Checks, Balances, Defray Responsibility Not Risk

 When something goes wrong, you can blame the balance or the check, rather than having to blame yourself. "If only you had let me--"

  Imagine a slave. Imagine someone owns the right arm, and someone else owns the left arm. Yes, they now have to work together. Only in very naive theory does this make their interests align. Mainly it makes the slave useless. Maybe they violate the balancing system, by making it fake or by buying a second slave to go around it. Maybe they just get their slave stolen. Conquest. Either way ownership will return to its natural whole.

 What if - and I know this is a real cloudy-headed fantasy - you work together with someone who keeps their word. Does things when they say they're going to do it, and doesn't do things when they won't say they're going to do it. Then you align interests using contracts, without unnaturally trying to split wholes down the middle. 

 With a balance/check system, it's a way to farm blame for incompetence. "We can't make a slave soldier, the guy who owns the left arm can't use a shield." All his fault, see. Naturally, revenge is sour. An effective society, one not run by eunuchs bureaucrats, can't develop a [balanced] system in the first place. The incompetence and paralysis comes first, the system appears to justify or excuse what's already happening.

The Christian Trinity is the Cluster B Trinity

 Turns out nobody can work out what [the holy ghost] is supposed to be, because it's satan, lol.

 The tell is that the father saves the son from the satan, but doesn't do anything about the satan. Uses cures as a way of abjuring prevention. Cures as a way of perpetuating the problem. Saves the bum from his addictive cravings by giving him money for more meth. The victim has to go on being the victim. The narcissist can't let them change their role. The identity has to be fixed.

 Saviours don't save you. Heroes are not heroic. Superheroes are especially villainous. Especially treacherous. 

 The christian father saves his son through resurrection. Could have saved his son by breaking the cross instead. Could have conquered the roman empire and lustrated it. Could have prevented rome from doing imperial things in the first place. Didn't do any of that. Just let the empire string his son up. "Have a nice passionate agony, son." "Thanks dad, it was excruciating." "You're going to have holes in your hand for eternity now, lmao. Try not to bloodstain on the upholstery, rofl." Nice save, father.

 Batman swears not to kill not because it's especially ethical but precisely because it's unethical. He could save the hostages from the joker by shooting the joker. This would also prevent any future hostages - an eventually that has to be strenuously opposed. Evil is so weak it can only survive if someone better subsidizes it.

 Superman could listen for crime being planned, and deport the criminal to a penal colony before they accomplish anything. Every time a purse gets snatched in metropolis it's because superman let it happen. So he can show off. "Look at me, I'm saving you." Every time a purse gets snatched anywhere on earth, in fact, it's because clark kent couldn't be arsed to get off his butt.
 Use superhearing or whatever to produce supertrials. "If I let you go, will you stop committing crime?" "Yes (lie)." "K then, have fun in jail." Superman isn't aware there's no reason not to execute them...but of course he's pro-crime, so he wouldn't in any case. Superbadman. 

 Spiderman is basically pathetic. His archenemy is a newspaper editor. Can't save you from anything you couldn't have saved yourself from. Meanwhile prof xavier could wheel around and simply delete every criminal and all corruption, aside from magneto's magic helmet. "But that's not narratively dramatic." Then don't hand out powers that break the narrative, genius.

 

 It is only honourable to save someone out of selfishness. And isn't that a mind fuck to you twisted abominations, lol. A father saves his biological son because doing so saves himself. A friend saves his comrade because friendship is profitable. The security firm saves you because that's what you pay them for. Working with professionals is always a relief.

 The key is that "selfless" saviours are plain lying. They're also doing it out of selfish purposes. Psychological egoism is true: it is logically impossible not to be selfish. It's part of the nature of subjectivity. 

 The [[saviour]] can't be honest about those purposes. They believe the purposes are nefarious - go ahead and believe them. When someone claims to be doing something out of pure agape, it's because the strategy is driven by some crooked and deranged impulse. An [all-loving] god is an all-insane god, a being putting lovecraft's hardest pushes to shame.

 

 It's very important to wreck the democratically-induced perception filter on responsibility. 

 "Oh, saviours are irresponsible." That was easy. 

 "Hey superman, we don't want to pay for all these felons you refuse to execute. Feed them yourself." 

 Even if the saviour manages to keep in their pants for a bit, inevitably a conflict will arise between the victim's needs and the saviour's needs. The saviour, as with god the father, will always choose their own needs first. And they will always claim they're serving the victim's needs, as per narcissistic projection. 

 At best the victim has declined opportunities to take care of themselves, because they thought they chad a saviour.

Encyclopedia: Iodine Pit

 This is so cool that you don't deserve to hear about it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iodine_pit I will pay a very noticeable karmic price for telling you. I think I'm telling you anyway because I'm insane. I have a big 'ol nasty scar right there.

 Nuclear reactors produce nearly harmless iodine as a by-product. This iodine is a time-delay poison, because the tense iodine relaxes into reactor-countering xenon. Enough xenon suffocates the reaction. Suicidal xenon kills the reaction, eliminating its progenitor iodine, and ultimately vanishing itself. However, as long as the reactor keeps running, it burns off the xenon before it can build up to suffocating levels.

 This is an alchemical metaphor for life in general. Life is either growing, or dying. Because cosmic order is inherently imperfect, life produces anti-life. When life grows, even more anti-life is produced. More than the instantaneous state can handle, so the growing life has to grow more to survive the byproduct of its own growth. Producing more anti-life. Etc. 

 If a country owns conquered territory, it is normal for the country to need to declare war on itself and conquer itself again. And again. And again. The alternative is to get conquered by someone else. The alternative is to cease to exist, to have nothing to conquer.

 If you get married through courtship, expect to have to court and win your already-wife. And to court and win your already-wife.
 If you wifenapped your wife, expect to have to kidnap her again, but moreso. And again. 

 If you discover a new field of wisdom, your options are to re-discover it and re-discover it voluntarily, or to permit it to be forgotten and anyone else who wants to know it must re-discover it involuntarily. There have been no significant discoveries in physics in the last fifty years, meaning, to first order approximation, nobody knows any physics at all. If someone wants to know, he is going to have to start from scratch. 

 Born, and this makes you want to live? Have to be re-born.

 "Normal" is death. The demands of life are never satisfied, except through the cessation of all demand.

If Government is Legitimate, Government Has Never Been Tried

 The usual orwellian Namelessness: order is called anarchy, anarchy is called order.

 It's not a government, it's an infection. Everyone siding with the infection, in the slightest capacity, is part of the infection. Every country has been an anarchy, since the invention of farming societies. All anarchy, all the time.

 Left anarchists, being agents of the infection, are true anarchists. Anarcho-capitalists &c are the only ones who believe in having a government. 

 Pity they haven't noticed aggregate demand for government is negative, and demand for anarchy is wild and growing.

The Possibility of the Rectifying Audit

 I looked at the body of knowledge previously known as [philosophy] and though, "Eh, I could do better." 

 What if I really did do better? What if I corrected all the errors?

 Maybe it would make no difference. Maybe it would be a huge waste of time. Maybe all the errors were illusory, and the uselessness was an inherent feature of the body. 

 Maybe the body was so corrupt that it was nothing more than one long wrong turn. Would have to start again from scratch, going in an orthogonal direction. 

 Maybe I couldn't do better. Maybe the errors were much more difficult than they appeared. 

 The fact the task appears daunting only made it more attractive. 

 Honestly the effort involved can only be called trivial. One person spending a substantial portion of one's life can't be called anything more than a minor effort, given it didn't even take a second researcher. Finished before I died. Finished long before I died. The sum total of mortal wisdom is so primitive it can be mastered by one individual working alone. You can try to call it thousands of years old if you like, but I think nobody is really trying it. I have no competition, even if you include the physically dead. An extremely young field.

 The errors of the previous body are the purpose. The delusion is the point. Naturally, those seeking the worst will try their hardest to look the best. They know exactly what the honourable are supposed to say, that's how they avoid doing the honourable thing so conscientiously. It wasn't all one wrong turn because they deliberately turned wrong at the last turn, to disguise their intent.

 Yes, I really could, and did, do better. This is because I was the only one trying. The benefits are numerous, but I'm the only one who wants them. The task was, at least, suitably challenging as a single-challenger team. 

 Still, there's that possibility that this is not the only very young and very valuable field. Perhaps you are interested in one of them. Consider not giving up. Just try it? See what happens? Turns out if you think you can do better, you probably can.

Most Fan Translators are Fluent in Neither Japanese Nor English

 They are specifically malaysian. And they're not terribly fluent in malay either - the kind of person who says alot and atleast in english, but born in malaysia instead. 

 E.g. the everyone else is a returnee guy isn't fluent in either english or korean. Singapore? Yeah, malaysian, like I said.

Feudalism as Labour Union

 Have a neighbourhood union rather than a labour union. Natural, real categories instead of DLS bureaucrat categories. Bonus: real unemployment insurance.

 If you want job security, secure your job. Hire yourself to a lord, who, not being a retard, is much better at finding a job than you are. He pays you in perpetuity, and in return, he has the right to choose your labour. 

 Admittedly the exact details of the contract are a bit tricky. Ideally you would use this lord for other lordly tasks as well - arranging a lawyer, a doctor, a priest/philosopher, house maintenance, and so on. You don't want to have to change lords every time the job is suboptimal. You don't want a purely fixed wage while your lord can perfectly optimize your earnings, thus his premium. You don't want a purely fixed "union due" or the lord has no incentive to get you a job beyond the bare minimum. These things need to be carefully balanced.

 But at the end of the day, a cooperative Exit society does permit changing lords. Shop around, get the best deal. Let experience be society's guide, rather than ivory tower theorizing.
 That is, macroeconomics is easy. Trivial. Microeconomics is nutty hard. 

  The lord is not a bureaucrat. He makes his choices based on knowing you personally. Get a new lord if he's not interested. He doesn't see you as a checklist and some ass area he has to cover, but as an idiosyncratic profit centre. You can't scam his unemployment insurance. He knows or will soon know if you're getting fired for fault or because the company screwed up. 

 Because he knows you personally, it's healthy for him to have some sympathy. If you need time off, he won't deny it arbitrarily, based on politics or case law established by weird outlier situations. If necessary you can negotiate health conditions into the contract. Personalized, individual health considerations. 

 

 You can go full Commune if you really want to. Have the lord keep a central pantry stocked with staples, and you simply take whatever you want. You work where he tells you to, you rest when he tells you to, you play when he holds a festival. Don't have to think at all. Maybe draw a small cash allowance for luxuries beyond the free pantry. The option exists. In a genuinely free country, freedom is optional, not mandatory.

 Two keys to all these wild benefits. Stop lying. Not everyone is a lord; egalitarianism is very false. Stop trying to be head traitor. Turns out treachery is bad.
 You would think this is not a big ask.

An Excellent Example of Boomer Ostrich-Sanding

What a fucking moron.

https://twitter.com/esrtweet/status/1874211838193447125/

 "We gave up honour, discipline, responsibility, curiosity. Then...it was dem cummunizts!!!1!!!" 

 Literally da jooooos, but someone else. "We wuz pooshed." Fascists gonna Fasc.

 Outlaw property rights in 1776...then oh noes we waz attacked by the furreigners in 1976. If only it wurnt fer dose furreners. 

 Be a victim be a victim nothing is ever your fault.

 The post he responded to is also an astounding feat of ignorance. "It worked." Yes, that's why the kids were so enthusiastic about discarding it...because it was working so well...

 Aristotles' [rational animal] propaganda is alive and well.