5 ms·

You sound very excited. Your optimism is beautiful. A credit to the poetry of your learning. I have some direct experience with your answer, and I do not want

You sound very excited. Your optimism is beautiful. A credit to the poetry of your learning. I have some direct experience with your answer, and I do not want to be a fright, though what you say is already true today. There is an elite society among us (not the 1%, the 1% if the 1% are the voices in their heads.) Let me say this, 1) through “Power” (capacity of effect through continuity of will) absolutely ultimate empirical truths may be read right from the neuron. Even every time that memory was accessed, even which element were the product of perception vs cognition.; 2) those of such skill rule humanity through armies of hundreds of thousands whose entire lives are embroiled in “schizophrenia” far more terrifying as it is true, there is an actor among us capable of possessing ourselves and others as though the poltergeist. There is a “logical rational” chain beneath that though you can see perception, and “make believe” can get real people doing some pretty terrible things to each other. The secret of true power (the true power of consciousness) in our world is protected by pyramid schemes of extortion and mass delusion. Only an “uncorruptible righteous rule of law” among powers over Man may save us. And you don’t even know what that means or why it is important.

kindkang2024 1y ago
> and I do not want to be a fright > those of such skill rule humanity through armies of hundreds of thousands whose entire lives are embroiled in “schizophrenia” far more terrifying as it is true, there is an actor among us capable of possessing ourselves and others as though the poltergeist. That does seem truly frightening. However, I do not believe it is true, nor am I aware of any valid proof that would make me believe it (though I'm certainly open to it.). I prefer to think that humans have all kinds of wills, and each will tries to gain power to manifest itself. All wills try to compete for power, and only the fittest ones can survive and thrive in the long run. In my opinion, the wills of 'love' are the fittest and are what could save us if we needs saving. This is much like how genes are the unit of evolution in biology, while wills are the unit of evolution in human society. That said, it belongs to a different conversation. Still, it’s been a pleasure exchanging thoughts.
- lastcat743 1y ago
  Your cautious self awareness is a credit to you. The “righteous rule” forbids “destroying the innocent”, the only real human right anyone has before Power. Those who do not accept this rule rape entire families from the gene pool to destroy all that they love in this world. …and smart modern peoples as yourself would flag and remove any such saying so for its impoliteness, not to mention “lack of proof” as though the idea itself incomprehensible.
  - kindkang2024 1y ago
    > The “righteous rule” forbids “destroying the innocent”, the only real human right anyone has before Power. I will go a little further. There is no righteous or wrong rule before Power. Power has no concept of morality, just like gravity—it doesn’t care whether you are man or woman, good or evil, right or wrong. It simply manifests the will of whatever/whoever holds it. Darwin’s “survival of the fittest” illustrates this truth: only the fittest survive in life-and-death conflicts. It’s an inherent law, a force that nature enforces. We must adapt to it. Many, however, reject this because they cannot accept such a cold, harsh reality. Yet, as humans—creatures born of love by the act of 'making love'—we do have a sense of right and wrong. Personally, I cannot accept that “forbidding destroying the innocent” is the 'only' real human right. I will fight against such a will and seek power to oppose it, if it is indeed empowered to manifest in reality. (Remember, the one who holds this will still needs power to manifest it.) Let this be a reminder to all: "survival of the fittest." This is the clearest possible reminder of our duty. We must actively empower and protect whatever we care about. Whether it is kindness in the face of cruelty, love against destruction—these values will only survive and thrive if we ensure they are fit enough to endure in an indifferent universe.
    - lastcat743 1y ago
      > Power has no concept of morality I will go one further smarty, Power is savage and the “terrible burden of free will” is to mitigate savage Power with a civilizing accord. “There shall be an uncorruptible righteous rule of law among Powers over Man.” Next you will ask me, “How does Man maintain an ‘uncorruptible’ righteous[1] rule of law”? 1: principled upon Truth and serving to protect ‘the unculpable’ from breach by will or neglect; one entitled by domain, competent and uncorrupted [hard line on purgery].

kindkang2024 1y ago

> and I do not want to be a fright > those of such skill rule humanity through armies of hundreds of thousands whose entire lives are embroiled in “schizophrenia” far more terrifying as it is true, there is an actor among us capable of possessing ourselves and others as though the poltergeist. That does seem truly frightening. However, I do not believe it is true, nor am I aware of any valid proof that would make me believe it (though I'm certainly open to it.). I prefer to think that humans have all kinds of wills, and each will tries to gain power to manifest itself. All wills try to compete for power, and only the fittest ones can survive and thrive in the long run. In my opinion, the wills of 'love' are the fittest and are what could save us if we needs saving. This is much like how genes are the unit of evolution in biology, while wills are the unit of evolution in human society. That said, it belongs to a different conversation. Still, it’s been a pleasure exchanging thoughts.

lastcat743 1y ago
Your cautious self awareness is a credit to you. The “righteous rule” forbids “destroying the innocent”, the only real human right anyone has before Power. Those who do not accept this rule rape entire families from the gene pool to destroy all that they love in this world. …and smart modern peoples as yourself would flag and remove any such saying so for its impoliteness, not to mention “lack of proof” as though the idea itself incomprehensible.
- kindkang2024 1y ago
  > The “righteous rule” forbids “destroying the innocent”, the only real human right anyone has before Power. I will go a little further. There is no righteous or wrong rule before Power. Power has no concept of morality, just like gravity—it doesn’t care whether you are man or woman, good or evil, right or wrong. It simply manifests the will of whatever/whoever holds it. Darwin’s “survival of the fittest” illustrates this truth: only the fittest survive in life-and-death conflicts. It’s an inherent law, a force that nature enforces. We must adapt to it. Many, however, reject this because they cannot accept such a cold, harsh reality. Yet, as humans—creatures born of love by the act of 'making love'—we do have a sense of right and wrong. Personally, I cannot accept that “forbidding destroying the innocent” is the 'only' real human right. I will fight against such a will and seek power to oppose it, if it is indeed empowered to manifest in reality. (Remember, the one who holds this will still needs power to manifest it.) Let this be a reminder to all: "survival of the fittest." This is the clearest possible reminder of our duty. We must actively empower and protect whatever we care about. Whether it is kindness in the face of cruelty, love against destruction—these values will only survive and thrive if we ensure they are fit enough to endure in an indifferent universe.
  - lastcat743 1y ago
    > Power has no concept of morality I will go one further smarty, Power is savage and the “terrible burden of free will” is to mitigate savage Power with a civilizing accord. “There shall be an uncorruptible righteous rule of law among Powers over Man.” Next you will ask me, “How does Man maintain an ‘uncorruptible’ righteous[1] rule of law”? 1: principled upon Truth and serving to protect ‘the unculpable’ from breach by will or neglect; one entitled by domain, competent and uncorrupted [hard line on purgery].