rigorousintuition.ca

Here's a screen cap of the first of a 13 tweet theory.

Here's the rest of it.

https://twitter.com/reecejhawaii/status ... 6664122369

Thoughts? I'll be back with my own but am very very curious what others make of this.

Looks like The Economist already tried to stitch this whole narrative together though I'm too lazy to climb the paywall.

They've been planning this shit for years, I'm afraid:

This is an interesting issue since it cuts to the heart of the modern dilemma. It's pretty insufferable to reach for Dune quotes, but indulge me because I'mma gonna:

"Beyond a critical point within a finite space, freedom diminishes as numbers increase. This is as true of humans in the finite space of a planetary ecosystem as it is of gas molecules in a sealed flask. The human question is not how many can possibly survive within the system, but what kind of existence is possible for those who do survive."

I've been telling people for a long time that totalitarianism isn't a boogeyman, worse case outcome, it's our best case scenario.

If we can manage to provide for a population of over ten billion human beings, it will involve concessions and changes to our way of life -- of being human -- that would have been unthinkable to our ancestors. Unless your great-grandfather was Huxley or Wells: we have a diverse readership here, after all.

Something I often have to clear up with people is that I do not, and indeed cannot, believe that "totalitarianism" is something which can actually be achieved. Much like democracy, or capitalism, or justice, or peace, or safety. These are only reified nouns, not actual things. But as an inevitable trend, as a continuous diminishment of individual agency for the greater good, as defined by a powerful few, I see no other exit plan aside from ... well, the failure of globalism, a century of resource wars and a radical reduction in the human population. Billions, gone.

This may seem like a weird and sweeping tangential turn to take when we're talking about Hawaiian shirts and firing ranges. However. What these gentlemen are doing is insisting upon their individual agency in the face of the sweeping changes to come. They are preparing themselves to take on roles that most civilized, rational, domesticated participants of the human project abdicate to the state.

Which is interesting, right? So many of the same mogs who go to protests about police brutality and speak out against the American Empire also implicitly expect to be protected by those same professional killers. And indeed: expect those same professional killers to intervene on their behalf to put a stop to these men who are forming light infantry bands to defend their beliefs and, surely, die on the hills they chose for doing so.

That's a whole other issue, though, and my whole theory of politics is "People Just Fucking Talk" -- I don't believe that many people out here have actual beliefs. It's too much work.

Now it's reasonable to interject, here, that curtailing your individual agency for the greater good is the very essence of the social contract. That this is what makes human civilization possible. And I wholly agree, too -- I would only add that historically it's been a losing deal for everyone but the ruling class, by many metrics. A legion of wags have observed by now that our television screens have expanded dramatically while our backyards have shrunk considerably, that laptops are cheaper than ever and education is prohibitively expensive.

Even a cynic like myself must concede that there's no inevitable trendlines and history is a very complex beast. It's possible that things will resolve themselves for the better, that as life expectancies increase, so too might our quality of life. It's possible that some kind of fusion generator the size of a thermos revolutionizes the world as much as electrical currents and those dumbass smartphones have, with all the unexpected consequences breakthrough tech provides, yet still wind up making the world an undeniably better place for human life. I just tend to doubt it.

So what if I'm right? What if the future really is interminable resource wars, the decoupling of empires, the implosion of cities, and a return to the kind of entrepreneurial genocide that has typified most of human history up until the recent Peace Bubble that so many Westerners take to be the real, normal world? Are you going to prepare for that, or are you going to see where that tide takes you? Are you really a pacifist, or just incapable of posing a credible threat to anyone or anything?

I would propose that anyone and everyone should be engaging in the same sorts of activities as Team Boogaloo -- and, let's be real, doing a far better job of it, too. There is a certain amount of hardware fetishism, historical illiteracy, and failure to understand the role of group selection in the evolutionary process with that demographic. They also suck at spotting Feds! Learning how to survive and how to wage war will only make you a more capable human being, and only render you better able to defend your community and be an asset to those you love.

In closing, Hawaiian shirts are awesome and they should never be politicized. Let old fat men have their culture! Stop conceding harmless hand signals and cartoon frogs to the far right simply because some New York dipshit at Buzzfeed or Vice are telling you it's bad! And learn to handle guns safely. You could literally save a literal life.

Downtown LA today

Downtown Seattle last night. The gentleman grabbing into the vehicle got shot for it. The shooter turned himself in. Was anyone wrong in this situation? Was anyone right?

Wombaticus Rex » Wed May 27, 2020 6:21 pm wrote:"Beyond a critical point within a finite space, freedom diminishes as numbers increase. This is as true of humans in the finite space of a planetary ecosystem as it is of gas molecules in a sealed flask. The human question is not how many can possibly survive within the system, but what kind of existence is possible for those who do survive."

This pattern has everything to do with the population ecology of CV19 as well as humans and biological systems in general. It is ubiquitous in nature however rephrased as thermodynamics or population ecology or ??.

Start with an empty frontier and introduce a specific organism and the population growth follows a sigmoid growth function of number on x axis and cumulative density on the y axis. . The population: (1) Becomes established where numbers are flat until the first deflection point; (2) Once established becomes free to grow into the medium, the period of exponential or otherwise unimpeded expansion until the second deflection point; (3) The medium becomes finite and there is competition within the medium, one might call this herd immunity when the curve starts to flatten; and (4) culmination and senescence when the curve flattens and numbers begin to drop. The specifics of the curve may vary but follow the sigmoid shape. The shape of the curve past culmination may vary as the organism may be seral(disappear and be replaced by usually longer lived organisms) or follow differing patterns of senescence. Actual ecosystems are more complex but every ecosystem is composed of overlays of this pattern of establishment and growth.