...Bacteria-Level Legal Philosophy: The Worst Problem With Political Parties
Summary:
1) Most people in the USA have a philosophy on the order of complexity of the goals a bacteria has. A bacterium swims toward the light. An American tax-slave files his taxes and waits to be looted and killed. Most Americans have a philosophy approximately as complex as "I hope the system eats me last, ...maybe that will allow me to save enough money by doing the narrowly-specialized task I learned about in college to survive!" While this isn't a complete lack of philosophy, it's approximately as useful. Philosophical knowledge is "knowledge of one's government and society-wide conditions." The average American has "less than zero knowledge" of such things. How does one have "less than zero knowledge"? One has wrong information. ...But the situation is actually worse than that. Not only does the average American have the wrong information about how his government works, he actually carries with him incorrect and destructive information. If he simply thought that prayer causes changes in government, he'd be mistaken and that would be harmful. However, he carries in his mind the idea that he knows how government operates(), and that the current government is responsive to elections that are fair and impartial.
2) The same was true of the Jews who perished in Nazi Germany. The lessons of History aren't lessons if they're ignored. Life-saving instructions are not life-saving if they're not regarded as powerful lessons, and acted upon. Just as individual bacteria have only the crudest striving for life and are unaware of the systems they are a part of, the unphilosophical have only a crude striving toward life that is completely unaware of the systems they are a part of. Unlike the uncaring conditions of nature, the human sociopaths who destroy innocent life (ultimately destroying even their own life) are aware of how easy it is to prey upon their victims, and contemptuous of that ease. They "blame the victim."
3) Having a philosophy is the only thing that could have saved Germany's Jews (or 55 million of the USSR's victimized proletariat), and it's the only thing that can save Americans, now that we're in similar circumstances to the Weimar Republic. The body politic of our republic is in a "pre-totalitarianism" condition, similar to a "pre-cancerous condition" in a human body. The problem of cancer is similar to the problem of totalitarianism: the code of life(DNA; jury-based law) becomes corrupted in both, resulting in bodies that grow in an uncontrolled manner, without regard to the legitimate goals of the system. In the case of a body
4) America is (and Americans are) going to experience a fate similar to Nazi Germany, if they continue to mindlessly increase the power of their already-totalitarian "system of law" or "government." A "system of law" can be separate from "government," and, indeed, is often separate, in a Western, common-law-based society. The more the distinctions between the two are blurred, and people come to see government action as "legal action," the closer they are to a day when police are completely unaccountable for their actions, and only tyrants who seek unaccountability seek to become police. Total unaccountability for one's actions legalizes murder and destruction, purely for the purpose of enriching the state (although, even at the height of the Nazi and Soviet mass murdering, the stated intentions of the state were benevolent).
Simple Goal-Driven Systems
Bacteria don't have much of a philosophy. They have a simple set of DNA-programmed behaviors that correspond to the conditions they're surrounded by. However, bacteria are able to survive as a colony-forming super-organism when conditions are right. The "philosophy-level" of each individual bacteria's code must cause its actions to favor replication, such that overall numbers of the bacteria at very least replace themselves, moving the colony into the future (in reality, they must replicate far more than that, when conditions are right, because conditions are usually very unfavorable, by default).
Even Simple Systems Are Inherently Hierarchical
The philosophical layer of the "actions"<-->"selected for DNA-code" feedback and correction behavior module is the one that produces "survival-enhancing behavior." For bacteria, this means "when food is encountered, ingest it" and "move flagella when light levels that are below or above a certain range." Bacteria that had the prior actions survived, when those actions improved access to food sources relevant to their previously-selected chemistry.
Man must have a philosophy that produces actions suitable for living on Earth. It's inappropriate for any individual man to have a philosophy that consists of "don't think about the system beyond the extent necessary to put food in my own mouth." That narrow level of specialization is the same as what is "automatic" in bacteria.
Yet this is the default level of philosophy in most men: a level that is essentially "non-existent" or so embryonic that it can essentially be called "unphilosophical."
Unlike a bacteria's "philosophy" or the philosophy of an animal, man's philosophy is contextual, adaptive, and consciously identifies, learns, and exploits "feedback-and-correction" mechanisms. (Bees and dogs both have hard-coded pack behavior that is learns and is adaptive within a narrower range, a range constrained by group membership. The dog's behavior is able to learn, prioritize, and adapt to far more than the bee is able to learn. The dog's behavior is pack-related, and defers to the dominant or "most-food-providing" member of the pack.)
Nonetheless, especially when conditions are good, man often has an absence of philosophy, similar to a bacterium that mindlessly moves toward light. A man who never needs move to a better system of governance, due to a continual presence of ideal conditions, is likely to eschew philosophy entirely.
Absence of High-Hierarchical-Level Thought or "Lack of Philosophy"
So what causes a human being to be unphilosophical? His misperception that conditions are "as good as they can be." In most people, this pattern can be summoned with the phrase "never so good they can't get better, never so bad they can't get worse." But there's a category of man for whom the present conditions are not good enough: the rational philosopher. Such a human being sees the connection between the quality of ideas; the nature of acted-upon-ideas; and the outcomes of high-quality, benevolent, acted-upon ideas in material reality.
Here is an excellent, high quality idea: "proper jury trials should be the only kind of trial, and should be as commonplace as accusations of misconduct." All one needs to know, if one is intelligent, is that this idea bears fruit upon investigation ( http://fija.org/docs/BR_YYYY_surviving_voir_dire.pdf and the final 60 pages of Vin Suprynowicz's book "Send In the Waco Killers"). Even so, it is a well-known fact that men can understand this idea, and simultaneously be ineffective at informing large enough numbers of others about it to achieve a benevolent result. It's also possible to state this idea, and act in contradiction to it, in practice (usually due to being "cowed into submission" due to "insufficient preparation for the courtroom interaction"). It's also possible to simply fail to have enough money or success to adequately disseminate this idea. (The latter is because ideas are usually not accepted or rejected due to their quality, but due to the listener's impression of the messenger's personal success level --a crude heuristic used by most human listeners who lack a basic philosophical grounding. The former is because people simply can't afford to pay for advertising, printing, or development costs in sufficient amounts.). There are many ways that ideas can exist, and simply fail to be acted upon.
Precursor Systems
Because the 1700s generation of Americans was highly attuned to philosophical concerns (they were aware of the tendency of "organized parasitism" or "tyranny" to deplete wealth and ruin civilizations), their uncertain surroundings triggered a rebellion. They swam toward the light of the Enlightenment, using crude-but-useful heuristics. (Some of the "Founding Fathers" of the USA sought to create a society whereby jury trials would limit government power, and the expected results of jury trials would also be expressed as limits and would also be codified within additional means of limiting government power, such as a limiting constitution. Although this desire and action wasn't universal, it was "better than had previously been achieved" but "not adequate to persist." It remains to be seen if the historical "relevant remnants" of that dead system are adequate to reinstate/reanimate such limits).
How Systems Self-Correct
Feedback and correction can be described as actions whereby a measurement's input is fed into a loop that determines the amount and characteristics/type/nature of action to be taken, and after the action, a new measurement is taken and new actions taken (resulting in continual measurement and correction based on ever-newer states) until the end-goal is reached. The time in-between "inputs"(measurements) and corresponding "outputs"(actions) should be "as frequent as possible" up to a systemic optimum. (Human reflexes can't accept changing inputs faster than 100 Hertz, so when they act faster than 100 Hertz, they are using pattern recognition that approximates the system they are interacting with based on prior memories that model large sections of a feedback and correction pattern--whether it's catching a fly ball, or Bob Munden shooting balloons. Because nerves fire on the order of 100 Hertz, Kevin Warwick of the University of Reading, UK, has found that faster-than-100-Hz electrodes don't communicate with human neurons, but those that fire at a rate near human neuron firing, do.)
Living Systems Are All Cybernetic Systems
When one starts talking about "feedback and correction" systems, one begins talking about systems that share analogies with "Life" (biology, synthetic life, computer programs). All life pursues goals. In the 1940s, the discipline of "Cybernetics" arose to differentiate the study of "goal directed mechanisms that use feedback and correction" from "purely deterministic physical phenomena." Although "purely deterministic physical phenomena" can be very complex and confusing(ie: "quantum mechanics"), any seeming adaptations are predictable results of human ignorance about their complexity. The same is not true of "systems that adapt to interaction, with the hope of defeating the interactor." Those systems care capable of "evil" or "malevolence" or "defeating what helps the individual and collective survival of sentient beings, for its own purposes."
Adaptive systems are often called "cybernetic systems," or "adversarial systems" or "political systems" so that they don't need to be called "self-correcting systems that use feedback and correction,' in order to defeat the changing goals of adversarial systems." The highest-level, most general designator of such systems is "cybernetic," although it's probable that more people will recognize attempts to communicate the difference between such systems and purely physical systems by using the terms "adversarial" or "political."
A bacterium swims toward light, by having its flagellum triggered by light and nutrient concentrations. An entire bacterial colony is impacted by the collective outcomes of the actions of the individual bacteria. The intelligence of such systems is based on the selection of prior systems that survived within a range of conditions. So long as those conditions only vary within the ability of the bacteria to reproduce, the bacterial colony will continue to survive, and some members of it will mutate, branch off, and evolve.
Cybernetic Evolution
Similar evolutionary behavior is often seen in human groups, though instead of chemical concentrations and the death of members, the group can be analyzed according to membership, participation, and the ideas that draw its members together. The collective group outcome can be analyzed and studied just like the individual actions that contribute to it. When yeast are surrounded by too much of their own waste(alcohol), they die. When humans that form a nation are surrounded by "the socially-encouraged, evolutionarily-selected desire to over-punish(to punish when unnecessary and uncalled for)," their colony grows in a lackluster, sub-optimal, self-destructive manner, until it also becomes unsustainable and dies.
The Soviet Union became unsustainable to a system-endangering level in 1987 (though its punishment, murder, and looting of its own citizens crippled it, far before then), and was destroyed when their Secretary of Agriculture saw how much more productive farms in the USA were than Soviet farms. (Because markets can apply increasing knowledge or "innovation" to changing conditions more quickly than government edicts allow for.) When the Marxist rebellion that created the Soviet system happened in 1917, anarchist and scientist Piotr(often Westernized to "Peter") Kropotkin recognized its fatal flaw of coercion, and said "If this is our revolution, we are undone." Technically, individuals who intuitively understood the then-obscure-and-unlabeled discipline of "cybernetics" could have thought really hard to come up with a strategy capable of defeating the Soviet system, and implemented it, at that time.
Another anarchist, Mikhail Bachunin (commonly considered an "anarcho-communist" due to the changing nature of the term "communism," which is often confusingly used to describe both coercive and voluntary communal goal structures with one word) publicly stated that he wished to form a USA style "republic" in Siberia. (Such a goal would not be associated with any communist today, and would, today, be considered anarcho-capitalist/libertarian/voluntaryist/classical liberal/protectorate republicanism).
Instead of the two prior Anarchists getting their way, the communist revolution entrenched top-down goal structures in government that murdered millions of innocent humans, and dispersed their wealth to parasitic humans who had not earned it. This orgy of destruction came from a non-English-common-law "system" of false law. (A system that superficially looks like "Law," but has none of the defining characteristics of legitimate law.) "Politics" (the means of acquiring collective power) always attempts to infiltrate "law" because that neutralizes the collective informational defenses of "host organisms" that are protected by the law. Like all infiltration strategies, the success of the infiltration relies on a lack of host ability to understand the nature of the body/domain/area/boundary being infiltrated.
So what does this have to do with political parties?
No party is consistent, nor capable of consistency, because all can be (and are) infiltrated when they actually fight the incumbent government. The incumbent government employs "feedback and correction" mechanisms to detect when people are preparing to seriously fight it. (There's no benefit to listing all of these mechanisms here, but one such method is "early stage polling of specific political districts.")
"Feedback and correction" is the strongest principle of systems engineering. Evolution has selected "feedback and correction" systems to deal with the wide range of changing conditions in the Universe. All of life is a hierarchical set of feedback and correction systems (from individual bacteria and bacteria colonies to organisms like humans). The border of what constitutes most feedback systems is blurry: For example, one can include the technology man uses to survive, as well as his bacteria as a part of his "hierarchical feedback system."
For the prior reasons, freedom-minded people must build SUPERIOR "feedback and correction" systems that cannot be killed by the "feedback and correction" systems of the incumbent government.
Incentives govern all feedback and correction systems. If bacteria don't receive enough nutrients, they die, and the bacteria colony experiences their death as "feedback." Without the deaths of the individual bacteria, the colony would be out-competed by competitors who use the information generated from individual bacterial deaths. Bacteria that grow in number release small amounts of pre-quorum-sensing chemicals that, once large enough, trigger the release of different chemical processes that then trigger "actions unlike prior actions,"(new behavior) entrenching the (now-quorum-sized) colony.
The world's libertarian movements are like soon-to-be-extinct bacterial colonies, because they fail to employ "feedback and correction" to their own benefit. Why? Because they don't want to live fully (which implies they are content to settle for the state's false offer of "security").
Men should not be like bacteria. Men should demand the existence of a fit collectivist organism that defends their liberty (such as "an army that employs tactics superior to that of the enemy" at the battle of Saratoga). ...But they won't have this as long as they fail to think at a very high level about individual liberty.
I don't know the names of everyone who has infiltrated the USA Libertarian Party. I don't know what cybernetic entities they are a part of. But I know some of their names, and I suspect several such entities, because the behavior that typifies such enemies is knowable, and I know something of it. How is it knowable? It is a documented part of US Court records. For example: When the FBI testifies against individuals, they must testify in court. The infiltrated groups then know much of "the behavior used to win the confidence of the enemy."
In nature, the most effective organisms are parasites. Daniel Suarez's philosophical fiction novel "Daemon"(Pronounced "demon" this word is an acronym for "Disk And Execution MONitor") shows how parasites outnumber "independent organisms" 3-to-1. (A more accurate, modern number would likely skew the ratio more in favor of the parasites, especially if commensal and symbiotic organisms are included).
The most effective parasites exploit their adversaries by altering their behavior. Sacculina, Toxoplasma gondii, and Cordyceps are all primitive organisms that, once they've infected their host organism, alter the behavior of the host organism to their own advantage, and to the disadvantage of the host organism. This is only useful in noting that "once a host's ability to adapt has been defeated, that ability is totally defeated without external intervention at a higher level of order."
Rats infected with toxoplasma are forever victims to it, unless humans intervene, and give them drugs to fight the infection. An ant that is infected with cordyceps "loses its mind" and climbs onto a grass-stalk nearby the colony, so that, when it dies, it can release spores onto the ant colony, heavily infecting individuals within it, often to the point of decimating the colony.
Human beings infected with Islam and Christianity also work to destroy humanity. The same is true of those infected with malevolent Patriotism (patriotism that does not mutually support "consequentialism" + "empathy" + "liberty").
So what of easily-infected humans? Can they be infected with a "freedom virus" that causes them to behave benevolently? Yes, they can. I've often performed the action of infection myself. It's the replication of a simple program that is tailored to correct the existing kernel of "Civics." It's a "jury rights kernel upgrade" module/program/meme-complex for the "basic high-school Civics" program that's already "instantiated in the background" as a "triggerable" SDR (Sparse Distributed Representation). If I have a few minutes with someone, I can produce a set of actions in them that will defeat tyranny, upon interaction with the most common form of tyranny (corrupted law attempting to obtain an unjust punishment, inside a courtroom).
As the Soviet and Nazi systems perished, America now perishes.
The election of Donald Trump has done nothing but speed that perishing, because he does not understand the nature of the corrupted law, in the same way that the Soviets, Germans, and other coercive collectivist totalitarians before him failed to understand its nature/boundaries/domain.
The cybernetic control mechanisms that allow the sociopathic control of the law are already physically entrenched in material reality. Notice that police officers no longer act as though a valid, two-part ("injury"+"intent") "cause of action" is required for them to take action against any civilian. Evolutionary legal precursors ("precedents") exist that still technically require this, but bar-licensed defense attorneys have given up referring to them in court, for many reasons. ( 1. Judges are unlikely to recognize them as valid, and/or, will attempt to silence the bar-licensed attorney who raise such issues. 2. Because the members selected for the jury by the judge and prosecutor --who wield disproportionate power in relation to the defense attorney-- are selected for un-American conformity, they are likely to respond to a judge's signaling of disagreement with such arguments, and the jury's mistaken servility to arbitrary laws that lack a valid corpus/"cause of action" will simply reflect the judge's will. 3. The bar-licensed attorneys are bar-licensed precisely because they have an education in legitimate law and legitimate legal philosophy that is identical to the government-schooled masses: non-existent. Most of them never consider how thoroughly the incentives toward predation have corrupted the practice of law. )
Cybernetic control mechanisms are based on networks of nodes that, once present in sufficient numbers, can learn. A beehive is a cybernetic control mechanism: the memory of the hive is longer than the memory of any individual bee, due to the transmission of information contained in bee "dances" that communicate pollen and nectar coordinates with scalar priority levels. As intelligent as a beehive is, it lacks the adaptivity of the human brain, with its 300 million "pattern recognition units," each comprised of "hard-wired" 100-neuron groupings. Such groupings' hierarchical relation to one another is "plastic" and structured by "online, temporal data feeds" provided by thick nerve bundles that are populated by the senses. At the highest level of the neocortical hierarchy, these senses are "ordered" or "prioritized" by either the thalamus (thoughts in our internal dialogue) or external stimuli (from the senses). The brain can be completely re-wired by altering the sensory inputs. An "auditory model of reality" can occupy the place in the brain that normally is populated by a "visual model of reality" in a blind person. In such a case, the "auditory model of reality" has a different form, and expands over the area once reserved for the "visual model of reality" selected (by evolution) to be provided by optic-nerve-inputs. The neocortex is not picky about the data streams that populate it: one data stream is as good as the next, so long as it directly corresponds to features of reality. The neocortex associates grouped phenomena (car door handles, enclosed vehicles, transportation modes, gear shifts, brake pedals, floor mats, engine sounds, gas caps, gasoline) together, and organizes them into a hierarchy. In a person who was never sighted, this hierarchy cannot be communicated easily to a sighted person, even if its dimensions were known, since drawing a pictorial representation is not an option for someone who has never seen one. Even so, a blind person has a model for the phenomenon that holds many relationships, based on the auditory model of the object. This illustrates the plasticity and generality of "learning," as well as its utility.
Helen Keller learned to speak, even though blind and deaf, she learned to form hierarchical priorities. Indeed, her capacity to think in philosophical hierarchies led to her becoming an outspoken advocate of philosophical communication. She wrote:
“History has taught you nothing if you think you can kill ideas. Tyrants have tried to do that often before, and the ideas have risen up in their might and destroyed them. You can burn my books and the books of the best minds in Europe, but the ideas in them have seeped through a million channels, and will continue to quicken other minds. I gave all the royalties of my books to the soldiers blinded in the World War with no thought in my heart but love and compassion for the German people.”The legitimate (effective, given hindsight) portions of the politics of the Founding Fathers, if one researches enough (to learn about proper jury trial), are sufficient to delay/prevent/unmake collectivist tyranny. Those "legitimate portions" are a subset of the entire body of thought that was popularized during the Enlightenment era (1600-1963 in France and England, the American Colonies, and the USA). In 1963, a new disincentive of "likely assassination" was placed on the outcome of "becoming the President of the USA (then the freest country in the world) and the New World Order (of sociopaths) inherited the power then-vested in human government (in every government on Earth). Since then, they have used statistical control combined with "feedback and correction" techniques to consolidate their control over the vast herds of unphilosophical humans.
Those who think in a philosophical manner despise law enforcement. We recognize that most of what they do is illegitimate, and designed merely to steal from cowed victims. We recognize unearned patriotism as a low form of brainwashing and a behavior modification technique that inculcates violent emotionalism in the servile and conformist. We see the same self-defeating stupidity in religion, as well as the ways in which religious unreason is mirrored in unearned patriotism. Moreover, we recognize mainstream patriotism as mindless worship of totalitarian incumbent powers, with none of it reserved for the ideas that once (but no longer) made America great. We, the philosophical, view any armed power that serves the IRS and DEA as criminal. This includes the US miltary and law enforcement, since they don't get a choice about which portions of the government to serve.
Sure, if one could join the military and serve it selectively, it might be worth serving. The Islamic State is certainly a reprehensible enemy, well worthy of destruction. But the military isn't "Burger King," and you don't get a choice about how you serve it, even though you're ostensibly a governing part of it(though this is no longer true in an America where electoral participation is tightly controlled with ballot access laws designed to sharply limit participation while appearing to allow inclusion).
The methods of the sociopathic state are well-known and understood by the few of us who have been paying close attention. The methods of political control used by the FBI, CIA, and other "deep state" actors must be investigated in order to be fully-understood. The book "Daemon" is the only work of fiction that I've read that accurately demonstrates a convincing overview of such methods. Here are some other nonfiction works that document the deep state's methods of political infiltration: "In the Spirit of Crazy Horse" by Peter Matthiessen --FBI Informant Douglas(s) Durham won Libertarian Russell Means' confidence and used that position of trust to drive away white, liberal support from the American Indian Movement; Green Is The New Red Eric McDavid was supplied with crude bombs by an two FBI informants, one of whom was girl he slept with(a "honey trap" form of entrapment) he was released after serving 10 years in prison of a 20-year sentence; Schaeffer Cox was sent to prison for organizing a peaceful militia(The "2nd Amendment Task Force") in Alaska, after an FBI informant held a knife to his neck and forced him to say he favored violent rebellion into an audio recorder; After Aaron Patterson spent 17 years on death row for a crime he did not commit, he was freed, exonerated, in part, by DNA evidence. (His confession to the crime he did not commit was obtained by Area 2 police detectives torturing him.) When he was released from prison he began organizing against the state, and for this crime of opposing the state, the Daley Machine sent an informant to his house with a car full of guns and drugs. Because the two prohibited property items were present, the government sent him back to prison on the word of an informant, for a 30 -year sentence, for things the common law doesn't consider crimes.
If any of the prior things seem OK to you, you lack a human conscience, and you lack a legitimate philosophy. You are more dog than human, you are following a pack with sociopaths at the helm.
The relevant portions of every new political party can be infiltrated, causing those political parties to behave in a manner that "does not," "can not," or "refuses to" threaten the incumbent power structure. Usually, the only thing the infiltrators need to do is "strongly encourage" naturally-existing levels of "lack of commitment to outcome / lack of will" and "stupidity" in those who seek out alternatives to the existing mainstream parties.
This is the case with the Libertarian Party.
For this reason, the only answer is to develop parallel systems that do no rely on permission.