seized power. A normal citizen may or may not have rights. A member of an oppressor class cannot. UBI gets to the root of the symptoms, not to the root of the problems.

Working within the system to change it is literally impossible. Only outside forces can produce meaningful change, by turning the system against itself. Most food ads are fraudulent because you will never get something that looks like that.

Legal fictions - occupational licenses, qualified immunity, corporate personhood, land ownership, derivatives legal fictions would entail you inherently accepting responsibility for payment for accepted services even if you explicitly deny such responsibility in advance ("if insurance doesn't cover it, i don't want it").

Not actually having your rights infringed is meaningless in a system, set up to allow infringing your rights at will. The problem is that your rights are not under your control, so they are effectively privileges, granted by someone else's forbearance.

The ONLY way to fight tyranny is to the death. To enforce traffic control devices when there's no traffic is tyranny. In a world with no free land for escape (with minor exceptions), the idea of an estate is divisive. Sometimes there's no lesser evil between minimal compliance and maximum resistance tyranny obtains in preventing people from seeing a viable opportunity to exercise dissent.

The existence of imaginary states - the current mode of political existence, is not superior to the tyranny of imaginary gods or right by birth. Speed bumps are an immoral imposition on freedom of movement, bodily autonomy, property rights, and personal responsibility.

You can only get credentials by being compliant, regardless of being right.

Governments mostly allow immigrants who are likely to be successful, weighting the message to the outside world on the side of success. Likewise, they allow mostly socially integrated people to travel abroad, again weighting the message.

"At will" employment is just a way for employers to make jobs worse and worse until they find the lowest cost in-between forcing people to quit and having to pay HR to find more. Being compatible with society is not a positive. A society always requires diminishment of the best of you and accentuation of counterproductive parts of you. I don't need to get security from Google, Microsoft, or the US Government. I need to be secure from them.

It's a tragedy that people with tremendous skills have to waste a significant portion of their resources on self-promotion and marketing to be successful. Cops typically look for enough evidence to find someone to persecute rather than prosecute. Until now, growth strategies have always won. Now sustainability is a prerequisite for ultimate success.

Businesses like to ask for sacrifices when times are bad for them. Less employees for the same work, longer hours, pay raises that are less than inflation. But they NEVER sacrifice for you when times are hard on you, unless they absolutely have to. Such as if you cannot be replaced right away, they can't fire you without legal repercussions, or if it would risk their profits by getting others sick.

Moreover, even in ordinary times they'll often ask you to do extra work for the same pay, for only potential extra profit for them. They may literally ask you to do the impossible, such as when their own rules conflict or when your "responsibility" doesn't include sufficient power to actually complete a task. They ask you to perform without the right information or tools, and it's your "fault" if the job doesn't get done. These are just a few of the ways a typical business ignores and/or kills the humanity of its workers.

If these things happen to you, keep track. Tell someone. The longer people remain ignorant and compliant, the less option they'll have not to. Try your best to hold the individuals making such decisions accountable to common sense and basic human dignity or you're a slave and you deserve it. People who claim to be mindful sure don't have much concern about being thoughtful.

Having a good idea isn't enough. Without action it's just indictment of society's current flaws. (Mr. T. R.'s note: Which range from corruption to entertainment greed).