Free Market FederationBoard

Search

Search

[+] Advanced...

Author:

Region:

Sort:

«12. . .766767768769770771772. . .809810»
LodgedFromMessages
Meritorious arcadia

Well, our newly elected leader had some very strong views on military spending, foreign policy and economics.

On an unrelated note, our people have never felt safer from foreign invasion.

Cerveskia and Antarctican commonwealths

Antarctican commonwealths

Meritorious arcadia wrote:Well, our newly elected leader had some very strong views on military spending, foreign policy and economics.

On an unrelated note, our people have never felt safer from foreign invasion.

Ah, a fellow Militaristic Nation.

Meritorious arcadia



Meritorious arcadia

Antarctican commonwealths wrote:Ah, a fellow Militaristic Nation.

We like peace so we follow the wisdom of:
“Peace through strength”
“If you want peace, prepare for war” and
“Don’t throw the first punch but if you must throw the second then make sure they can’t get up for a third.”

So far so good. It’s kind of nice our elected leader would lead the charge if we did get attacked though😏

Antarctican commonwealths



Antarctican commonwealths

Meritorious arcadia wrote:We like peace so we follow the wisdom of:
“Peace through strength”
“If you want peace, prepare for war” and
“Don’t throw the first punch but if you must throw the second then make sure they can’t get up for a third.”

So far so good. It’s kind of nice our elected leader would lead the charge if we did get attacked though😏

Ah, we follow the wisdom of:
“If it’s useful for the war against annihilation, then by all means use any method of testing and research to get it done”

“ Take one step back and you’ll be court martialed for cowardice”

and

“Don’t tell ES, but our experimentation on jump drives that breach the fabric of space time to reach another dimension for FTL purposes accidentally resulted in the destruction of a planet he was studying primitives on (It was under no one’s jurisdiction and no one claimed it). Through means that are so horrifying (even to us) that they’re classified, and totally not being researched in order to weaponise them”

Environmental Support, Cerveskia, and Meritorious arcadia

Catos

Cerveskia wrote:It’s always about the illusion of choice.

*laughs in surprise monarchy*

Environmental Support, Cerveskia, and Antarctican commonwealths

The Merchant Republic of Environmental Support

Antarctican commonwealths wrote:Ah, we follow the wisdom of:
“If it’s useful for the war against annihilation, then by all means use any method of testing and research to get it done”

“ Take one step back and you’ll be court martialed for cowardice”

and

“Don’t tell ES, but our experimentation on jump drives that breach the fabric of space time to reach another dimension for FTL purposes accidentally resulted in the destruction of a planet he was studying primitives on (It was under no one’s jurisdiction and no one claimed it). Through means that are so horrifying (even to us) that they’re classified, and totally not being researched in order to weaponise them”

What the f*ck man?

They were a fully sentient species about to develop tools.

Cerveskia, Antarctican commonwealths, and Meritorious arcadia



Antarctican commonwealths

Environmental Support wrote:What the f*ck man?

They were a fully sentient species about to develop tools.

Hey now, how were we supposed to know tearing a hole through space time would make our pilot go insane.Or that the dimension had an omnipresent eldritch diety that would cause your crew to go insane.

Meritorious arcadia



The Merchant Republic of Environmental Support

Antarctican commonwealths wrote:Hey now, how were we supposed to know tearing a hole through space time would make our pilot go insane.Or that the dimension had an omnipresent eldritch diety that would cause your crew to go insane.

When have you been to an alternate dimension that isn't ruled by an eldritch deity?

Cerveskia, Antarctican commonwealths, and Meritorious arcadia



Antarctican commonwealths

Environmental Support wrote:When have you been to an alternate dimension that isn't ruled by an eldritch deity?

When we started communications by sending them through a different spatial dimension in order to get past the ancient human constructs that prevent the normal method of communication with most of the Antarctican Commonwealths.

Don’t worry, we already reseeded the planet with it’s original flora and fauna, and this occured 300 years ago.

Cerveskia and Meritorious arcadia



The 2nd Deliberative Theocracy of Free Transhumanists

*checks NS stats after a while*

OH NO! I'm 2nd in Sector:Manufacturing?! 2ND?!!! I need to fix this problem ASAP.
... I'm 2nd in Arms Manufacturing as well?! *anxiety intensifies*
... My employment is falling? *anxiety reached the levels when it becomes a physical phenomenon*

...1st in Agriculture? What? But I'm no farming nation... how did this..... *anxiety transforms into absolute confusion*

Don't know what's actually happening, but send help - the universal one which includes guns, medicine and money in the same package. Thank you!

Environmental Support and Cerveskia



The 2nd Deliberative Theocracy of Free Transhumanists

Also, after a longer period of time I dare to present you one of my "typical" poll questions once again! Hope you missed them at least a little bit :-D.

...this one is about the Character of Your Nation's Society!

So, as a part of my doctoral study this is one of my smaller 'quick-projects' and thought experiments. I used as an inspiration a political compass, which is in my opinion generaly an insufficient positivist (therefore I believe outdated) tool for visualization and measurement of ideologies, philosophies and other political thoughts and opinions since the multi-naration of these thoughts is now so vibrant and somehow "colorful" that two axis are not enought to measure it (at least from qualitative point of a view). However, the "mass society" has not many categorizations, we often just call it "mass society" and automatically operate with definitions from authors and thinkers that we are affiliated to; interested in; or just that we simply know. So I got the idea to use this two axis system for procedural expanding of our view on mass society and try to summarize its, sometimes contradictional, properties into some logical system and causations that helps us understand and maybe even study this phenomenon further from the perspective of postmodernist paradigm...which could make this scheme once again outdated as in the case of political thoughts.

But just as I said previeusly, it's just a naive quick-thought experiment :-).

Any opinions and ideas and other comments are welcomed of course, hope you'll enjoy the poll any my little experiment here. :-)

Environmental Support, Cerveskia, and Antarctican commonwealths

The Merchant Republic of Environmental Support

Free Transhumanists wrote:Also, after a longer period of time I dare to present you one of my "typical" poll questions once again! Hope you missed them at least a little bit :-D.

...this one is about the Character of Your Nation's Society!

So, as a part of my doctoral study this is one of my smaller 'quick-projects' and thought experiments. I used as an inspiration a political compass, which is in my opinion generaly an insufficient positivist (therefore I believe outdated) tool for visualization and measurement of ideologies, philosophies and other political thoughts and opinions since the multi-naration of these thoughts is now so vibrant and somehow "colorful" that two axis are not enought to measure it (at least from qualitative point of a view). However, the "mass society" has not many categorizations, we often just call it "mass society" and automatically operate with definitions from authors and thinkers that we are affiliated to; interested in; or just that we simply know. So I got the idea to use this two axis system for procedural expanding of our view on mass society and try to summarize its, sometimes contradictional, properties into some logical system and causations that helps us understand and maybe even study this phenomenon further from the perspective of postmodernist paradigm...which could make this scheme once again outdated as in the case of political thoughts.

But just as I said previeusly, it's just a naive quick-thought experiment :-).

Any opinions and ideas and other comments are welcomed of course, hope you'll enjoy the poll any my little experiment here. :-)

If I could have, I would have selected a position between hierarchal and egalitarian as my nation is not fully egalitarian nor fully hierarchal since major steps are taken by the government to level the societal playing field so to say while still preserving the free market.

And of course, two axis are never enough to properly classify individuals or nations but compasses are fun and easy to understand so they work well for an introduction. Far better than the single axis classification I was taught in high school.

via Lardyland

Ironiassia persia

“Oh bother only the sticky part is left”
-Winnie the Pooh



The 2nd Deliberative Theocracy of Free Transhumanists

Environmental Support wrote:If I could have, I would have selected a position between hierarchal and egalitarian as my nation is not fully egalitarian nor fully hierarchal since major steps are taken by the government to level the societal playing field so to say while still preserving the free market.

And of course, two axis are never enough to properly classify individuals or nations but compasses are fun and easy to understand so they work well for an introduction. Far better than the single axis classification I was taught in high school.

Yup, well you hit the problematic spot that I'm aware of, and that is an interpretation of equality under different thought schools. Libertarian left interprets equality quite differently in comparison well... lest say socialist, or social democrat, etc. While Social democrat and socialist tend to be focusing the essence core of equality in the equal amount of material well-being and equalization of our material-productive capacities, the left-libertarian lately started to focus on the equality of opportunities and ability to achieve our goals whether they are of material essence or not. They of course criticize capitalism for it and present it to be a "corrupted" version of a free market with the hierarchy that has traditions roots (overall institutions) in slave-society and feudalism and are leading to further reproduction of unjustifiable market unequalities in every aspect of a human life (in short: they think that market in its "freed" form would not be reproducing unwanted and unjustified unequality). This presented subject is basically covered by a question of which thinkers and what political thoughts are more focusing on the horizontal or vertical equality.... etc etc..... :-D Personally I think it's sometimes easy to become lost in these waters.

And well... these and other differences in interpretations are just impossible to express in such simplification scheme as is a two axis scheme.

So.... yes, in a "TLDR" version - I completely agree :-D.

The Merchant Republic of Environmental Support

Free Transhumanists wrote:Yup, well you hit the problematic spot that I'm aware of, and that is an interpretation of equality under different thought schools. Libertarian left interprets equality quite differently in comparison well... lest say socialist, or social democrat, etc. While Social democrat and socialist tend to be focusing the essence core of equality in the equal amount of material well-being and equalization of our material-productive capacities, the left-libertarian lately started to focus on the equality of opportunities and ability to achieve our goals whether they are of material essence or not. They of course criticize capitalism for it and present it to be a "corrupted" version of a free market with the hierarchy that has traditions roots (overall institutions) in slave-society and feudalism and are leading to further reproduction of unjustifiable market unequalities in every aspect of a human life (in short: they think that market in its "freed" form would not be reproducing unwanted and unjustified unequality). This presented subject is basically covered by a question of which thinkers and what political thoughts are more focusing on the horizontal or vertical equality.... etc etc..... :-D Personally I think it's sometimes easy to become lost in these waters.

And well... these and other differences in interpretations are just impossible to express in such simplification scheme as is a two axis scheme.

So.... yes, in a "TLDR" version - I completely agree :-D.

The best option in my opinion is to give up on classification of political systems and instead analyze governments and societies holistically. Instead of trying to force them into tiny boxes and making concessions, it would be better to look for commonalities between governments and group them based upon overarching motifs found across varying systems.

Basically build the system around the state and not the other way around.

(woo comparative politics)



The 2nd Deliberative Theocracy of Free Transhumanists

Environmental Support wrote:The best option in my opinion is to give up on classification of political systems and instead analyze governments and societies holistically. Instead of trying to force them into tiny boxes and making concessions, it would be better to look for commonalities between governments and group them based upon overarching motifs found across varying systems.

Basically build the system around the state and not the other way around.

(woo comparative politics)

So very vast general definition of a phenomenon with very specific properties which doesn't have to be described as "it is or it is not there" but rather focus on the relative perceptibility. Is that right? This is very postmodern approach (Which I approve), but I would say that it is not very holistic approach, because these commonalities that you would be studying are particular fragments in their character. It's a very analytic approach I would say. But that's just my subjective interpretation, maybe it would be achievable even throughout the "holistic" or other structuralist criterion.

The Merchant Republic of Environmental Support

Free Transhumanists wrote:So very vast general definition of a phenomenon with very specific properties which doesn't have to be described as "it is or it is not there" but rather focus on the relative perceptibility. Is that right? This is very postmodern approach (Which I approve), but I would say that it is not very holistic approach, because these commonalities that you would be studying are particular fragments in their character. It's a very analytic approach I would say. But that's just my subjective interpretation, maybe it would be achievable even throughout the "holistic" or other structuralist criterion.

I guess holistic wouldn't quite be the right word but grouping by similar structures like presidential vs parliamentary systems and then with subgroups based upon more specific requirements.

Somewhat like an evolutionary tree that tracks traits.

Meritorious arcadia

I mean, I’ve always been more of a modernist (facts and observations) than a post-modernist (personal experience/perceptions).

I think focusing on a few spectrums helps us come to a better understanding of a society/culture.

For example:
1. Rights of the Individual vs. Rights of the Collective
2. Integrity of the Government vs. Corruption of the Government
3. Law & Order vs. Crime & Instability
4. Decentralized Power vs. Centralized Power
5. Limited Government Power vs. Substantial Government Power

I mean each of those will have several different possibilities as it won’t be an either/or situation but still, looking at where a country sits on those scales will tell a great deal about their economic options.

Personally, I look at the United States in the early years. After the Constitution was ratified, we had flipped the old power structure of the European kingdoms on its head.
1. Instead of only the few elites having rights, each individual had legally recognized rights. (Everyone was equal under the law at least in principle).
2. Businesses and individuals could conduct business without having to pay bribes.
3. While crime is a constant in life, they saw the law & order as important. (Prior to the formation of formalized police departments, individuals of the community worked together to keep the peace).
4. Government Power was restricted based on how close a government was to the people in that it governed. The national government had the least authority over an individual citizen and focused a few specific areas that were its purview.
5. In general, the power of the government was restricted with more power going to the individual and less to the collective.

I believe this combination of societal stability, equal application of the law, limited government power, decentralized government power and a focus on individual rights produced the environment that took America from a primarily agrarian economy to an industrialized global super power in less than 300 years.

I realize that all of these are, by nature, generalizations but they serve primarily to contrast against the opposite positions. For example, the parts of the country that embraced the Antifa and BLM riots instead of enforcing the law and maintaining the peace resulted in a great deal of suffering both directly and indirectly.

To contrast these positions with their opposites, picture an imaginary country that holds the opposite views. A country where only the collective (the desired/favored majority) has protection under the law and the undesirables do not. The government is corrupt and multiple bribes must be paid to open and run a business. Crimes are condemned and punished only when they are committed against the favored. A centralized government holding most of the power with little to no accountability to the individual citizens. And a government that wields significant power to use in any way those in power see fit.

In such a country, only the privileged and wealthy can jump the hurdles and enjoy the economic opportunities. By contrast a nation that maintains stability and impartially applies the law justly creates an environment that overflows with opportunity where those who work hard will be rewarded and succeed.

Again I know that these are a bit generalized but I think the framers of the US Constitution really hit the nail on the head with some of these issues. No system will be free of crime, corruption or abuse but that doesn’t mean that some aren’t better than others.

Environmental Support and Antarctican commonwealths



The 2nd Deliberative Theocracy of Free Transhumanists

Meritorious arcadia wrote: (...)...modernist (facts and observations) than a post-modernist (personal experience/perceptions).

I disagree with this dichotomy, because what you are basically saying is that post-modern paradigm is not scientific. All paradigms are generating their own data which are constructed from observations, analysis and other scientific methods which are possible within the "realm of social sciences". The postmodern paradigm just underlines that the "fact" is something that could be universally generalized and results are possible to be accurately quantitatively reproduced (and expected) using induction (not the deduction) principle. For this to be achievable you need to have a constant variable (something that in social sciences is very rare) to be represented in current phenomena, if you don't than you can't achieve objectivity at any level, therefore every dataset without constant variables can't be considered as a "fact" but as "knowledge" since they are not universally "truthful" and there is some form of subjectivity or unpredictable/unrepeatable and non-linear causal relationship.

This could be summarized in a postmodernist sorf-of-a-quote "We deconstructed the illusion of truth for more accurate knowledge"

The Merchant Republic of Environmental Support

Free Transhumanists wrote:I disagree with this dichotomy, because what you are basically saying is that post-modern paradigm is not scientific. All paradigms are generating their own data which are constructed from observations, analysis and other scientific methods which are possible within the "realm of social sciences". The postmodern paradigm just underlines that the "fact" is something that could be universally generalized and results are possible to be accurately quantitatively reproduced (and expected) using induction (not the deduction) principle. For this to be achievable you need to have a constant variable (something that in social sciences is very rare) to be represented in current phenomena, if you don't than you can't achieve objectivity at any level, therefore every dataset without constant variables can't be considered as a "fact" but as "knowledge" since they are not universally "truthful" and there is some form of subjectivity or unpredictable/unrepeatable and non-linear causal relationship.

This could be summarized in a postmodernist sorf-of-a-quote "We deconstructed the illusion of truth for more accurate knowledge"

So is it then impossible to view math and science through the lense of postmodernism?

Meritorious arcadia

Environmental Support wrote:So is it then impossible to view math and science through the lense of postmodernism?

I think based on how the Free Transhumanists worded their response, we may be talking about post-modernism using different definitions. I think this article explains the philosophical definition of post-modernism quite well and reflects what I’m referring to when I say it: https://www.britannica.com/topic/postmodernism-philosophy

I can accept that in social and cultural interactions, many things are subjective. Your upbringing, cultural background and personal experiences will impact how you perceive and respond to different events and ideas.

Where I have problems with post-modernism is when someone tries to take that same relativity/subjectivity and apply it to reality outside of the social/cultural realm. For example, while someone from the equator and someone from Alaska would interpret/experience 0C/32F in different ways based on what temperatures their bodies are adapted to, their subjective experiences wouldn’t change the objective truth that at that temperature water begins to freeze.

I accept that individual experiences and such are subjective/relative to the individual but perception, feeling and belief don’t alter reality. If someone was born blind and had never experienced sight of any kind, that would not change the fact that the sun gives off light. Their experience doesn’t alter reality, it only alters their ability to perceive it.

So when someone tries to apply post-modernism to areas of reality where the facts can be clearly and objectively measured then it is unscientific with regard to the empirical/experimental sciences. Empirical science only works because there are rules that the natural world functions by. If post-modernism tries to apply that same relativity to the physical world then it discards belief in absolute truths that are the foundation of the empirical sciences.

If you’re speaking only with regard to cultural, social and societal interactions then that makes sense and a reasonable case can be made in that regard. But a reasonable case can’t really be made with regard to applying that subjectivity/relativity to objective reality. 2+2 will always equal 4. That’s a fact that doesn’t change regardless of belief or perception.

Hopefully this clarifies things a little.

Meritorious arcadia

Actually, re-reading your comment I think we do agree more than I initially realized. You seem to still believe that facts and truth exist which is inconsistent with a full/complete application of of post-modernism that was described in my text books and in the article I referenced.

There are people who fully apply post-modernism and deny the existence of any objective facts or truths. I don’t think you’re one of them given that you said: “the "fact" is something that could be universally generalized and results are possible to be accurately quantitatively reproduced (and expected)“

So I think our disagreement was based more on operating from different definitions rather than actually disagreeing.

Environmental Support, Free Transhumanists, and Antarctican commonwealths

The United States of The Lunar Republic

Did you all get invitations to sign a petition to ban all "real fascists and neo-nazis"?

The Merchant Republic of Environmental Support

The Lunar Republic wrote:Did you all get invitations to sign a petition to ban all "real fascists and neo-nazis"?

Yup. I'm not signing it. Although I vehemently disagree with fascists and Nazis and they stand opposed to everything I believe in, I will defend their right to free speech to the death.

Meritorious arcadia

Environmental Support wrote:Yup. I'm not signing it. Although I vehemently disagree with fascists and Nazis and they stand opposed to everything I believe in, I will defend their right to free speech to the death.

Fair enough, it’s a very slippery slope when we start taking away people’s rights just because we disagree with them. Also I prefer them operating in the open. When they’re transparent about their beliefs and ideals, it turns most people away.

«12. . .766767768769770771772. . .809810»