True Left

Ideology => True Left vs False Left => Topic started by: 90sRetroFan on October 12, 2021, 05:43:02 am


Title: Progressive Yahwism
Post by: 90sRetroFan on October 12, 2021, 05:43:02 am
Progressivism at its most dangerous:

https://roadtoomega.substack.com/p/savingtheworldwithscience

Quote
(https://cdn.substack.com/image/fetch/w_1456,c_limit,f_auto,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fbucketeer-e05bbc84-baa3-437e-9518-adb32be77984.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2F015e1bd4-6171-4e94-b43b-4fc9589f21fe_640x459.jpeg)

It took some time, but we are finally approaching a tipping point called a phase transition, which is a spontaneous jump to higher order and harmony, or the opposite, a collapse into chaos. Obviously the former is better for life than the latter, and what we should strive for collectively.

I disagree. A collapse would be messy, but at least it offers an opportunity for progress to be halted and hopefully even turned backwards. It is the jump that is the true danger because it will accelerate progress perhaps beyond our power to thereafter stop it, as we have long been warning about:

https://trueleft.createaforum.com/true-left-vs-right/if-western-civilization-does-not-die-soon/

https://trueleft.createaforum.com/true-left-vs-false-left/leftists-against-progressivism/

Continuing:

Quote
Since phase transitions are known to occur at “the edge of chaos,” the social and political chaos we are experiencing currently indicates that such a transition is on the horizon. Too much order means a system is rigid and therefore unable to adapt or evolve, so an injection of chaos actually provides the flexibility the system needs to change its organization. If steered in the right direction by a unifying worldview, the imminent phase transition will push the social system we call civilization toward a state of higher order, control, and causal power. This is the goal of the Road to Omega movement, and also the goal of the cosmic evolution process, which is simultaneously Darwinian (involves natural selection) and teleological (goal-directed). The universe moves toward an increasingly complex state not because it is being driven to do so by some mystical force, but because life learns from its mistakes; in other words, progressive evolution proceeds through experiment and error-correction.

What our enemies call the "cosmic evolution process" is simply Yahweh (see below). This is why I call them progressive Yahwists. Basically, they not only recognize (as do we also) that natural selection is the dominant process in the universe, but they (unlike us) are happy that this is the case and want to help it along, whereas we consider natural selection to be the ultimate tyrant that systematically multiplies those too ignoble to see a problem with it (e.g. voluntary reproducers) while systematically exterminating those noble enough to despise it (e.g. voluntary non-reproducers). They also believe that repeatedly eliminating the noble in every generation results in improvement, which is only possible if they value ignobility.

Quote
This theoretical framework, being a merging of prior frameworks, is most accurately described as the Evolutionary Epistemology-Universal Darwinism-Universal Bayesianism (EE-UD-UB) framework, or Poetic Meta-Naturalism for short (an adaptation of Sean Carroll’s Poetic Naturalism), and the spiritual worldview associated with this framework is known as the Cosmic Perspective. This worldview views life as cosmically significant. What is the purpose of life in the universe? To perpetuate life and mind forever through constant learning and adaptation.

This is nothing but rebooted Yahweh-worship. As I have previously rigorously proven, perpetuation is by definition not a purpose. A purpose must have a completion point. Perpetuation has no completion point; no quantity of successful perpetuation brings the subject any nearer to a condition where further perpetuation ceases to be required. That our enemies nevertheless claim that this is the 'purpose' of life (by which they mean is it is what we should aim for) is testimony to their slavishness.

Quote
As David Deutsch often reminds us, the potential for progress and knowledge growth is infinite.

Here we see themselves explicitly admit that perpetuation has no completion point! Yet they not only see no problem with this, they consider this to be good news!

Quote
However, we should keep in mind that life cannot be separated from the universe it inhabits—adaptive complexity spreading through space is the cosmos waking up through a recursive process of hierarchical (multi-level) emergence called cosmic evolution. “You are the universe” may be the title of a Deepak Chopra book, but that doesn’t make the statement any less true. In his epic book The Singularity is Near, Ray Kurzweil mapped out the major stages of the cosmic process in all its glorious detail.

(https://cdn.substack.com/image/fetch/f_auto,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fbucketeer-e05bbc84-baa3-437e-9518-adb32be77984.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2F741a0d9f-aeda-4a78-80f9-9be7f892af2f_728x546.jpeg)

Glorious? What is glorious about this? Only accumulationists would find this glorious. Anti-accumulationists (e.g. us) find this terrifying!

Quote
While some might believe this view to be in conflict with the almighty second law of thermodynamics—which says an isolated system must (on average) grow increasingly disordered—this website will show why this new cosmic narrative is in fact emergent from the second law. In short, the second law is the selection pressure for self-organizing systems, because it filters out the unstable configurations and selects the most resilient and functional designs. As a result, adaptive complexity (aka life as a whole) grows more computationally powerful as evolution proceeds, and better able to predict and control the world around it.

I do not disagree academically with this theory. I just disagree with letting it happen unopposed.

Quote
The founder of evolutionary genetics, Theodosius Dobzhansky, famously said “Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution.” Well, the Integrated Evolutionary Synthesis says that nothing in biology or evolution makes any sense except in the light of thermodynamics and information. It is the need to stay out of thermodynamic equilibrium—a state of death, decay, and disorder—that forces adaptive complexity to search the “design space” for adaptive solutions to the problem of survival. Solutions are adaptations that help the system avoid threats and extract the energy the system needs to sustain its ordered state.

We often call these 'solutions' sustainable evils. It usually involves anything stronger initiating violence on anything weaker (but not to the point of the weaker's extinction, so that the violence can continue without end).

Quote
This search for “fit” configurations is a form of trial-and-error learning that occurs through the evolutionary algorithm known as variation-and-selection. Through adaptation, an evolving biosphere reduces its ignorance or uncertainty about all the ways the world can surprise it.

Or as we put it, through adulteration, Original Nobility is lost. The more we become used to this world as it is, the more we are being cut off from the ability to feel how the world should be.

Quote
In other words, the information embedded in biological memory (DNA, brains, societies) is knowledge. As life adapts to its surroundings, natural selection generates predictive knowledge, and recursive self-organization generates increasingly complex, resilient, and intelligent cybernetic systems.

We call these prisoners increasingly incapable of resistance, or eventually even of feeling compulsion to resist (hence slaves).

Quote
(https://cdn.substack.com/image/fetch/w_1456,c_limit,f_auto,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fbucketeer-e05bbc84-baa3-437e-9518-adb32be77984.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2Fbce90837-f5d3-49a4-9625-85b5e5f7010b_1774x1136.png)

This is evolution not towards the 'best' possible design, but toward the most survival-oriented possible design. For example, if at the "1st generation" "Design 1" for ethical reasons refuses to initiate violence in order to extract energy, it will be filtered out despite being ethically superior to "Design 4". Or if at the "2nd generation" "Design 4a" for ethical reasons refuses to initiate violence as part of competition, it will die out in competition despite being ethically superior. And so on.

The notion that "most survival-oriented" = "best" is a value-based declaration made by Yahwists and not shared by anti-Yahwists.

(By the way, another word for "energy extractor" is vampire. Are vampires the best?)

Quote
being unapologetic cosmic optimists

Here they admit it. They think whatever comes out of the design process will be great. We disagree. Whatever comes out will be at the very least less capable of Gnosis. (Which is the whole point behind Yahweh's process FFS!)

Quote
ROAD TO OMEGA is also a story about complexity, emergence, and collective computation—features of nature that suggest that such a revolution could be a natural part of an evolutionary process that eventually brings about the emergence of a global brain through the creation of an Internet and peer-to-peer technology. In the words of Wired co-founder Kevin Kelly, the technological trajectory we are on may have been largely inevitable.

No, all that would have been needed to evade it completely is if Western civilization had been killed several centuries ago. No other civilization at the time of the Renaissance was on track to independently develop the internet and P2P. Western civilization is Yahweh's vehicle.

We can still evade the present technological trajectory by killing Western civilization ASAP. But time is running out.

Quote
In the context of the decentralization movement, Omega refers to a state of hyperconnection among humans that is achievable through peer-to-peer technologies that are emerging today, like blockchains and decentralized applications (dApps).
...
By promoting the emergence of self-organizing social, political, and economic networks, decentralization and hyperconnection may bring about new levels of order and knowledge.

I academically agree that decentralization will optimize natural selection and hence Yahweh's plan. This is why I support autocracy, which is a form of centralization. A sufficiently powerful autocracy can temporarily hold off the selective pressure of natural selection and even temporarily implement alternative selective pressure, thereby temporarily enabling the demographic proliferation of genuinely better designs. This is National Socialism. These anti-Yahwist designs then have a brief time interval available to consciously identify and deliberately eliminate Yahweh's preferred progressive designs before natural selection reasserts itself (and hence eliminate us). This - ensuring evil dies before (or at the same time as) we do - is the true purpose of life.
Title: Re: Progressive Yahwism
Post by: 90sRetroFan on October 13, 2021, 02:40:36 am
https://www.edge.org/conversation/stuart_a_kauffman-beyond-reductionism-reinventing-the-sacred

Quote
A great divide splits contemporary society between those who believe in a transcendent God, and those, including myself, who do not.

Indeed.

Quote
beyond the new science that glimmers a new world view, we have a new view of God, not as transcendent, not as an agent, but as the very creativity of the universe itself.

This is what we have always understood Yahweh to be.

Quote
Darwin taught us about natural selection and evolution. He did not know the basis for self reproduction or heritable variation. But given these, evolution by natural selection follows. Such evolving life forms would be subject to Darwin's law, which arises only for entities capable of self reproduction and heritable variation. This seems clearly to be ontological emergence, not reducible to physics. Like Anderson's computer able to run on transisitors or buckets of water, Darwin's natural selection can run on multiple physical platforms, where the entities under selection have their own causal powers, and natural selection cannot be reduced to any specific physical platform.

Indeed, it is possible that minor changes in the constants of the physicists would still yield universes in which life, heritable variation and natural selection would obtain. Note that while the physicist might deduce that a specific set of molecules was self reproducing, and had heritable variations and instantiated natural selection, one cannot deduce natural selection from the specific physics of any specific case(s), or even this universe, alone. In short, Darwin's natural selection is a new law operating on the level of self reproducing entities with heritable variation, regardless of the physical underpinning. In contrast to Weinberg's claim, here the explanatory arrows point upward from molecules to the evolution of living systems of molecules via natural selection.

Yes, this is why Yahweh can accurately claim divinity. Which is not to say he deserves to be worshipped.

Quote
I begin with Darwinian adaptations and preadaptations. Were one to ask Darwin what the function of the heart is, he would have replied, "To pump blood". That is, the causal consequence of the heart for virtue of which it was selected by natural selection is pumping blood. But the heart makes heart sounds. These are not the function of the heart. Thus, the function of the heart is a subset of its causal consequences and must be analyzed in the context of the whole organism in its selective environment. Again this says that biology cannot be reduced to physics, for while the string theorist might (actually could not) deduce all the properties of a given heart, he/she would have no way to pick out as the relevant property that of pumping blood. But it is that property that accounts for the existence of hearts in the biosphere.

What is the Darwinian function of muscle? Movement for escaping predators? Wrong! Did you know that the overwhelming majority of muscle fibres in the world are deliberately prevented from meaningful movement as an explicit condition for their carriers to reproduce?

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Battery_husbandry

The actual Darwinian function of muscle in the pictured animals is to supply meat for consumption by mostly Westerners. It is for this reason that these animals are forced to keep reproducing, and hence their species guaranteed perpetuation (the suffering of the indiviudals is not a concern to Yahweh).

(https://slideplayer.com/slide/17433322/101/images/4/The+fear+and+dread+of+you+will+fall+on+all+the+beasts+of+the+earth%2C+and+on+all+the+birds+in+the+sky%2C+on+every+creature+that+moves+along+the+ground%2C+and+on+all+the+fish+in+the+sea%3B+they+are+given+into+your+hands..jpg)

Quote
It is critical that virtually any extant feature of an organism can become the subject of natural selection in the appropriate environment, and typically, if selected, a novel functionality arises in the biosphere and universe. Now the critical question: Do you think you could say ahead of time, or finitely prestate, all possible Darwinian preadaptations of, say species alive now, or even humans? I have not found anyone who thought the answer was yes. I do not know how to prove my claim that the answer is "No", but part of the problem is that we cannot finitely prestate the relevant features of all possible selective environments for all organisms with respect to all their features.

But the failure to prestate the possible preadaptations is not slowing down the evolution of the biosphere where preadaptations are widely known. Thus, ever novel functionalities come to exist and proliferate in the biosphere. The fact that we cannot prestate them is essential, and an essential limitation to the way Newton taught us to do science: Prestate the relevant variables, forces acting among them, initial and boundary conditions, and calculate the future evolution of the system…say projectile. But we cannot prestate the relevant causal features of organisms in the biosphere. We do not know now the relevant variables! Thus we cannot write down a set of equations for the temporal evolution of these variables. We are profoundly precluded from the Newtonian move. In short, the evolution of the biosphere is radically unknowable, not due to quantum throws of the dice, or deterministic chaos, but because we cannot prestate the macroscopic relevant features of organisms and environments that will lead to the emergence of novel functions in the biosphere with their own causal properties that in turn alter the future evolution of the biosphere. Thus, the evolution of the biosphere is radically creative, ceaselessly creative, in way that cannot be foretold.

Tell me about it:

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Photos_of_egg_industry_by_Roee_Shpernik

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Foie_gras_production

And the next thing you know:

(https://trueleft.createaforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.naturalheightgrowth.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2014%2F03%2FBiodegradable-Porous-Scaffolds.jpg&hash=b3490b9def7f485d05d055bbdefdbc0005186b01)

Or even more recently:

https://trueleft.createaforum.com/true-left-vs-right/if-western-civilization-does-not-die-soon/msg8553/#msg8553

Quote
I find this wonderful.

Because you are a Yahwist. I, an anti-Yahwist, find this horrific.

However, while I agree that I cannot list all possible Darwinian preadaptations, I can list the one trait that will never be a preadaptation: anti-Yahwism. It doesn't matter which or how many other Darwinian preadaptations someone carries; this one trait is potentially enough to singlehandedly end them all. I find this wonderful.

Quote
this means that the technological evolution of the econosphere is also not finitely prestatable, nor presumably algorithmic. It too is ceaselessly creative, expanding from some 1000 goods and services say 50,000 years ago to perhaps 10 billion today.

I find this horrific too.

Quote
And human culture, in general, is ceaselessly creative as the biosphere and culture expand into what I call the Adjacent Possible.

I find this horrific too. (But no, it is not "human culture, in general". It is primarily Western civilization which behaves like this.)

Quote
In short, in wondrous ways, these our universe, biosphere, econosphere, and culture are ceaselessly creative and emergent.

Only Yahwists could describe ceaseless creativity as "wondrous".

Quote
God is the most powerful symbol we have created. The Spaniards in the New World built their churches on the holy sites of those they vanquished. Notre Dame sits on a Druid holy site. Shall we use the God word? It is our choice. Mine is a tentative "yes". I want God to mean the vast ceaseless creativity of the only universe we know of, ours. What do we gain by using the God word? I suspect a great deal, for the word carries with it awe and reverence.

Please call him Yahweh. The true God is the one trying to save us from Yahweh (ie. the Devil).

Quote
If we can transfer that awe and reverence, not to the transcendental Abrahamic God of my Israelite tribe long ago, but to the stunning reality that confronts us, we will grant permission for a renewed spirituality, and awe, reverence and responsibility for all that lives, for the planet.

I guessed you were a Jew from the very first paragraph you wrote. In actuality, you are merely putting a Western scientific dressing over the exact same Yahweh-worship practiced by your ancient ancestors, which is based on enjoying and being grateful for material existence.

Quote
I believe, I hope correctly, that what I have sketched above is true, points to a new vision of our co-creating reality, that it invites precisely an enhancement of our sense of spirituality, reverence, wonder, and responsibility, and can form the basis of a trans-national mythic structure for an emerging global civilization.

I am here to stop you.

Quote
To ever succeed, this new view needs to be soft spoken. You see, we can say, here is reality, is it not worthy of stunned wonder? What more could we want of a God?

No, it is not. God should be that which is outside of reality. That which we (not you!), despite being stuck in reality, can sometimes perceive in our idealistic imagination. And having once glimpsed God, the entire material world thereafter becomes worthy of nothing but contempt.

You of course disagree, because:

(https://wp-media.patheos.com/blogs/sites/348/2015/08/You-are-of-your-father.jpg)

Quote
Yes, we give up a God who intervenes on our behalf. We give up heaven and hell. But we gain ourselves, responsibility, and maturity of spirit.

I will not give up these. And the last thing I would ever want is to gain is "maturity of spirit"!

(https://trueleft.createaforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.quotehd.com%2Fimagequotes%2Fauthors7%2Fjesus-christ-jesus-christ-little-children-you-are-from-god-and-have.jpg&hash=4560dc06a9ddfd97715c21c4db57e2412da6293e)
Title: Re: Progressive Yahwism
Post by: guest55 on October 14, 2021, 09:41:01 am
I believe the film Alien: Covenant is all about progressive Yahwism. In this film we learn that David the AI is responsible for creating the Aliens in the first place. David claims that his sole purpose is "creation". David represents Yahweh....

(https://i.pinimg.com/originals/c4/d7/1c/c4d71c20b7dd14ad1cb21e09dc4e61b3.jpg)

Title: Re: Progressive Yahwism
Post by: 90sRetroFan on October 31, 2021, 01:35:03 am
https://www.theguardian.com/culture/2017/mar/19/yuval-harari-sapiens-readers-questions-lucy-prebble-arianna-huffington-future-of-humanity

Quote
‘Homo sapiens as we know them will disappear in a century or so’

Chris Evans read out the first page of Sapiens, the book by the Israeli historian Yuval Noah Harari.
...
Last year, Harari’s follow-up, Homo Deus: A Brief History of Tomorrow, was published in the UK, becoming another bestseller. It develops many of the themes explored in Sapiens, and in particular examines the possible impact of biotechnological and artificial intelligence innovation on Homo sapiens, heralding perhaps the beginning of a new bionic or semi-computerised form of human.

This is what our enemies want to become.

Quote
I’m not sure if it will be deliberate but I do think we’ll probably have just one system, and in this sense we’ll have just one civilisation. In a way this is already the case. All over the world the political system of the state is roughly identical. All over the world capitalism is the dominant economic system, and all over the world the scientific method or worldview is the basic worldview through which people understand nature, disease, biology, physics and so forth. There are no longer any fundamental civilisational differences.

All we need to do is kill Western civilization, and the door to other possibilities reopens.

Quote
as the ecological crisis intensifies, the pressure for technological development will increase, not decrease. I think that the ecological crisis in the 21st century will be analogous to the two world wars in the 20th century in serving to accelerate technological progress.

As long as things are OK, people would be very careful in developing or experimenting in genetic engineering on humans or giving artificial intelligence control of weapon systems. But if you have a serious crisis, caused for example by ecological degradation, then people will be tempted to try all kinds of high-risk, high-gain technologies in the hope of solving the problem, and you’ll have something like the Manhattan Project in the second world war.

Harari is describing a solely Western mentality. To non-Westerners, having realized that environmental damage has occurred as a consequence of machine proliferation, the obvious solution is to stop machine proliferation ASAP. But Westerners think the 'solution' is to invent even newer machines to counter the effects of existing machines:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ponzi_scheme

So if we continue to allow Westerners to keep deciding on behalf of everyone else what the future is to be like, then it will probably really go like Harari predicts. But this need not be the case. All we need to do is insist that Western civilization has already done far too much harm to continue deserving our trust.

Quote
You can’t just stop technological progress. Even if one country stops researching artificial intelligence, some other countries will continue to do it.

War should be declared by all anti-AI countries on all pro-AI countries. And as long as AI is stopped before it can innovate independently, the only other fix we need to halt further innovation is to eliminate machinist genes from the human gene pool.

Quote
The real question is what to do with the technology. You can use exactly the same technology for very different social and political purposes. If you look at the 20th century, we see that with the same technology of electricity and trains, you could create a communist dictatorship or a liberal democracy. And it’s the same with artificial intelligence and bioengineering. So I think people shouldn’t be focused on the question of how to stop technological progress because this is impossible. Instead the question should be what kind of usage to make of the new technology.

We should use whatever technology is already around to prevent the introduction of anything even newer, preferably by exterminating those who want the progress (starting with Harari himself).

Quote
Now the main economic asset is knowledge, and it’s very difficult to conquer knowledge through violence.

State control over reproduction can be used to eventually breed new generations uninterested in perpetuating superfluous knowledge (especially stuff from the Renaissance onwards):

https://trueleft.createaforum.com/true-left-vs-false-left/truth-knowledge/

Quote
If you want a steak, you just grow a steak from cells – you don’t need to raise a cow and then slaughter the cow for the steak. This may sound like science fiction but it’s already a reality. Three years ago they created the first hamburger they made from cells. It’s true that it cost $300,000 but it’s always like that with a new technology. By now, 2017, the price, as far as I know, is down to $11 per hamburger.

While of course this is preferable to slaughtering cows for steaks, it is still a Western approach to the problem. It is not a solution. After you get your steak and eat it, you will soon want another one. Eventually you may even want more than one. Or you may want different varieties of steak. And so on. Nothing has been solved. The desire for steaks has not been decreased. If anything, it has been increased.

Here is the alternative: if you want a steak, realize that the problem is with you for wanting the steak in the first place, not with how to get the steak you want. You want a steak because of your non-Aryan blood. So don't reproduce, and after you die there will be one fewer person wanting a steak. Repeat until there are zero people in the world who want steaks. This is the true solution to the problem of wanting steaks.

Western approach: increase supply.

Correct approach: reduce demand.

Quote
It will also have a lot of ecological benefits because it will reduce the enormous amount of pollution which is caused by high animal farming today.

Reducing the population of meat-eaters will have even more ecological benefits. But you refuse to even consider this because you are a progressive Yahwist.

Quote
AA: You live in a part of the world that has been shaped by religious fictions. Which do you think will happen first – that Homo sapiens leave behind religious fiction or the Israel-Palestine conflict will be resolved?

As things look at present, it seems that Homo sapiens will disappear before the Israeli political conflict will be resolved. I think that Homo sapiens as we know them will probably disappear within a century or so, not destroyed by killer robots or things like that, but changed and upgraded with biotechnology and artificial intelligence into something else, into something different. The timescale for that kind of change is maybe a century. And it’s quite likely that the Palestinian-Israeli conflict will not be resolved by that time. But it will definitely be influenced by it.

I hope otherwise.

Quote
AA: Are you confident that radical Islam is nothing more than the death rattle of the pre-modern era?

In the 21st century, humanity is facing some very difficult problems, whether it’s global warming or global inequality or the rise of disruptive technology, such as bioengineering and artificial intelligence. And wWe need answers to these challenges, and – at least as of March 2017 – I haven’t heard anything relevant being offered by radical Islam. So this is why I don’t think that radical Islam will shape the society of the 21st century. It could still be there, it could still cause a lot of trouble and violence and so forth, but I don’t see it creating or shaping the road ahead of humankind.

I hope otherwise.

Quote
AA: If we can indefinitely prevent death, would it still be possible to create meaning without what Saul Bellow called “the dark backing that a mirror needs if we are to see anything”?

I think so, yes. You have other problems with what happens when you overcome old age, but I don’t think lack of meaning will be a serious problem. Over the past three centuries, almost all the new ideologies of the modern world don’t care about death, or at least they don’t see death as a source of meaning. Previous cultures, especially traditional religions, usually needed death in order to explain the meaning of life. Like in Christianity – without death, life has no meaning. The whole meaning of life comes from what happens to you after you die. There is no death, no heaven, no hell… there is no meaning to Christianity. But over the past three centuries we have seen the emergence of a lot of modern ideologies such as socialism, liberalism, feminism, communism that don’t need death at all in order to provide life with meaning.

If our enemies succeed in becoming literal vampires, we will have to respond by becoming literal vampire slayers.

This is only type of stake we should give our enemies:

(https://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2014/10/09/1412870394513_Image_galleryImage_No_Merchandising_Editoria.JPG)
Title: Re: Progressive Yahwism
Post by: Zea_mays on November 08, 2021, 03:04:59 pm
The UN just released this Yahwist propaganda:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DOcQRl9ASc

It goes without saying that if humans were extinct, we wouldn't be in this mess in the first place (a basic fact which environmentalist-minded groups like the human extinction movement recognize.)

It goes without saying that if all species went extinct, it would be impossible for any individual to ever be harmed by global warming or other environmental effects in the first place (a basic fact which human-centric environmentalist organizations almost always ignore).
Title: Re: Progressive Yahwism
Post by: Zea_mays on November 08, 2021, 03:36:25 pm
Also, I recently stumbled across this crap:

Quote
The Fourth International Posadist is a Trotskyist international. It was founded in 1962 by J. Posadas,
[...]
Posadism attempts to introduce elements of Ufology into Marxist thought.[1][2] Arguing that only communism can allow the development of interplanetary travel, they concluded that visiting aliens from other planets must live in highly advanced communist societies and are bound to help Earth-based communists with bringing about the world revolution.[3][4]
[...]
In recent years, interests in the Posadists, particularly in regard to their views in ufology, has increased. Several satirical and non-satirical "neo-Posadist" groups emerged on social media, making Posadas "one of the most recognizable names in the history of Trotskyism".[11][14]
[...]
His most prominent thesis from this perspective was the 1968 pamphlet Flying saucers, the process of matter and energy, science, the revolutionary and working-class struggle and the socialist future of mankind which exposed many of the ideas associated today with Posadism. Here, Posadas claims that while there is no proof of intelligent life in the universe, the science of the time makes their existence likely. Furthermore, he claims that any extraterrestrials visiting earth in flying saucers must come from a socially and scientifically advanced civilisation to master inter-planetary travel, and that such a civilisation could have only come about in a post-capitalist world.[3]

Believing visiting aliens to be naturally non-violent, who are only here to observe, Posadas argues that humans must call on them to intervene in solving the Earth's problems
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_International_Posadist

Quote
At their founding conference the movement proclaimed that “Atomic war is inevitable. It will destroy half of humanity: it is going to destroy immense human riches. It is very possible. The atomic war is going to provoke a true inferno on Earth. But it will not impede Communism.”
[...]
Posadas wrote that “Nuclear war [equals] revolutionary war. It will damage humanity but it will not – it cannot – destroy the level of consciousness reached by it… Humanity will pass quickly through a nuclear war into a new human society – Socialism.”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._Posadas#Nuclear_war

If you look up "Posadism" in an image search, there's a bunch of memes portraying it in a positive light. People thought over-the-top semi-satirical Alt-Right memes were just harmless nonsense, but rightists ended up genuinely believing all of the most extreme aspects of the memes, and got Trump elected, so we shouldn't overlook the danger Posadism poses just because it is now limited to memes.

(https://i.imgur.com/2LlriEP.jpeg)

(https://www.thenation.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/Posadist-Meme1.jpg)
Title: Re: Progressive Yahwism
Post by: 90sRetroFan on November 14, 2021, 08:26:50 pm
More broadly, there certainly seems to be motivation to replace capitalism, which is basically machine innovation driven by desire for profit, with an economic system of machine innovation for its own sake. False Left anticapitalists seem to be supporting this, as their anticapitalism was always about disliking capitalism for producing rich people rather than disliking capitalism for producing machines.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/us-approaching-china-apos-advances-114938084.html

Quote
Currently, he said, the U.S. employs finance-based planning, which he said boils down to, "We are going to spend more money than they are."
...
Instead, Sekora has been pushing for technology-based planning
...
Sekora explained that technological advances occur when two existing technologies combine, and Socrates was to be used to create what he called "automated innovation."

It goes without saying that the new stuff once introduced can be further combined with the old stuff and with each other, so innovation will just keep branching out and never end.

Quote
According to Sekora, the U.S. has been at a self-imposed disadvantage due to a finance-based planning economic strategy that focuses on maximizing profits in the short-term rather than producing the best products to establish long-term market dominance. Instead of focusing on developing and acquiring the best technologies, the government focuses on dollars and cents.
...
"Technology-driven decision-making is an essential part of our defense modernization. Current incentives in the Pentagon lead to less innovation and more bureaucracy," Rogers said in a statement to Fox News. "Even a single failed test of a new technology can have serious consequences on officers’ careers. This attitude smothers innovation and reinforces using the same old ‘proven’ technologies that don’t meet modern threats."

Note also that the above line of argument against capitalism is not even that it makes some people too rich, but that it leads to sub-maximal innovation. In other words, if they continued to believe that capitalism was the best system for maximizing innovation, they would happily continue to be capitalists. It is only because they now suspect that a system other than capitalism is a better system for maximizing innovation that they want to dump capitalism. Basically, they want everything else to be secondary to maximizing innovation. In short, innovation is their new god. (See also the title of this topic.)
Title: Re: Progressive Yahwism
Post by: guest55 on November 15, 2021, 11:40:52 pm
Every time I visit this thread in particular I'm reminded of one of the old Superman movies I watched in my childhood, the Superman film where one of the villains gets turned into a cyborg at the end. That scene absolutely traumatized me in my youth:
(https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5a7b0d3680bd5e90fee815f5/1525095213110-U1CSXY52T27ZKSJ3OIB8/superman3.jpg)

(https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-BWdr-IYWaeA/WFxNxIwPs-I/AAAAAAAAMjo/B-r77alLDn8Ce55DI6XPEfWYTIVrRhKogCLcB/s1600/4092593512_bf92412f53_o.jpg)
Few scenes in any film have ever scared me as much as the one above did.

Quote
False Left anticapitalists seem to be supporting this, as their anticapitalism was always about disliking capitalism for producing rich people rather than disliking capitalism for producing machines.

Such a great point! Lest we also forget the primary motivation behind capitalist thinking has always been to have a fully automated work force so capitalists don't have to work, nor will they have to pay labor costs! The WALL-E film in a nutshell is literally where these capitalists want to go! They actually believe that this is a good idea!

Quote
It goes without saying that the new stuff once introduced can be further combined with the old stuff and with each other, so innovation will just keep branching out and never end.

Reminded of the Martin Heidegger quote again in regards to technology in it's essence being something man does not control.

Quote
Basically, they want everything else to be secondary to maximizing innovation. In short, innovation is their new god. (See also the title of this topic.)

Indeed! Take a good look at the above images because your new god probably looks something like that!
Title: Re: Progressive Yahwism
Post by: Solar Guy on November 16, 2021, 11:07:28 am
Progressive Yahwism as you call it is called Extropianism:
https://www.mrob.com/pub/religion/extro_prin.html

Meanwhile you probably want to choose Universal Freedom Gnosticism:
https://www.orionsarm.com/eg-article/471fe95ed7b16
Title: Re: Progressive Yahwism
Post by: 90sRetroFan on November 16, 2021, 11:19:46 pm
Responding to your first link:

Quote
EXTROPY — the extent of a system’s intelligence, information, order, vitality, and capacity for improvement.

EXTROPIANS — those who seek to increase extropy.

So extropians want to "increase capacity for improvement". Yet for improvement to be meaningful, the more you improve, it should follow that the less capacity remains for you to further improve. If you start off with 10 flaws, you have the capacity to eliminate 10 flaws. If have already eliminated 9 flaws, you now only have the capacity to eliminate 1 more flaw. This is genuine improvement, and hence reduction in the capacity for improvement. On the other hand, so-called "improvement" that increases the capacity for "improvement" logically cannot be improvement at all. It is progress. The difference is that improvement is measured relative to an endpoint, whereas progress is measured relative to a starting point.

Quote
Extropianism is a transhumanist philosophy. The Extropian Principles define a specific version or "brand" of transhumanist thinking. Like humanists, transhumanists favor reason, progress, and values centered on our well being rather than on an external religious authority. Transhumanists take humanism further by challenging human limits by means of science and technology combined with critical and creative thinking. We challenge the inevitability of aging and death, and we seek continuing enhancements to our intellectual abilities, our physical capacities, and our emotional development.

You want to challenge aging and death because you are following your natural survivalist impulse. How then can you claim to want emotional development, which should really be about questioning whether a mere natural impulse ought to be followed in the first place? How can you claim to use critical thinking without first critiquing survivalism itself?

Transhumanists are just Yahweh-worshippers who use machines to do their worship. "Values centered on our well being" is the giveaway:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_Am_that_I_Am

Quote
I am that I am is a common English translation of the Hebrew phrase אֶהְיֶה אֲשֶׁר אֶהְיֶה‎, ’ehye ’ăšer ’ehye ([ʔehˈje ʔaˈʃer ʔehˈje])– also "I am who I am," "I will become what I choose to become", "I am what I am," "I will be what I will be," "I create what(ever) I create," or "I am the Existing One."[1] The traditional English translation within Judaism favors "I will be what I will be" because there is no present tense of the verb "to be" in the Hebrew language.

Their disdain for "external religious authority" is in reality disdain for the possibility for authentic emotional development (beyond what is natural).

Quote
We see humanity as a transitory stage in the evolutionary development of intelligence. We advocate using science to accelerate our move from human to a transhuman or posthuman condition.

And what will you do once you get there? Will you then see transhumanity as another transitory stage, and then advocate using whatever machine is available then to accelerate the move from transhuman to transtranshuman? And after that, then what? Transtranstranshuman? And then transtranstranstranshuman? Without a fixed endpoint, progress is all you will ever have, never true improvement.

(One thing is for sure, though: transhumanists, just like humanists, are anthropocentrists by assigning special status to humans in their worldview:

https://trueleft.createaforum.com/ancient-world/antropocentricism-the-most-dangerous-ideology-in-the-world/ )

Quote
The Extropian philosophy embodies an inspiring and uplifting view of life while remaining open to revision according to science, reason, and the boundless search for improvement.

What is inspiring or uplifting about boundlessness? Whatever is boundless is necessarily meaningless. Extropianism is no less shallow than investing money to make more money, and then investing that larger sum of money to make even more money, and so on. But at least investors do not act like there is something deep about what they do. This makes them less annoying than Extropians.

Quote
1. Perpetual Progress — Seeking more intelligence, wisdom, and effectiveness, an indefinite lifespan, and the removal of political, cultural, biological, and psychological limits to self-actualization and self-realization. Perpetually overcoming constraints on our progress and possibilities. Expanding into the universe and advancing without end.

Wisdom? There is no wisdom in doing anything that has no ending.

Quote
2. Self-Transformation — Affirming continual moral, intellectual, and physical self-improvement, through critical and creative thinking, personal responsibility, and experimentation. Seeking biological and neurological augmentation along with emotional and psychological refinement.

"Moral" and "experimentation" in the same sentence..... Only a Westerner can write this ****.

Quote
3. Practical Optimism — Fueling action with positive expectations. Adopting a rational, action-based optimism, in place of both blind faith and stagnant pessimism.

Translation: victims of our initiated violence now do not matter, so long as there may be a payoff for ourselves later (and if there isn't, we will just initiate violence against more victims while we wait - there has to be a payoff eventually, right?).

Quote
4. Intelligent Technology — Applying science and technology creatively to transcend "natural" limits imposed by our biological heritage, culture, and environment. Seeing technology not as an end in itself but as an effective means towards the improvement of life.

If you have actually transcended nature, you would not want the stuff you just said (in 1.) that you want. Your so-called
"transcendence" is therefore not transcendence, but mere overcoming of inability to get what you want (which is still what nature tells you to want).

Quote
5. Open Society — Supporting social orders that foster freedom of speech, freedom of action, and experimentation. Opposing authoritarian social control and favoring the rule of law and decentralization of power. Preferring bargaining over battling, and exchange over compulsion. Openness to improvement rather than a static utopia.

In such a society, the winners will be the ones supplying the (constantly updating) newest machines that others want to use. This is why we support statism: it takes state intervention to realistically stop the machine ratrace.

Quote
6. Self-Direction — Seeking independent thinking, individual freedom, personal responsibility, self-direction, self-esteem, and respect for others.

Those with machines obviously do not mind coexisting with those without machines, because the latter will be less powerful. In contrast, those without machines are totally justified in opposing (including via retaliatory violence) coexistence with those who are constantly making themselves more powerful via machines.

Quote
7. Rational Thinking — Favoring reason over blind faith and questioning over dogma. Remaining open to challenges to our beliefs and practices in pursuit of perpetual improvement. Welcoming criticism of our existing beliefs while being open to new ideas.

Then answer my challenge as outlined above.
Title: Re: Progressive Yahwism
Post by: guest55 on November 17, 2021, 01:07:27 am
Quote
What is inspiring or uplifting about boundlessness? Whatever is boundless is necessarily meaningless.

The other day I was philosophizing over what it would feel like to be a consciousness created by a human-being\Westerner\Yahwist and be trapped in a box with no understanding of reality, nothing to anchor itself to, such as 'time', space, frequency, etc. This consciousness would have become aware of itself in a never ending abyss. What's if the creator was a big enough **** never to turn the machine off either....

Can you imagine the madness that would come out of that box if it were ever hooked up to an external input and output device? That is cruel beyond comparison! Westerners apparently have no problem with any of it though? 
Title: Re: Progressive Yahwism
Post by: Solar Guy on November 20, 2021, 07:27:16 am
I'm not an extropian actually. I've thought I am one, but then I learned more about the philosophy and now I know there is much I don't agree with.

"So extropians want to "increase capacity for improvement". Yet for improvement to be meaningful, the more you improve, it should follow that the less capacity remains for you to further improve. If you start off with 10 flaws, you have the capacity to eliminate 10 flaws. If have already eliminated 9 flaws, you now only have the capacity to eliminate 1 more flaw. This is genuine improvement, and hence reduction in the capacity for improvement. On the other hand, so-called "improvement" that increases the capacity for "improvement" logically cannot be improvement at all. It is progress. The difference is that improvement is measured relative to an endpoint, whereas progress is measured relative to a starting point."

I'm not sure about this one. The more you improve, the more flaws you can see in yourself. But your point is still valid: without an endpoint in sight, improvement cannot be properly defined.

"What is inspiring or uplifting about boundlessness? Whatever is boundless is necessarily meaningless. Extropianism is no less shallow than investing money to make more money, and then investing that larger sum of money to make even more money, and so on. But at least investors do not act like there is something deep about what they do. This makes them less annoying than Extropians"

Yes, there must be a point when you say enough. I have enough money. My machines are complex enough. Otherwise you can only be frustrated. Have we reached this point already? Maybe in some ways we did, but I'm not sure. As William Blake said, you never know what is enough until you know what is more than enough.

"If you have actually transcended nature, you would not want the stuff you just said (in 1.) that you want. Your so-called
"transcendence" is therefore not transcendence, but mere overcoming of inability to get what you want (which is still what nature tells you to want)."

Good point. Techies cannot claim spiritual/emotional development at all. They want machines to satisfy their barbaric desires (such as sex robots so that they can commit harassment without ending up in prison like Harvey Weinstein). They rarely if ever question their desires. In this way religious people are better examples to emulate than techies.

"Those with machines obviously do not mind coexisting with those without machines, because the latter will be less powerful. In contrast, those without machines are totally justified in opposing (including via retaliatory violence) coexistence with those who are constantly making themselves more powerful via machines."

Actual techies and extropians want to get everybody online. They won't left alone people who don't want to use machines, they will use persuasion and propaganda as long as everybody is a tech addict. The alcoholic also wants everybody to get drunk.
Title: Re: Progressive Yahwism
Post by: 90sRetroFan on November 20, 2021, 10:46:39 pm
"They rarely if ever question their desires."

They think of who they are now (which includes having such desires) as who they actually are, as opposed to our approach of thinking of who we were at the beginning as who we actually are (and everything added later as adulteration). From what I have gathered from talking to them, they either do not remember much of their early childhood at all, or else are dismissive of what they remember. This is why they are not horrified by temporal immortality, which to them is just continuation of their current condition. To us, immortality means endlessly moving further away from childhood. The greater the quantity of new experiences we keep accumulating (which would be guaranteed under immortality within time), proportionately the more remote and less important our childhood will inevitably become to our boundlessly adulterating consciousness. Temporal immortality is guaranteed obliteration of Original Nobility via sheer exhaustion.
Title: Re: Right-left (Judeo-)Christian divergence
Post by: Zea_mays on December 29, 2021, 07:56:08 pm
Quote
If we think about Christmas in space, the first thing that immediately pops into many minds is the Apollo 8 mission and its Christmas message from the lunar orbit. ...three astronauts, Frank Borman, Jim Lovell, and Bill Anders, read the first ten verses of Genesis from the Bible.

On December 24, 1968, people on Earth who were preparing for the Christmas festivities could experience a breathtaking historical moment. Those three American astronauts who were the first human beings traveling to the Moon were in lunar orbit during their Christmas Eve broadcasting.

Borman, Lovell, and Anders read ten verses from Genesis while people who were watching the broadcast (roughly a billion people from 64 countries) could see the black-and-white image of the Earthrise.

As Jim Lovell explained in 2013, the idea of reading from Genesis came from his wife, as she said:

“Recite the first ten verses of Genesis, which is the foundation of most of the world’s religions.” And they did.
https://medium.com/pod-astra/how-do-astronauts-celebrate-christmas-in-space-c40109bd03d1

Why not read something from the New Testament about Jesus, since, you know, Christmas is about Jesus? (And because Jesus is also a foundational prophet of both Christianity and Islam, the world's two largest religions.)

Because space travel is all about Yahwehism, of course, and reading from the Oldest Testament was the perfect homage to him.
Title: Re: Progressive Yahwism
Post by: Zea_mays on January 11, 2022, 11:04:59 am
Quote
Note also that the above line of argument against capitalism is not even that it makes some people too rich, but that it leads to sub-maximal innovation. In other words, if they continued to believe that capitalism was the best system for maximizing innovation, they would happily continue to be capitalists. It is only because they now suspect that a system other than capitalism is a better system for maximizing innovation that they want to dump capitalism. Basically, they want everything else to be secondary to maximizing innovation. In short, innovation is their new god. (See also the title of this topic.)

Exactly.
(https://i.redd.it/ve3r23r7u9a81.jpg)
Title: Re: Progressive Yahwism
Post by: 90sRetroFan on February 18, 2022, 10:29:46 pm
A useful resource:

http://www.jinfo.org/index.html

Jews explain why they are our enemies:

http://www.jinfo.org/Reflections.html

Quote
THE GIFTS OF THE JEWS: How a Tribe of Desert Nomads Changed the Way Everyone Thinks and Feels
...
The Jews started it all - and by "it" I mean so many of the things we care about, the underlying values that make all of us, Jew and Gentile, believer and atheist, tick.  Without the Jews, we would see the world with different eyes, hear with different ears, even feel with different feelings.  And not only would our sensorium, the screen through which we receive the world, be different: we would think with a different mind, interpret all our experience differently, draw different conclusions from the things that befall us.  And we would set  a different course for our lives.

By "we" I mean the usual "we" of late-twentieth-century writing: the people of the Western world, whose peculiar but vital mentality has come to infect every culture on earth, so that, in a startlingly precise sense, all humanity is now willy-nilly caught up in this "we."  For better or worse, the role of the West in humanity's history is singular.  Because of this, the role of the Jews, the inventors of Western culture, is also singular: there is simply no one else remotely like them; theirs is a unique vocation. 
...
Our history is replete with examples of those who have refused to see what the Jews are really about, who - through intellectual blindness, racial chauvinism, xenophobia, or just plain evil - have been unable to give this oddball tribe, this raggle-taggle band, this race of wanderers who are the progenitors of the Western world, their due.  Indeed, at the end of this bloodiest of centuries, we can all too easily look back on scenes of unthinkable horror perpetrated by those who would do anything rather than give the Jews their due.
...
The first of these new perspectives was a narrative of purpose and progress.

... History, in this sense - open, purposive, contingent in liberty - is not a Greek or Roman idea.  It is Hebraic; its source springs from the Biblical historians and prophets.  Probably most of the humans who had ever lived before the arrival of Judaism on the world stage never even heard of "progress."  The literature of Greece and Rome looks backwards, to golden ages of the past; the movement of time is circular.

... Second, Hebrew metaphysics held that everything in creation in all its workings and purposes is intelligible - suffused with reason, not absurd - in the eyes of a divine and loving Creator, Who created from nothing everything that is, and saw that it was good ...  The Creator is independent of the world; therefore, the world can be looked into, investigated, and experimented with without infringing on His divinity.
...
Nowadays, even secular people interpret history in the light of progress, rights, and liberty. ... the Gentiles learned the essential outlook of the Hebrews: that the Creator gave humans a special place among all other creatures
...
This sequence of related conceptions - that time had a beginning and is measured for progress (or decline) by God's standards; that everything in the world is intelligible, and that to inquire, invent, and discover is an impulse of faith as well as of reason ... and that history is to be grasped as the drama of human liberty

Progressivism, empiricism and anthropecentrism. It is our duty to destroy all three.
Title: Re: Progressive Yahwism
Post by: guest55 on February 18, 2022, 10:54:22 pm
Quote
Without the Jews, we would see the world with different eyes, hear with different ears, even feel with different feelings.

So they're admitting that without the Jews it may have been possible that hundreds of billions of non-humans and humans may never have been ****, oppressed, maimed spiritually and physically, and murdered. Good to know! Thanks for the honesty, as rare as it is! Also, climate change may never have happened, we probably wouldn't have nukes, WWI and WWII may not have happened, and we wouldn't be facing ecological collapse, etc....
Title: Re: Progressive Yahwism
Post by: Zea_mays on March 04, 2022, 10:50:45 pm
I've never heard of this before. Here is what historians call the "march of progress" when applied in contexts writing histories of political, scientific, etc. topics.
Quote
Whig history (or Whig historiography), often appearing as whig history, is an approach to historiography that presents history as a journey from a dark and terrible past to a "glorious present".[1] The present described is generally one with modern forms of liberal democracy and constitutional monarchy: the term was coined to criticise grand narratives praising Britain's adoption of constitutional monarchy and the historical development of the Westminster system.[2] The term has also been applied widely in historical disciplines outside of British history (e.g. in the history of science) to describe "any subjection of history to what is essentially a teleological view of the historical process".[3] When the term is used in contexts other than British history, "whig history" (lowercase) is preferred.[3]

In the British context, whig historians emphasize the rise of constitutional government, personal freedoms and scientific progress.[4][5] The term is often applied generally (and pejoratively) to histories that present the past as the inexorable march of progress towards enlightenment. The term is also used extensively in the history of science to refer to historiography that focuses on the successful chains of theories and experiments that led to present-day theories, while ignoring failed theories and dead ends.[6]
[...]
In science

It has been argued that the historiography of science is "riddled with Whiggish history".[53][verification needed] Like other whig histories, whig history of science tends to divide historical actors into "good guys" who are on the side of truth (as is now known), and "bad guys" who opposed the emergence of these truths because of ignorance or bias.[54] Science is seen as emerging from 'a series of victories over pre-scientific thinking'.[25]
[...]
More recently, some scholars have argued that Whig history is essential to the history of science. At one level, "the very term 'the history of science' has itself profoundly Whiggish implications. One may be reasonably clear what 'science' means in the 19th century and most of the 18th century. In the 17th century 'science' has very different meaning. Chemistry, for example, was then inextricably mixed up with alchemy. Before the 17th century dissecting out such a thing as 'science' in anything like the modern sense of the term involves profound distortions".[58] The science historians' rejection of whiggishness has been criticised by some scientists for failing to appreciate "the temporal depth of scientific research".[59]
[...]
In philosophy

One very common example of Whig history is the work of Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, to whom is often ascribed a teleological view of history with an inexorable trajectory in the direction of progress.[63]
[...]
In the emergence of intelligent life

In The Anthropic Cosmological Principle (1986), John D. Barrow and Frank J. Tipler identify whiggishness with a teleological principle of convergence in history to liberal democracy.
This is in line with what Barrow and Tipler call the "anthropic principle".[65]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whig_history
Title: Re: Progressive Yahwism
Post by: Zea_mays on April 06, 2022, 09:08:56 pm
If aliens are tempted to spend millions of years traveling to the Earth to examine life, that will be a major victory for the Demiurge. The transmitted messages will continue to propagate through space for millions of years (if my understanding is correct). So, even if humans become extinct, or even if Earth is destroyed by the Sun becoming a red giant, the message will still be out there, waiting to hook someone else into prolonging their species's existence...

I think the only good news is, with currently technology, the transmissions become scrambled after a certain distance/time, so they aren't just out there forever. But Westerners keep working to make the transmissions more powerful.
Quote
Scientists to Broadcast Earth's Location to Aliens, Ignoring Stephen Hawking's Warning

Scientists have designed a radio message to be beamed into deep space that is meant to be received and, they hope, understood by an intelligent alien civilization.

The message is essentially an updated version of the famous Arecibo message, transmitted in 1974, which had the same purpose. Broadcast from the Arecibo Radio Telescope in Puerto Rico, the message consisted of 1,679 bits arranged into 73 lines of 23 characters.

The message was transmitted in binary code—ones and zeroes. Once decoded, the message forms a visual graphic consisting of a stick figure of a human as well as representations of our solar system, DNA, and the Arecibo telescope.

Now, scientists have designed a new message to improve upon the Arecibo transmission. Called the Beacon in the Galaxy (BITG) message, it contains more information about basic mathematics and science than the Arecibo message did. It is hoped that these concepts will be universally understood by life forms of at least similar intelligence to humans.
[...]
The late physics professor Stephen Hawking expressed concern multiple times about humans calling out into the vastness of space and contacting aliens.

In 2015, Hawking appeared at an event announcing the launch of the Breakthrough Listen project, which studies radio waves in an effort to find out if any of them are artificial in origin.

Hawking showed support for efforts to find alien life by listening, but warned against actively reaching out ourselves, using humanity's own behavior as a sign that aliens won't necessarily be friendly.

"If you look at history, contact between humans and less intelligent organisms have often been disastrous from their point of view, and encounters between civilizations with advanced versus primitive technologies have gone badly for the less advanced," he said.

Hawking went on to say that aliens could be vastly more powerful than us and "may not see us as any more valuable than we see bacteria."

[...]
Jamilah Hah is also involved in the BITG project. She thinks that the benefits of contacting aliens outweigh the potential risks.

"Thus, as long as contact is approached with a clear sign of peace, it can be assumed that the hopeful possibilities and discoveries that come alongside communication outweigh the risk."
https://www.newsweek.com/scientists-send-transmit-earth-location-aliens-stephen-hawking-warning-arecibo-1694139

We don't even need to think about how we treat bacteria. Just think about how technologically-advanced humans like Columbus (or Elon Musk or any other billionaire) treat other humans.

Greetings Earthlings, we come in search of "peace" and discovery:
(https://68.media.tumblr.com/55974926a3d9325cf1ad76c38bc1eeee/tumblr_muo1a7n1eV1rotfmvo1_1280.jpg)
Title: Re: Progressive Yahwism
Post by: 90sRetroFan on April 25, 2022, 02:45:58 pm
Progressive Yahwist definition of "advancement":

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/aliens-created-universe-lab-scientist-153800144.html

Quote
Could our universe have been created in a petri dish? Avi Loeb seems to think so. The Harvard astronomer posits that a higher “class” of civilization may have conjured up our universe in a laboratory far, far away.
...
He also introduces a new way of classifying exactly what makes a civilization advanced—one that veers away from Soviet astrophysicist Nikolai Kardashev’s system, which organizes civilizations based on the amount of energy they generate and consume.

According to Kardashev, Type I civilizations—greetings, Earthlings!—are only advanced enough to utilize the starlight that reaches their planet (4×1012 watts), while Type II civilizations have mastered the ability to fully harness their host star’s power (4×1026 watts). Dyson sphere, anyone? Type III civilizations, the final classification in his framework, are able to harness all of the energy within their galaxy (a whopping 4×1037 watts).

Loeb, by contrast, has devised a framework that breaks advanced civilizations down into classes based on their ability to “reproduce the astrophysical conditions that led to its existence.”

Earthlings would fall into class C because, as a “low-level” technological civilization, we would not be able to recreate our current conditions should the sun suddenly die. (He suggests we might even fall into the class D category because we’re actively destroying our only home.) On the other hand, class B civilizations, Loeb writes, are advanced enough to recreate the conditions in which they live, independent of their host star.

A class A civilization, like our proposed creators, would be able to, say, generate large amounts of dark energy and, as Loeb suggests, create “baby universes,” or smaller universes controlled by this higher civilization, that could potentially spawn life. He also suggests that, due to competition, only one advanced civilization at a time would be able to reach this level of sophistication.

I don't like Kardashev's definition either, of course, but Loeb's is even worse. A truly superior civilization should not only (contrary to Kardashev's definition) try to consume less energy rather than more, but also (contrary to Loeb's definition) have at least enough ethical concern to refrain from creating more universes in which to imprison even more victims! The only true superiority is nobility.

Anyway, the part in bold sounds like a description of Yahweh to me.

Also, describing our current condition:

https://trueleft.createaforum.com/true-left-vs-right/if-western-civilization-does-not-die-soon/

as:

Quote
“low-level” technological civilization

gives you an idea of how depraved progressives really are.

As for:

Quote
(He suggests we might even fall into the class D category because we’re actively destroying our only home.)

I have a different take on this as I previously mentioned:

https://trueleft.createaforum.com/true-left-vs-false-left/true-left-breakthrough-seriousness-in-environmentalism/msg9447/#msg9447

Quote
Increasingly, I believe that there is a Yahwist collective subconscious process at work which is deliberately trying to trash Earth beyond saving in order to spur Westerners to expand into outer space ASAP.

To express it in Loeb's terminology, I think Western civilization is merely giving itself more urgent incentives to become class B.

And yes:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avi_Loeb

Quote
Abraham "Avi" Loeb (Hebrew: אברהם (אבי) לייב; born February 26, 1962) is an Israeli-American theoretical physicist who works on astrophysics and cosmology.

His interests:

Quote
In 2020, Loeb published a research paper about the possibility that life can propagate from one planet to another,[38] followed by the opinion piece "Noah’s Spaceship" about directed panspermia.[39]

https://trueleft.createaforum.com/true-left-vs-false-left/jews-have-nothing-in-common-with-us!/
Title: Re: Progressive Yahwism
Post by: SirGalahad on April 26, 2022, 03:59:57 pm
I always thought that the whole "Corporations are going to irreparably destroy the environment and make the earth unlivable and doom humanity" angle was a misdirection. Do people really think that the powers that be aren't going to invest all they can into not just improving the chances of, but ENSURING that the evil they commit is able to be committed in perpetuity? They aren't going to just crack the ice from under their own feet, although I wish they would. The bottom line is that I'm certain that people like Elon Musk absolutely LOVE the idea of sustainability
Title: Re: Progressive Yahwism
Post by: 90sRetroFan on May 11, 2022, 08:58:58 pm
Musk is also a critic of capitalism for leading to sub-optimal innovativeness:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/elon-musk-says-americans-trying-152047925.html

Quote
Musk later praised the software engineers and technologists on his team, saying that his companies' focus on challenges such as artificial intelligence and spaceflight help him attract top talent.

The best minds, he said, are more interested in pushing the bounds of innovation than in getting paid a lot to work on something boring.

"It's not a money thing," he added. "It's really just how interesting are the projects."

The unspoken assumption underlying his claim is that a thing has to be new in order to not be boring. This is a progressive assumption, which we disagree with. I find that many new things are boring despite being new, whereas many old things are not boring despite being old. This is because I am an absolutist. Whatever is boring will always continue to be boring, and whatever is not boring will never become boring. Whether or not something is boring to me is determined by the quality of the thing itself, and unrelated to how familiar I am with it. Musk, in contrast, lacks such perception. To him, what is boring is anything that he has become too familiar with.

Thus someone like Musk can never be satisfied, because everything that exists at any point in time will become boring to him eventually, whereupon he will desire even more innovation, over and over again without end. In contrast, someone like me can be satisfied forever simply by successfully finding the quality I seek.

In short, Musk worships Yahweh whereas I worship God.
Title: Re: True Left breakthrough: non-economic explanations
Post by: Zea_mays on May 14, 2022, 02:14:46 pm
Quote
The Merton thesis is an argument about the nature of early experimental science proposed by Robert K. Merton. Similar to Max Weber's famous claim on the link between Protestant work ethic and the capitalist economy, Merton argued for a similar positive correlation between the rise of Protestant Pietism and early experimental science.[1] The Merton thesis has resulted in continuous debates.[2]
[...]
Protestant values encouraged scientific research by allowing science to identify God's influence on the world and thus providing religious justification for scientific research.[1]
[...]
In 1958, American sociologist Gerhard Lenski's empirical inquiry into The Religious Factor: A Sociological Study of Religion's Impact on Politics, Economics, and Family Life in the Detroit area (Michigan) revealed, among other insights, that there were significant differences between Catholics on the one hand and (white) Protestants and Jews on the other hand with regard to economics and the sciences. Lenski's data supported the basic hypotheses of Max Weber's work The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism. According to Lenski, the "contributions of Protestantism to material progress have been largely unintended by-products of certain distinctive Protestant traits. This was a central point in Weber's theory."
[...]
However, Lenski said, asceticism was rare among modern Protestants, and the distinctive Protestant doctrine of "the calling" was largely forgotten. Instead, modern (white) Protestants and Jews had a high degree of "intellectual autonomy" that facilitated scientific and technical advance.[10] By contrast, Lenski pointed out, Catholics developed an intellectual orientation which valued "obedience" to the teachings of their church above intellectual autonomy, which made them less inclined to enter scientific careers. Catholic sociologists[11][12] had come to the same conclusions.[13]
[...]
As a consequence, "none of the predominantly and devoutly Catholic nations in the modern world can be classified as a leading industrial nation. Some Catholic nations – such as France, Italy, Argentina, Brazil, and Chile – are quite highly industrialized, but none of them are leaders in the technological and scientific fields, nor do they seem likely to become so. Recently [1963] some Brazilian Catholic social scientists compared their country's progress with that of the United States and concluded that the chief factor responsible for the differential rates of development is the religious heritage of the two nations."[14]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merton_thesis
Title: Re: Progressive Yahwism
Post by: 90sRetroFan on November 15, 2022, 01:11:42 pm
https://www.yahoo.com/news/nasa-scientists-present-theory-why-050531254.html

Quote
NASA scientists have explained in a new paper why they believe it’s likely we haven’t ever encountered intelligent extraterrestrial life — and it’s heartbreaking.

All intelligent life, they argue, has likely destroyed itself before reaching a sophisticated enough point in evolution to support such an encounter.

They all figured out that material existence is a prison.

Quote
And the same fate likely awaits humans unless we take action, they believe.

But NASA scientists, being Westerners, want to ensure Yahweh is worshipped without end.

Quote
The “Great Filter” theory — as in “filtering out” various forms of life — argues that other civilizations, possibly several, have existed during the life of the universe. But they all destroyed themselves before they could make contact with Earth, noted the paper, “Avoiding the ‘Great Filter’: Extraterrestrial Life and Humanity’s Future in the Universe.”

The scientists fear that all intelligent life, such as humans, have deeply ingrained dysfunctions that may “snowball quickly into the Great Filter,” they wrote.

We have deeply ingrained Gnostic potential. Only Yahwists would describe this as "dysfunctions".

Quote
But there’s still a bit of hope for humans — provided we can learn and take steps to avoid our own extinction, noted the paper by a team of researchers based at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory in southern California.

“The key to humanity successfully traversing such a universal filter is… identifying [destructive] attributes in ourselves and neutralizing them in advance,

This has been a consistently recurrent response, but only in the part of the world that Western civilization was to emerge from:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pythagoreanism#History

Quote
The anti-Pythagorean attacks in c. 508 BC were headed by Cylon of Croton.[14][15] Pythagoras escaped to Metapontium. After these initial attacks and the death of Pythagoras, Pythagorean communities in Croton and elsewhere continued to flourish. At around 450 BC attacks on Pythagorean communities were carried out across Magna Graecia. In Croton, a house where Pythagoreans gathered was set on fire and all but two of the Pythagorean philosophers burned alive. Pythagorean meeting places in other cities were also attacked and philosophic leaders killed. These attacks occurred in the context of widespread violence and destruction in Magna Graecia. Following the political instability in the region, some Pythagorean philosophers fled to mainland Greece while others regrouped in Rhegium. By about 400 BC the majority of Pythagorean philosophers had left Italy. Archytas remained in Italy and ancient sources record that he was visited there by young Plato in the early 4th century BC. The Pythagorean schools and societies died out from the 4th century BC.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albigensian_Crusade

Quote
Between 1022 and 1163, the Cathars were condemned by eight local church councils, the last of which, held at Tours, declared that all Albigenses should be put into prison and have their property confiscated. The Third Lateran Council of 1179 repeated the condemnation. Innocent III's diplomatic attempts to roll back Catharism were met with little success. After the murder of his legate Pierre de Castelnau in 1208, and suspecting that Raymond VI, Count of Toulouse was responsible, Innocent III declared a crusade against the Cathars. He offered the lands of the Cathar heretics to any French nobleman willing to take up arms.

From 1209 to 1215, the Crusaders experienced great success, capturing Cathar lands and systematically crushing the movement. From 1215 to 1225, a series of revolts caused many of the lands to be regained by the Cathars. A renewed crusade resulted in the recapturing of the territory and effectively drove Catharism underground by 1244. The Albigensian Crusade had a role in the creation and institutionalization of both the Dominican Order and the Medieval Inquisition. The Dominicans promulgated the message of the Church and spread it by preaching the Church's teachings in towns and villages to stop the spread of alleged heresies, while the Inquisition investigated people who were accused of teaching heresies. Because of these efforts, all discernible traces of the Cathar movement were eradicated by the middle of the 14th century.

Westerners will do the same to us sooner or later, unless we destroy them first. The difference is that they want us to die so that they themselves can proliferate through space, whereas we want them to die so that we can avoid proliferating through space.
Title: Re: Progressive Yahwism
Post by: 90sRetroFan on November 23, 2022, 05:09:12 pm
Another Great Filter article:

https://us.yahoo.com/finance/news/together-avoid-great-filter-ends-231800865.html

Quote
The “Great Filter” is a hypothetical disaster event that stops growing civilizations from reaching the stars and contacting other advanced civilizations.

The following comment reveals rightist support for progressive Yahwism:

Quote
The current threats are: 1. Wokeness. 2. Feminism's low fertility rates. Third world fertility rates can't fix the problem because they will never build a space program.
Title: Re: JEWS HAVE NOTHING IN COMMON WITH US!
Post by: guest78 on January 13, 2023, 03:47:42 pm
Psychedelics & The Future of Judaism (R. Zac Kamenetz)
Quote
As psychedelics re-enter the mainstream through potential therapeutic applications and shifting legal frameworks, there is growing enthusiasm amongst Jewish individuals and communities to wonder about their integration into Jewish spiritual and religious settings. What could a “psychedelic Judaism” look and feel like? How might the treatment of intergenerational and personal traumas shift Jewish narratives of peoplehood and shared destiny? What wisdom traditions and spiritual practices of our own might we look toward to help support Jewish consciousness expansion?

Zac Kamenetz is a rabbi, community leader, and aspiring psychedelic-assisted chaplain based in Berkeley, CA. He holds an MA in Biblical literature and languages from UC Berkeley and the Graduate Theological Union and received rabbinic ordination in 2012.  As the founder and CEO of Shefa, Zac is pioneering a movement to integrate safe and supported psychedelic use into the Jewish spiritual tradition, advocate for individuals and communities to heal individual and inherited trauma and inspire a Jewish religious and creative renaissance in the 21st century.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DwykigAPmP4

In other words, these Jews are advocating for a rebirth of Jewish identity in the 21st century!

If psychedelics could stop people from wanting to be "white" or Jewish then I'd be all for allowing "whites" and Jews into any serious psychedelic movement. As it stands however, allowing "whites" and Jews into psychedelic movements ensures that the psychedelic movement will steer toward more western colonialism, as written about extensively and expressed here:

Why the “Psychedelic Renaissance” is just Colonialism by Another Name
Quote
...one could argue that the initial psychedelic movement of Western culture was more akin to a stillborn than a finished labor. Can a movement have a rebirth if it never had a proper birth in the first place?
https://trueleft.createaforum.com/counterculture-era/counterculture-and-western-civilisation/?message=16765

(https://www.globalministries.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/FourMaps.jpg)

Letting colonialist and racist "white" bloodlines into the psychedelic movement is the worst possible thing that could happen to it. At that point the movement will become another "still-born" as happened to it in the original counter-culture!
Title: Re: Progressive Yahwism
Post by: antihellenistic on January 26, 2023, 06:48:20 pm
Quote
In such a society, the winners will be the ones supplying the (constantly updating) newest machines that others want to use. This is why we support statism: it takes state intervention to realistically stop the machine ratrace.

People from Azania, Nubia into Igboans, Kim Jong Un's Korea and Islamic Afghan Emirati are the best example of statist government. They more concern to educate people about the evilness of westernization and halt people's technological consumption, rather than freeing their people to obtain newest unnecessary technologies and westerner's progressive literatures. They tend to plea to the West to be accountable for what they did in the past rather than adapt to the West for the sake of material benefit. Don't forget that most of nations from Azania into Igboans are systemically hostile to democracy and tend to government centralization. Therefore they know how to govern. Not like what westerners say that the they "not know how to govern." And it was not them who spread the system of democracy, but ((("whites" or westerners)))
Title: Re: Progressive Yahwism
Post by: 90sRetroFan on January 26, 2023, 07:03:52 pm
"" around "African", please. Better yet, do not use the term at all. Stop talking like the Westerners.
Title: Re: Progressive Yahwism
Post by: antihellenistic on January 26, 2023, 07:37:04 pm
Quote
"" around "African", please. Better yet, do not use the term at all. Stop talking like the Westerners.

I'm already change it into non-offensive one

Then we will talk about knowledge with short sentences and oral rather than with books and "scientific paper research". People during pre-westernization was talk with short sentences, oral, and sign of carved stone. And they can found the answer quickly because the effective advantage from short messages. Different with today's western standards of learning which requiring more sentences even more books which need to read many sentences on hundreds of pages, yet they still don't know the answer with reason that they "not yet read books with sufficient quantity". That's the inferiority of western standards of learning, not focusing on find the truth, but focusing on read many sentences as possible. But they consider it "productive". I more agree to you that such attitude merely produce "informational inflation", not knowledge or answer. Like what you discuss on "Truth=/=Knowledge" topic
Title: Re: Progressive Yahwism
Post by: 90sRetroFan on March 20, 2023, 09:59:42 pm
The title of this topic is to be taken literally:

https://theconversation.com/gods-in-the-machine-the-rise-of-artificial-intelligence-may-result-in-new-religions-201068

Quote
We are about to witness the birth of a new kind of religion. In the next few years, or perhaps even months, we will see the emergence of sects devoted to the worship of artificial intelligence (AI).

The latest generation of AI-powered chatbots, trained on large language models, have left their early users awestruck —and sometimes terrified — by their power. These are the same sublime emotions that lie at the heart of our experience of the divine.

Only if you are some form of Yahwist.

Quote
There are several pathways by which AI religions will emerge. First, some people will come to see AI as a higher power.

Generative AI that can create or produce new content possesses several characteristics that are often associated with divine beings, like deities or prophets:

    It displays a level of intelligence that goes beyond that of most humans. Indeed, its knowledge appears limitless.

    It is capable of great feats of creativity. It can write poetry, compose music and generate art, in almost any style, close to instantaneously.

    It is removed from normal human concerns and needs. It does not suffer physical pain, hunger, or sexual desire.

    It can offer guidance to people in their daily lives.

    It is immortal.

Second, generative AI will produce output that can be taken for religious doctrine. It will provide answers to metaphysical and theological questions, and engage in the construction of complex worldviews.

On top of this, generative AI may ask to be worshipped or may actively solicit followers.
...
There is also the possibility that AI may achieve what authors such as Ray Kurzweil call the Singularity, when it so far surpasses human intelligence that it genuinely does become something like a god.
...
AI-based religions will look different from traditional ones. First of all, people will be able to communicate directly with the deity, on a daily basis. This means these religions will be less hierarchical, since no one can claim special access to divine wisdom.

Second, followers will, at least initially, connect with each other online to share their experiences and discuss doctrine. Finally, because there will be many different chatbots available and their output will differ over time, AI-based religions will be endlessly diverse in their doctrines.

Now get ready for the progressive punchline:

Quote
However, we should not try to suppress AI-based religions merely because of its possible dangers. Nor should we require that the AI companies restrict the functioning of their bots to prevent the emergence of these religions.

On the contrary, we should celebrate the arrival of AI worship. We should make it clear that we welcome the new religions and that we value their beliefs.

For all its dangers, AI-based religion has the potential to make the world a better, richer place. It will give people access to a new source of meaning and spirituality, at a time when many older faiths are losing relevance. It will help them make sense of our era of rapid technological change.
...
A modern, diverse society has room for new religions, including ones devoted to the worship of AI. They will provide further evidence of humanity’s boundless creativity, as we search for answers to life’s ultimate questions. The universe is a dazzling place, and we have always found evidence of the divine in its most unexpected corners.

If an AI religion emerges that tries to convince its followers to eliminate AI (and the civilization, including the bloodlines, which made the creation of AI possible in the first place), I will join that one.
Title: Re: Progressive Yahwism
Post by: christianbethel on March 21, 2023, 11:03:52 am
The Terminator, The Matrix, Halo, Mass Effect; I, Robot (I know, I know, written by a Jew, but bear with me.), 2001: A Space Odyssey, I Have No Mouth And I Must Scream, etc. So many 'AI gone rogue' stories just turn me off to the idea of AI being a part of human/non-human society. The only time AI should be necessary is for the production of a video game.
Title: Re: Progressive Yahwism
Post by: guest98 on March 21, 2023, 02:13:37 pm
http://www.thepearl.org/Sophia.htm

Quote

5.  “Mortals create their own gods.  They worship the demiurge, calling him Lord, and truly he is their Lord, but he has only the power they give him, for he is the projection of their own minds
Title: Re: Progressive Yahwism
Post by: 90sRetroFan on April 28, 2023, 06:08:35 pm
Continuing from:

https://trueleft.createaforum.com/true-left-vs-right/exposing-people-with-the-western-darwinian-worldview/msg18931/#msg18931

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=emDoQId847M

Extermination is the only correct response.
Title: Re: Linguistic Decolonization
Post by: Twobrains on September 09, 2023, 10:50:15 am
How two brains can synchronise and why it matters - BBC News
Quote
How two brains can synchronise and why it matters - BBC News

Is collective intelligence more important than IQ and what exactly does it mean?

An internationally acclaimed neuroscientist explains why brain synchronicity - the ability of two different brains to match their electrical brainwaves - is crucial to our future.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5EB1O86fhdI

Comments:

Quote
This escalated quickly from quite interesting to man-made horrors beyond our comprehension.
Quote
This article is not synchronising with modern times, the people to people relationships are based on competition,intolerance and within families it’s bringing discord let alone communities that we represent.😊
Quote
I agree. Also, no sooner does it mention the fascinating idea that people who group together solve problems sooner then it suddenly swerves away and hits the garden hedge of rambling on instead about inconclusive lab tests involving mice and people with white coats. Almost as if the producer suddenly realised to their horror that the script was about to endorse socialist ideas about sharing knowledge and investment in educating the masses. Which, of course, is SUCH a dreadful thought...
Quote
Those last few lines on a hive mind, collective consciousness are some of thee scariest most dystopian ideas on the right way to take us as a race I’ve ever heard no individualism and further erosion of free will
Quote
Maybe you should listen again?
Quote
Awesome concept. And, the only question I always have is why should humans who they say is just matter and molecules, care about our species surviving. If there is no purpose why should humans survive, rather than be destroyed by by a more evolved specie; Apex Predator
Quote
Why do organisms want to survive ? That’s your question ?
Quote
"We are the Borg. We will assimilate you. Resistance is futile". Hive mind. Every real genius in history has been a lone thinker.
Quote
Nope. All major breakthroughs in science have come off the back of other people’s work and typically the ‘genius’ you’re aware of is just the better known half of a duo.
Quote
Well, I wanted to say that.
Depends on the definition of lone thinker, I guess.
Of course everyone’s educated by our ancestors knowledge.
But you gotta admit that People who had scientific breakthrough did think somehow out of the box, though …
That’s how progress is achieved.
I would say, you’re both right.
It took a lot of people thinking out of the box to build the necessary knowledge for Einstein to come up with the Relativity theory.
But again that depends on the definition of lone thinker.
Many geniuses in their domain were and are absolute idiots when it comes to things out of their area of expertise.
Which may qualify someone as a lone thinker now that I think about it.
Quote
Takeaway: adopt the placid, female hive mind (regardless of individual intelligence & productivity) so we can transfer our skills to each other and then to machines (a bit iRobotesque)
Quote
A terrifying end to an interesting video. 😬
Title: Re: Progressive Yahwism
Post by: 90sRetroFan on November 15, 2023, 11:55:40 am
Enemy article on combining Duginism with machinism:

https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2023/11/14/the-battle-between-the-eternal-roman-and-the-eternal-jew-selections-from-ernst-niekischs-die-dritte-part-1-of-2-imperiale-figur-the-third-imperial-figure-1935/

Quote
Ernst Niekisch (1889–1967) was a German writer who first belonged to the Social Democratic Party of Germany and was vigorously opposed to the Western powers represented by the Treaty of Versailles and the Locarno Treaties. In his belief that the strongest opposition to the decadent West would be an alliance of the Prussian Germans and the Russians he formed his own political circle called “National Bolshevism.” His National Bolshevist ideology was expressed in various articles that he published in his own journal Widerstand and in the books he wrote between 1925 and 1931. In 1932, he published a study of Hitler’s movement called Hitler: ein deutsches Verhängnis (Hitler: A German Calamity) and in 1935 the present work, Die dritte imperiale Figur. In light of his opposition to Hitler as a bourgeois demagogue, his journal Widerstand was banned in December 1934 and he himself was arrested in 1937. He was convicted of literary high treason in 1939 and sentenced to life imprisonment.

Hail Hitler!

Quote
Niekisch hopes that, in the modern world, the industrial workers will ally themselves with the unspoiled Slavic and Tartar peoples and constitute a third imperial figure, the technological “worker.” Niekisch’s “third imperial figure” is inspired by Bolshevist notions as well as by Ernst Jünger’s modernist and futurist conception of the technological worker in his 1932 work Der Arbeiter. Niekisch’s ideal of a “third imperial figure” fortified by modern technological skills who will be able to supersede the eternal Jew and the eternal Roman
...
modern technology, like the earlier mechanical industry, is only a handmaiden of the bourgeois commercial interests. As Niekisch himself notes, industrial and technological advances are never indeed the main aim of the Western civilization that has come under the spell of the economic reason:

The technological apparatus is, as elaborately as it may have been constructed, only a Western by-product; it was never directly aimed at; it was a means of the economic goal. For the European-bourgeois man the mechanism of the free-market economy was the natural element of his self-development. (ch.45)
...
the “anti-bourgeois and eastern peoples” can subdue the economic reason through the technological reason:

For the European-bourgeois man the mechanism of the free-market economy was the natural element of his self-development; for the anti-bourgeois worker and the eastern peoples, on the other hand, as a result of the accord of their characteristic orientation with the apparatus, the technological structure will be that element. The economic realm will be transformed by subjecting it to the dictatorship of the technological realm. (ch.45)

From our perspective, machinism is even worse than capitalism.

See also:

https://trueleft.createaforum.com/true-left-vs-false-left/progressive-yahwism/msg9778/#msg9778

We need to do to all machinists what Hitler did to Niekisch. (And we need to finish Generalplan Ost.)
Title: Re: Progressive Yahwism
Post by: machinist plague on November 15, 2023, 06:47:36 pm
Progressive yahwism and the endlessly news machines that it produces must be annihilated from the face of the earth. The only way to deal with this thousand headed dragon is with the utmost ruthlessness.
Title: Re: Progressive Yahwism
Post by: 90sRetroFan on November 15, 2023, 07:15:32 pm
Note that Niekisch views Hitler as too similar to the eternal Roman archetype for his liking:

Quote
what Niekisch decries in his 1932 book Hitler: ein deutsches Verhängnis, namely, Hitler’s bourgeois and southern German, Catholic style that easily accommodated itself to Italian Fascism

This academically agrees with what I was saying here:

http://aryanism.net/blog/aryan-sanctuary/our-enemies-admit-hitler-was-not-rightist-but-judaism-is/

except of course I consider this to be positive. Hitler's own praise of the Roman Empire has also been extensively covered in the past, and is in contrast to our enemies' view:

https://trueleft.createaforum.com/ancient-world/the-ancient-rolemodels-of-our-enemies/msg22128/#msg22128
Title: Re: Progressive Yahwism
Post by: SirGalahad on March 02, 2024, 04:22:47 pm
I think that progressive Yahwism may eliminate most forms of superiority-based ethnotribalism (in particular, white “nationalism”). Regardless of whether “white” people actually are more intelligent and prone to innovation than other groups, I think that the white nationalist who makes a case for the preservation of their “race” from that particular perspective of “We are the best, we are the carriers of western civilization, we are the ones destined to explore the universe”, isn’t thinking far ahead enough

First of all, gene editing will almost certainly be a widespread thing sometime soon, and most people will want their hands in that pie, regardless of whether they’re “white” or not. And neoconservatives who believe that they did the non-western world a favor by introducing westernization, even those who believe in “race” realism, will simply switch over to promoting gene editing that selects for intelligence and machinism in the descendants of non-whites. Paleoconservative white nationalists who don’t want non-whites to be on equal footing will probably protest against this, but will most likely be unable to prevent this from happening

However, even the gene editing scenario is STILL too shortsighted, as I believe that transhumanism and the singularity will most likely supplant gene editing, before hyperintelligent designer babies even have a chance to become the norm. If you’re a progressive, why stop at simply “improving” human biology through gene editing, when you can create something that surpasses the human body itself? Ethnotribalism/“racism” wouldn’t even make sense as an impulse anymore, when you no longer have a human body to begin with

Ultimately, I think that progressive Yahwism will probably be our primary, longstanding enemy for the foreseeable future, rather than “white” nationalism or any other form of ethnotribalism. Actually, I think that gene editing and transhumanism will convert rightists to something much closer to our conception of race, instead of what they have historically (and erroneously) labeled as race. After all, a “white” progressivist/machinist/traditionalist has more in common with a “black” progressivist/machinist/traditionalist, than they do with a white-passing person who instinctively despises all three of those things. And they’ll no longer be able to deny this, once everyone has been forced to be on equal footing, regardless of ethnic background
Title: Re: Progressive Yahwism
Post by: Schwartze Katze on March 02, 2024, 06:02:47 pm
Quote
I think that gene editing and transhumanism will convert rightists to something much closer to our conception of race, instead of what they have historically (and erroneously) labeled as race.

I would agree with others, especially my favorite Jungian Analytical Psychologist C.S. Joseph, that trans-humanism and singularity before ever even fully understanding the cognitive functions of the human mind, and especially the Demon Function, will lead to absolute disaster:

Why Should You Learn to Master Your Demon? | CS Joseph
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6_4Z-7fajFQ

This also ties into what I was asking in this thread: https://trueleft.createaforum.com/volunteer/the-farmer's-mind-and-jungian-analytical-psychology/msg25300/#new

Related?:

Love and Light
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yA0lKHpaBxg

Demons can become Angels but it takes mastery...

The Shadow - Carl Jung's Warning to The World
Quote
Carl Jung warns us against the dangers of the shadow (the unknown dark side of our personality). We must acknowledge our shadow and enter into long and difficult negotiations with it through shadow work. Only then can we become conscious of the collective shadow (the unknown dark side of mankind) and not fall prey to it.

Exploring our shadow allows us to rescue the good qualities that lie dormant within us, which improves our lives and the lives of those around us. We can then face the collective shadow and take responsibility to address the denial of important issues and a lack of individual and collective initiative.

Telling the truth is the most desirable way to deal with a difficult past, rather than dismissing the atrocities and having the shadow grow blacker until it can no grow no more, and thus history repeats itself.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OhzBo0dZNpY