Soo much complete bullshit from Zenaan as usual. See below for those others interested in knowledge.
On 10/10/19 11:11 PM, Zenaan Harkness wrote: > Well that's the question isn't it... > > Humans seem prima facie inclined to engage in transactions of > "currency" (e.g. fiats) or "money" (fiats, gold and silver coin, > digital coin, etc). > > As we recently learnted from Jordan Peterson, hierarchies are rather > fundamental to our biology, and indicate strongly the pyramidal > distribution of wealth, status and mating opportunities. > > AKA "skewed distribution of wealth". Off the top of my head: People have been around for hundreds of thousands of years and have lived in all sorts of different civilizations and social structures. The world is of much bigger scope than Zenaan permits; humans have much more range than benzo addict Jordan Peterson yelling about lobsters and hoping to hoard even more commodities/bananas. Indus Valley Civilization lacked military/security forces, very little wealth disparity, very little hierarchy, no priests, very peaceful. We have recently learned from benzo addict Jordan Peterson that he is an idiot. Here, think of this. Trade versus sharing. Obviously, especially older generations, will automatically hear "sharing" and think "Soviet Union" or "communism" but there are other real-life models for actual sharing. Imagine you are on a road trip with three friends. Four individuals in the vehicle. You all have a single bag of 100 kale chips. Communism is when one of these four becomes a dictator and says "each person gets exactly 25 kale chips because we're all [supposedly] equal, (though perhaps a few extra kale chips for me)" and anyone who disagrees is killed, etc. USian anarchists insisting on rebranding history to fuel their attempts at celebrity cstatus all this "State communism" because then they can agree with their constitutencies of rank-and-file idiots that "communism is a good thing", but most people know better about the failures of communism, etc. Trade (such as capitalism, yes not just crony capitalism, jim bell), is when you gesture to your ingroup friend in the car that you'd like to have some kale chips too and he says "$5 or GTFO." Suddenly you are an outgroup on this roadtrip. You don't belong anymore; you've been shunned. You have to provide dolla dolla bill up front to your former friends because you can no longer sit with them etc. Trade is when you go to the deli and say "Fuck you, I paid the five dollars, give me my goddamn reuben" and you get your sandwich without having to ponder, associate with, or help the dead factory farm animals, the workers cleaning the deli, the homeless person who hangs out in the deli, etc. It's just fuck you I paid give me my sandwich. Trade = outgrouping; sharing = ingrouping. Forget the communism crap, I had to clarify since "sharing" automatically triggers "communism" in people's impressionable brains, you know this world where we all go around murmuring "invisible hand" or "proletariat" because dead guys wrote those words down hundreds of years ago. So just normal sharing. Like little kids usually do. Sharing is what ingroups do. It's fluid custodianship of assets. In this roadtrip case, the assets are the 100 kale chips to be distributed/allocated during the course of the road trip. The road trippers share the kale chips according to respect, approval, logic, etc, because they are in-group folks. Maybe the driver needs a few extra because the driver is tired from focusing on the road. Maybe the one passenger with high blood pressure needs to not have so many salty chips, so the other 3 subtly and semi-automatically look out for this person, making sure this person doesn't have too many kale chips. This is all sort of natural and automatic and the situation is dynamically refreshed constantly. Maybe the car breaks down so everyone becomes more careful to save the kale chips. This sort of sharing is what ingroups do, not just road trips but also families, officeworkers in an office setting familiar to them, etc. We're all familiar with this. Imagine you are working in a computer firm office and suddenly one secretary demands the other secretary fork over $2 for the good pencil with the eraser left on it. No, obviously, these employees see each other as ingroup so they share the good pencil on an as-needed basis and refresh the situation according to life's contingencies. Maybe someone gets shunned or the dynamically refreshed situation changes, everyone decides to burn down their employer, leak all the documents, strike, or whatever. Trade is what outgroups do. I don't trust you, so I'm not gonna do X for you unless you do Y for me. And those most skilled at trading rise to the top of this, as lobster fanatic and benzo addict Jordan Peterson screams, but did you know for hundreds of thousands of years not all of life is based on trade? Over time in ideal circumstances trade might lead to the traders becoming ingroup with each other, ending the trade, and starting up sharing / fluid custodianship of assets. But in today's world the deli never changes because of overwhelming social control exerted by corporations, states, etc. You have to trade for the reuben, even though the deli worker behind the counter has come to know you from your regular stops and y'all share good tidings with each other, friendly comments on the rainy weather, etc. The sharing prosocial world and the trade antisocial world exist side by side every time you stop at the deli counter, two vibes or spheres uncomfortably overlapping. Trade means non-traders, such as very disabled individuals or infants or elderly, are forced to rely on shameful charity rather than being treated as integral parts of the ingroup. Today in the capitalist ideal, everyone is their own 'sole proprietor' of an outgroup of everyone else, 7.5 billion outgroups all competing, except for say families, or when people start forming ingroups, as they do in so many situations. You can tell trade is stupid for ingroups because it doesn't include automatically infants and elderly etc. Able-bodied white people with no kids please! Yeah, let's base all the rules on 30 year olds and just kick infants and elderly to the curb with shameful charity. Makes a lot of fucking sense as a lifelong, generations-long strategy /sarcasm. "Where there's justice, there's no need for charity." -- Wollstonecraft We need a global commons for public data so we can organize effectively to knowledgeably replace the social structures, not just cheering on corporate Twitter etc when the current ones continue to collapse (and then when our number's up screaming that we deserve more cryptocoin to float our own particular outgroup boat), and so there can be a literate population that can maintain individual autonomy (which means so much more than trade but also cooking skill, traveling skill, etc etc) through individual rights but also be informed in agreeing to social contracts etc because we're simultaneously very social creatures. Stuff you should read for more similar or similar-ish to the above: Peter Gelderloos: _Worshiping Power: An Anarchist View of Early State Formation_ Heather Marsh: _Autonomy, Diversity, Society_ and _Binding Chaos_ and https://getgee.xyz Ursula K Le Guin: "The Carrier Bag Theory of Fiction", _The Dispossessed_
