WATCH: Building Community – #SolutionsWatch

aussies are getting 11 submarines worth $368 billion.

how long would it take to recoup the cost when these submarines are used to smuggle cocaine?

“i am utterly sick of self appointed experts”

No shit!

The most ridiculous thing is that all these know-it-all gurus who write fucking books on how to build a community (I wonder how many communities they’ve built) are using essentially the same approach, the same kind of technocratic thinking as the technocrats they’re in theory opposing.

My guess is that if they managed to built their intentional community, they’d eventually turn into the same kinda oppressive pricks as the ones that are pestering is now.

BTW, the only community I’m aware of – maybe apart from kibutzes in Israel that apparently kinda used to work – is Gabriola Island, a small island off Victoria Island in B.C. I used to know a violin player who lived there. But that’s a long time ago, who knows what’s happened there by now.

Does anybody know of an actual self-contained community that lives somewhere off-grid, detached from mainstream society? Amish?

Other than that, you gotta build your “community” within the mainstream society, by flying under the radar, having likeminded contacts, etc.

Is there any word more over used than community?

Walden 2, Prevention or Intervention. From Nowhere and Utopia. What’s the point? The Objective, The Purpose !MARCH 15, 2022

But there was, I think, a better reason why more and more people began to read the book. The world was beginning to face problems of an entirely new order of magnitude-the exhaustion of resources, the pollution of the environment, overpopulation, and the possibility of a nuclear holocaust, to mention only four. Physical and biological technologies could, of course, help. We could find new sources of energy and make better use of those we had. The world could feed itself by growing more nutritious grains and eating grain rather than meat. More reliable methods of contraception could keep the population within bounds. Impregnable defenses could make a nuclear war impossible. But that would happen only if human behavior changed, and how it could be changed was still an unanswered question. How were people to be induced to use new forms of energy, to eat grain rather than meat, and to limit the size of their families; and how were atomic stockpiles to be kept out of the hands of desperate leaders? From time to time policy makers in high places have been urged to pay more attention to the behavioral sciences. The National Research Council, the operative arm of the National Academy of Sciences, made one such proposal a number of years ago, pointing out that useful “insights in policy formulation” had been developed. But it implied that the chief role of the behavioral sciences was to collect facts and insisted, possibly to reassure policy makers who might be alarmed by the ambitions of scientists, that “knowledge is no substitute for wisdom or common sense in making decisions.” Science would get the facts but Congress or the President would make the decisions-with wisdom and common sense. vii It is true that when the behavioral sciences have gone beyond the collection of facts to recommend courses of action and have done so by predicting consequences, they have not been too helpful. Not all economists agree, for example, on how an increase or reduction in taxes or a change in interest rates will affect business, prices, or unemployment, and political scientists are no more likely to agree on the consequences of domestic or international policies. In anthropology, sociology, and psychology the preferred formulations are those that do not dictate action. A thoroughgoing developmentalism, for example, almost denies the possibility of effective action. Applied psychology is usually a mixture of science and common sense, and Freud regarded therapy as a minor contribution of psychoanalysis.
B. F. SKINNER January, 1976

Chapter 3 (Sheep)
. We set out across the field to the south, skirting a fairly large flock of sheep. The sheep were kept together by a single length of string, carrying occasional bits of cloth like a kite-tail, and supported on poles stuck into the ground to form a square fold. Rogers commented on this insubstantial arrangement. ‘We wanted an expanse of cropped grass in our front yard,” Frazier explained, “but it’s too close to the buildings for a regular sheep pasture. It’s used a great deal by the children. In fact, we all use it as a sort of lawn. By the way9′-he turned particularly to Castle and me-“do you remember Veblen’s analysis of the lawn in the Theory of the Leisure Class?” “I do, indeed,” said Castle. “It was supposed to represent a bit of choice but conspicuously unconsumed pasture.” Castle’s diction was always precise, but occasionally, as in this instance, he burlesqued himself with added delicacy. “That’s right,” said Frazier, with a slight smile. “Well, this is our lawn. But we consume it. Indirectly, of course -through our sheep. And the advantage is that it doesn’t consume us. Have you ever pushed a lawn mower? The stupidest machine ever invented-for one of the stupidest of purposes. But I digress. We solved our problem with a portable electric fence which could be used to move our flock of sheep about the lawn like a gigantic modng machine, but leaving most of it free at any time. At night the sheep are taken across the brook to the main fold. But we soon found that the sheep kept to the enclosure and quite clear of the fence, which didn’t need to be electrified. So we substituted a piece of string, which is easier to move around.” “What about the new lambs?” Barbara asked, turning her head at a slight angle and looking at Frazier from the comers of her eyes. “They stray,” Frazier conceded, “but they cause no trouble and soon learn to keep with the flock. The curious thing is-you will be interested in this, Burris-the curious thing is that most of these sheep have never been shocked by the fence. Most of them were born after we took the wire away. It has become a tradition among our sheep never to approach string. The lambs acquire it from their elders, whose judgment they never question!’ “It’s fortunate that sheep don’t talk,” said Castle. “One of them would be sure to ask ‘Why?’ The Philosophical Lambkin.” “And some day a Skeptical Lambkin would put his nose on the string and nothing would happen and the whole sheepfold would be shaken to its very foundations,” I added. “And after him, the stampede!” said Casde. “I should have told you,” said Frazier soberly, “that no small part of the force of tradition is due to the quiet creature you see yonder.” He pointed to a beautiful sheep dog, which was watching us from a respectful distance. “We call him the Bishop.”

At the snake eating its own Tail Phase. #PEAKEVERYTHING #CarbonCurrencyEndgame #ConquestofDough #FinancialEyes #Aadhaar @financialeyes @PerKurowski @SwiftysDucks @fiatisdying1 @AKkiff262 @wesfree @scientificeconThis interchange between Kunstler and Berman on where did peak oil go from 2018 was interesting to contrast with Kunstler’s recent appearance on Geo-Politics and empire where he also professes an enduring dislike personally for Noam Chomsky. This, then contrasted with both appearing in the Nation magazines video series on Peak oil and then finally with the journey of Mike Ruppert from 9-11 truth to peak oil propagandist, which ties in also with Peak prosperity and Chris Martenson. Cognitive dissonance is a much better first explanation for contradictions in all expressed opinions in this day and age as quoted above from Jonathan Nitzan and Shimshon Bichler. The Scientist and the Church. , which commentator or blogger is not confronted with sure bet betting slips that “now hang on the thread of cognitive dissonance”.Always of course begging the question were they gambling with their own skin in the game. ( Hugh Hendry anyone.)

Corbett’s rolling series of discussions on the One Health agenda are some of his best work and it’s a shame OG doesn’t carry them.

This guy is a comedian, his naivete makes me laugh. His phantasmagorical suggestions are on par with the idea I once heard that people should go off-grid by buying a generator and bumming off used cooking oil from the neighbors.

I wouldn’t be caught dead in an intentional community. Just the thought of it makes its prospective members get on my nerves already!

However, let me propose a real solution.

So, the CBDCs are coming, right? The banskters will roll out digital bucks, euros, or whatever currency you’re using in your neck of the woods, and the electronic dough will come with strings attached. You’ll only be allowed to buy a certain quantity of this shit, that shit, and the other shit, and only if you’re a good boy or a good girl. They’ll also have digital IDs to tie your purchases to yourself.

It seems that this opens a large opportunity for a secondary market, where people will buy thereto government-allotted amounts of crap and then trade it among themselves based on their actual preferences. For example, people who don’t like sweets but like meat will trade their allotment of sweets for meat. So on, so forth. An online platform for trading shit like this can be created, and if there are any IT motherfuckers around, they might as well start working on it. Mind you, this will have to be totally under the table so the government can’t sniff it out.

With any luck, thus created black market will eventually take over the technocratic bullshit and make it die by attrition.

I don’t know whether this qualifies as “making the world a better place”, but IMHO, that’s a rather lofty ambition. The vast majority of people are more or less fucked up, one way or another, unable to make themselves a better person, and aspiring to improve the world sounds pretty fake and pretentious.