Question

... and please, keep in mind that this is coming from someone who is a royal count, with a very rich family history spanning centuries, from Italy, through Poland, Russia, and Ukraine, from someone who comes from a long history of very prominent and well known scientists, who's great*3-grandfather even has a giant portrait and permanent exhibit at the National Air and Space Museum in Washington DC ...

Why bother tracing one's lineage, whether through mothers or fathers, in the first place? What's so special about the dead people you came from?

  I stopped watching when he said "This is my video blog post for November fourteenth, two thousand seven." The man clearly has no grasp of the fourth dimension, how can he know about the tenth?

The Fourth Dimension –A Line Okay. The first three dimensions can be described with these words: “length, width, and depth”. What word can we assign to the fourth dimension? One answer would be, “duration”. If we think of ourselves as we were one minute ago, and then imagine ourselves as we are at this moment, the line we could draw from the “one-minute-ago version” to the “right now” version would be a line in the fourth dimension. If you were to see your body in the fourth dimension, you would be like a long undulating snake, with your embryonic self at one end and your deceased self at the other. But because we live from moment to moment in the third dimension, we are like our second dimensional Flatlanders. Just like that Flatlander who could only see two-dimensional cross-sections of objects from the dimension above, we as three-dimensional creatures can only see three-dimensional cross-sections of our fourth-dimensional self.

Conversely, I would rather find out if someone is has a prevalent rape culture, and have people's thoughts on it be in public, just in case there are some creeps I'd rather not associate with.

I'm irreducibly cismen. I've always said if you're not sure of your gender, take a look. Beyond what you find, you're not going to fool anyone, and what good iwould it be to try? Better to live to the full potential of the role  you're best equipped for.

Huh? I thought in this country parents decided on a child's name and surname, and the state only recorded the parents' decision?

If enough people in a community consider it a crime, it's a crime, regardless of whether there are governments or laws involved. Whether "crime" is the right word to use at that point is just a question of semantics. I don't like to use "immoral," because not everything considered "immoral" is unethical, and just saying "unethical" just doesn't have the same intensity of meaning. If you would prefer some other term for an act that a society, with or without government, considers extremely wrong and requiring restitution, let me know.

You do realize there's a precedent for male rape victims being sued for child support, right?

Anyways, I find your overall attitude sexist and disgusting.  If no one else, think about the baby.

Lol! I find this highly ironic. The forum is filled with Libertarians and Anarchists who want the whole world to be "self-moderated", yet the thought of a self-moderated Interwebs thread scares them. So they trust 'authority' more than they trust their peers, as long as the authority hasn't taxed/done anything bad to them yet? Out with the old, and in with the new!

TECSHARE used the wrong term. This topic isn't "self moderated," it's "OP moderated." Self moderated would be posters moderating, editing, and deleting their own posts. The "Libertarian and Anarchist" thing to do. OP moderated is that other thing.

This.

Meh. To me it seems 'gender' is genetic programming, literally. People can fight it, deify or idolize it, rely on it, belittle it, ignore it, accept it, and maybe even transcend it.

These are cultural issues, not political or economic ones. So there is no answer to the question of whether these crimes would be more or less prevalent in anarchy society v.s. statist society, dictatorship society v.s. democratic society, communist society v.s. capitalist society, etc.

Sorry to use that way overused meme, but I do not think that word means what you think it means. Either of those. Just so we don't go around in circles, instead of assuming that the rest of us have any clue as to what you are talking about, can you actually explain what you mean, without using words like "capitalism," "collectivism," and "matrilineal"?

...and I guess I have to make myself clearer.


I'm all against state and bureaucracy and stealing and enforced taxation, but I'm also tired of this typical US Libertarian rhetoric.

Socialism vs Market-radicalism is another of these false dichotomies.

Total world-wide equality and solidarity is an illusion, but non-corroding property rights at the individual level are an illusion as well. You need a state to enforce such property rights. If some rich ass owns an island on the other side of the world, it's just a piece of paper. And if he didn't even work hard for it, but inherited it like the friggin Queen of England, and people around that island have no space and starve, you can be sure they'll see it as their necessity and fair right to set a foot on this island. If they are civilized enough to know there's a paper that says someone owns that island at all in the first place, that is. They'll give a shit about any lex mercatoria.

From that perspective, property underlies the laws of entropy, just like anything in the universe.

Thus the concept of property only makes sense when there is a (military) force, mostly supplied by a state, behind it that can protect it.

So, again: property is just a piece of paper.

Say you own a piece of land with a house far away. What you're gonna do against squatters? Today, you'd call the police, right? Also supplied by the state.

And are these squatters just lazy bums and deserve it? No, maybe they're just from poor families, never could get proper education in Aynrandistan. They weren't lucky enough to be privileged and inherit land just like you. That's how social strains come about in the first place.

"Supplied by the state", but these forces can also be supplied by private organizations, you say? But what difference does it make to a state? That it's more "voluntary"? Also today you can vote with your feet. So the question is only about scale here.

Or, to put things in another way: If you (really) own some land, then you are the state of that land. And you're a dictator even at that. There's no essential difference between your idea of property and a state. Only about scale.

At the end of the day, without a state, you can only call property what you can defend yourself. Just how Max Stirner, an individualist anarchist puts it:

"Whoever knows how to take, to defend, the thing, to him belongs property."

This is much more logical than the US Libertarian view. And once you understand that, you'll see that a more co-operative and syndicalist way of self-organizing is just more rational and more economical.

I think you missed my point. Unless I misunderstood "matrilineal community" as still having specifically defined gender roles with the female being the dominant one as opposed to the male one we have now. I'm against the idea of gender roles.

10 million dollars of gold weights ~2760 lbs

"Information can not be destroyed" stops being a catchy phrase once you ask yourself "what do i mean?"  Then it turns into something trivial like "love can not be destroyed":  sure, you can stop loving, though the concept itself persists.  Just like you can forget something, or beat up a HD with a sledgehammer, and you'll no longer have access to that information.  If yours was the only copy, nno one else would have access to it either.  Is it destroyed?  Well, what are we talking about?
How can you kill that which does not live? BoooOOooOooOo

What about BITCOIN?

A self moderated topic in politics and society. This thread is going places.