https://www.royalroad.com/fiction/31409/aidan-alastair-series

The manifestation of souls as a quantum phenomenon is still fiction. It seems to be just another state of matter, like the convergence of matter into planets, stars and black holes.

[Freedom is like the ‘god game' simulations, and you make it as complex as you want, or even less complex. You can reset the board if you get bored.

All you have to do is become a desiring being. And to separate your consciousness into at least the world vs the soul.

However, it would be boring if it stopped there – the new child-like soul would have to have a friend or an enemy.]

“The opposite of a saint is the devil. You are the devil. You will have us ruined,” said the crowd.

“…” ‘This is just progress,’ I thought. “I think I’m right. You don’t need to hear my side.” ‘Wanna hear my side?’

“You are wrong,” said a man.

“I see,” I said.

“Fuck yourself,” he said. “Go back to prison!”

“Fuck off,” I replied.

***

At a brothel:

“Welcome to the brothel!”

“Hello,” I say.

“We are running a special program. I’ll ask you a couple of questions.”

“What is it about?”

“You’ll understand.”

“Go ahead.”

“Do you have insecurities about your height or size?”

“I don’t.”

“Do you have mommy issues or daddy issues? Or maybe you are clingy or reluctant to make a friend?”

“I’m an orphan.”

“Ahem. You don’t look like one. Maybe you only lost your parents when you were a young adult.”

“I’ll confess. I am not an orphan. I just like cherrypicking my business partners, and let me see... For my partnership with you and your subjects, I would like a mommy figure. The woman should fit the average package and by that, I mean my average package. If she’s a fluffy flowerhead, that’s good too. Shall I describe what I mean by average?”

“You are embarassing, dude,” said Benjamin.

“Give this fellow hero here a six-foot tomboy. She’ll serve his needs.”

“You’ll be left with no one, at this rate,” Benjamin cautioned. “Take the tomboy while you have the chance.”

I sighed. “You are right, Benjamin.” I faced the patroness. “Excuse me, ma’am. I have prior commitments.” I walked away.

“I am?” Benjamin echoed. He recovered his spirits. “Dear patroness, give me a thin woman with decent boobs.” He looked in front of himself in drunken stupor, before reflecting, “can’t wait.”

***

‘A tinkerbell, maybe?’ I thought. ‘Catherine’s not gonna be angry about that. Ambrosia would probably feel insulted though. Partners and friends work out fine.’ “Get your mind out of the gutters, Aidan,” I mumbled to myself.

As I walked, my hand touched someone. I tried pushing the person away, but then I decided against it. “Excuse me,” I said to the startled woman, as I tapped her shoulder lightly.

“Not a problem, honey.” She took a minute to register my face. “You are that caecus-afflicted demon!”

“I see I’m not a stranger to you.”

“Wanna give me baby demons?”

“I’m a hero, not a father.”

“I thought you were a man.”

“Maybe I’m better.”

“No, thank you.”

“Nice boobs,” I commented.

The prostitute looked at me, and departed.

Catherine joined me shortly. I looked at her breast area and kept my reaction to myself. “I’m not a prostitute,” she said, indignified.

I stopped walking. “You are not. You are just Catherine. Damn, I forgot to catch that prostitute’s name.”

Catherine was shocked. She kept her reaction to herself. “Not that I have anything against them. Why don’t you go back?” She crossed her arms and signaled with her head.

“I don’t care. Since I’m not a stud, I need an oiran. I need an intellectual courtesan.” I looked at my palms. "You are a good teammate, Catherine."

"I don't believe you for a second," Catherine said with a red face. She stomped away.

"I need good friends. Dalton and Catherine are good enough for now," I said to myself. (Author Note: Aidan is not gonna go rogue, if he can help it.)

An eunuch in a dress cozied up to a couple and gave his blessings to their kids. They gave him alms in return. “Good thing the goddess supports adopting productive foreign races. Recession is bad for business,” said an old man with a top hat, drinking beer at the open-air snack bar the couple had left from.

I walked on.My eyes grew dull with darkness. "I don't know if my antagonistic journey for you has a future, Ambrosia. You are the golden dragon that seems to have it all figured out." ‘I’ll keep sacrificing high-value time until there are only low-value times to sacrifice.’ I didn’t have to wait for recession. “I already have the conscription to save myself.”

‘You are a slave to the state,’ a thought in my head surfaced.

“I just have to become a sovereign subject, doing more than the average,” I said.

"You called?" asked Dalton. “I wanna own a castle too.”

'Damn. Now I have competition.' "It's not what you think," I said."Damn right, you are. I'll stick with what I think," he replied.

"Fair enough."

After some time, I said. "Maybe I should have taken that offer."

"What offer?"

"A brothel offer."

"I'm disappointed, man."

"Well, I'm not," I said. "Do you ever get obsessed by looks, by the way."

"Looks themselves? Well, maybe for an idol singer or something," Dalton bantered. "I'm just your typical tanker."

"Sounds gross. Looks only ever hit me twice, without wishful thinking. I am perplexed by the fact that it bypasses what a typical brothel could offer."

"Fucking simp."

"It's dialectical when you say it, Dalton." Dalton burst out laughing. "Without the infatuation development, you think the simp effect ever breaks?"

"Don't ask me."

"I should probably stop shittalking."

"You are a natural at it, bro. Didn't know you had it in you." That was probably why I had a chance of dishing it out with Catherine.

Meanwhile, Ambrosia was too good at her job. 'You would think I learned something.'

Silence slowly crept in. We reached the castle. In the castle garden, a man rested his head on a woman's lap.

'Who am I kidding? I didn't have the selflessness to listen to some of my mother's whims.' I was just a lonely statistical digit when I died in the real world. It was my choice.

I knew myself. I knew my path. I had to keep up the development.

As a writer, I thought of various ideal situations with a woman. Thinking about it echoed with me. Of course, if something did not exist in the first place, it would not endure. It was not a practical existence. The innocent woman was replaced by someone who was not an ideal.

Part of me was left off, back then.

It was like a fantasy I had no control over.

“Now, I don’t care,” I said, aloud. “I’ve made up my mind.”

***

“I don’t like the idea of being bound to duty to the Thesis empire,” I said.

“Are you dissatisfied?” inquired Ambrosia.

“Fundamentally, it doesn’t matter if I’m bound to a matriarchy or patriarchy. I don’t want a one-way liability relationship.”

“Believe me. I’m accountable to you. I’ve already proven I’m not your mother.”

“I believe you. That means there is room for negotiation.”

“I don’t know what you are talking about.”

“You chose to revive me. Thanks to that, I came to this world as a powerful black box. Why did you take the risk? Since then, I’ve staked my servitude into a moneyless ‘hero’ contract. What happens if I violate the contract?”

“Let’s just say I had the liberty to add a couple of oddities to my prospective hero list.”

“You lied about Elliot Brave, did you?”

“I didn’t. I would have revived a squad of soldiers if I could. Hero-summoning is a gamble, particularly if you increase the number of heroes to summon.”

“Where was I revived from?”

“From the eternal afterlife’s samsara of wandering,” Ambrosia said. “By samsara, I mean cyclical change.”

“Seems like there is a time lord to this eternal samsara.”

“A time lord? Now, that’s a strange concept.”

“I agree. It’s science fiction.” ‘Thankfully, I’m not gonna be replaced by a doppelganger in the real world’s timeline, because of personality, individualist darwinian development and crystallized intelligence, involving language.’

“Oh, that stuff in your world, huh?” Ambrosia said

I blinked. “Yes. Now, can you tell me what happens if I violate the contract?”

“You’ll lose my promised assistance to help you return back to your original world. You’ll stop being part of the Thesis nation’s blockchain. Depending on the circumstances, we may decide to hunt you down,” said Ambrosia, in a serious tone.

“Fair enough. What happens if you die?” I asked.

“Fides, one of the four divine beings of the upper world, will honor my contract with you. We gods and goddesses form part of the lower world. We are chosen from the race of divinity.”

“Woah, lore bomb. What if that divine being guy dies?”

“Fides and Caecus are both immortal. They are the primordial conciousnesses I share with the people and creatures of this land.”

“That demon lord was free of the curse of Caecus and Fides.”

“Well, that’s true,” Ambrosia said with a troubled look. “He simply chose to side with Caecus.”

“I see,” I said. “What’s Fides doing?”

“Fides is the opposite of entropy. She is an omnipotent being capable of sharing her consciousness with you. As the definition of a saint, she is healing her followers.”

“I see a connection here. I am Caecus-afflicted, very much like you. It is indeed the case that I’m an oddity.

“…”

“What happened was not something you expected,” I said.

“Hero Walter Stanford and many other heroes followed a similar path to you. Outside of the Thesis nation, there are dark kings. Each of them have their blockchain systems. It is an unsustainable mix of shadows and tyranny. That said, just like Fides, Caecus has his limits.”

“I hate the idea of white-pill cultists thinking they have the answer to Caecus. I want to be free.”

Ambrosia coughed. “I cannot allow that to be said.”

“Who joined your consciousness with Caecus and Fides?” I inquired.

“I’ve said enough for today.” Ambrosia looked sullen.

“I see. I have one request, if you don’t mind me saying. I want to study your political system.”

“We are at war, Aidan. The wise men's council already advise me on that. Bring your personal negotiations directly to me. For anything greater, you’ll have to earn it.”

“I understand, Ambrosia,” I said. ‘Having a voice is enough. Some don’t have it.’

“If you grow worried, earn marriage with one of my citizens.”

“That will leave you with a child or two to burden your economy with, after I’m gone in five years. I don’t have enough data to go in that direction.”

“I hear you. And I’m sorry.”

“That doesn’t bother me. I’m not an insecure Freudian hero. I just want to make a good deal.”

“Sounds like a trust issue. I hope that doesn’t increase your demon lord apprentice affinity.”

“We’ll see,” I smiled.

“That only fills me with anxiety,” Ambrosia said, touching her heart.

“I understand,” I said, touching my heart in turn. ‘Since it’s you, I am satisfied with the given opinion.’ “I’ll be going now,” I turned to leave. “Never mind. Join me for dinner. I’ll cook.”

Ambrosia looked at me with perplexion. “I’ll help out,” she said.

“Okay.”

“You are a dangerous oddity,” she commented.

“I would not flatter myself that much,” I said. Back in my world, I would not have afforded to waste money on that. As an office worker cum casual writer, who was twenty-seven years, I had been too insecure. “Why is your hair not white, by the way?”

“That was a one-time thing,” Ambrosia said. “I should inform you that pregnancy is a no-go for me.” She blushed.

“You predicted that far… Sounds like a deal. You can give me up to five years to clean up this mess,” I said.

“You can’t do it alone. Also, it doesn’t have to be me and you. You’ll find someone more available,” Ambrosia replied.

“I could say the same for myself. Don’t sweat it for now,” I said.

Ambrosia looked at my face. “Sure,” she said. I saw the distant look in her eyes.

“Can you join our campaigns?” I asked.

“Huh? Yeah, sure. I would probably get overworked though,” Ambrosia said in a hesitant voice.

“I’m getting a good salary. I would need to exploit resources to build houses during our expeditions though. We will eventually join armies, right?”

Ambrosia was flustered. “Yeah. Glad you are enthusiastic to help us,” she said. “Walter Stanford and the other heroes will be glad for that.”

“If I live, we can gradually arrange meetings to see them, one after the other,” I said.

“You seem… different,” she said.

“You are right,” I said. ‘Armies? I’m honestly going down that route?’ I looked down. “I changed my mind. The Thesis nation depends on your survival for now. Are you the only goddess?”

“For our side, yes.”

“What about the other side?” I asked.

“Souls of the old gods have been implanted into new divine vessels, from the race of divinity. These divine vessels have become the new gods. The implanting act is called transmigration.”

“Race of divinity, huh? Is there a place for that?”

“Yes.”

“So we have two routes. First one is to negotiate with the divine nation. Second one is to convert the new gods, one by one. Once these bear favorable results, you’ll become more expendable.”

“That sounds like you are trying to kill me,” Ambrosia said, with wry.

“Haha, let’s get cooking,” I said.

Ambrosia hugged herself. “I’ll get in the way, if I go berserk. Hero Linda will be mad at me.”

“You’ll die,” I concluded.

“It’s not just you,” she said.

‘I hate this kind of stuff.’ “What have the other heroes told you?” I asked.

“What would they want to tell me?” she asked.

“You enjoy babysitting?”

“Huh? I’m not gonna babysit you?!” Ambrosia said in an anxious voice.

“Well, get used to it.”

“You can’t be this selfish, Aidan!”

I took some steps towards the door. Ambrosia followed me. “Schema must have cooked at least a dozen babies. I don’t care who they belong to. Just ask to take care of them, once in a while.”

“You’ll come with me!” she shouted, embarrassed. I thought she was a natural at babies.

“I care about who the babies belong to. Can you still work with that?”

“...I’m sorry. Why the sudden idea, by the way?”

“Your Caecus affinity. I can fix that.” ‘I’m a writer.’

I was an atheist at heart. Being revived to be a 'hero' figure was synthetic to me. It was not a job. I was just a synthetic truthseeker in a matrix.

***

Support - 20.4.25 Update:

https://www.amazon.com/Aidan-Alastair-Darkness-Character-progression-ebook/dp/B09LRSK4FS/?_encoding=UTF8&ref_=pd_gw_ci_mcx_mr_hp_atf_m

Chapter links:

(That’s a lie – a womb)

Lilas Ikuta – Hyakka Ryouran:

[ [I am in support of either a minarchy or democratic anarcho-corporatocracy.] ]

#: I’m in favor of democratic anarcho-corporatocracy, with use of Dispute Resolution Organizations and private charity, and, in particular, in favor of company-forking instead of non-compete agreements. I am tax-resistant, as an ‘anarcho’-corporatocrat. You will learn about anarcho-corporatocracy, anarchy and, briefly, other political theories.

->Class can be determined by wealth, but merit is determined by abilities solely. Being a meritocrat is better than being a classist in my individual opinion. On a governance scale, citizens or employees may be the ones to decide that.

Compared to a meritocrat, that is, a person who has authority allegedly based on ability, a technocrat is an individual who makes decisions based solely on technical information and not personal or public opinion. A technocratic oligarchy is about dictatorship, and almost the same can be said of a meritocratic oligarchy, while electing company CEOs gives employees a chance to moderate their amoral corporate legislations.

By the way, I think algorithms might inform decision-making, but I don’t support algocracy, that is, governance by algorithms, particularly if it is imposed, non-open-source algorithms, as in the case of China, and its social credit system being used to make important decisions about individual citizens, most likely without recourse to the court to contest the decision.

Argument against voluntaryism: I don’t support the pacifism/non-aggression of voluntaryism (Auberon Herbert rejects anarchy when it comes to enforcing laws), because I believe that:

1. In the case of anarcho-capitalism, Dispute Resolution Organizations (DROs), such as paralegal (arbitration) and paramilitary (defense agencies) companies, while bound to companies and individuals through contracts and market shares, should be able to enforce protection of the agreed contractual sets of laws through punishment via common hivemind moral legislations, or based on contracts. I don’t believe in non-physical violence, like ‘shame’, ‘blackmail’ (in particular), and ‘social isolation’. These ‘non-physical forms of violence’ – social isolation, as relevant – are just similar to social hot takes like ‘ghosting’ and ‘stonewalling’. The hivemind is essentially groupthink, a ‘mob rule’, a double-edged sword that defeats the purpose of anarchy in terms of individualism (reference to abolitionist David Henri Thoreau’s work ‘Civil Disobedience’). Non-physical violence simply enforces a state of non-coexistence, like banshees screaming ‘bad’. There is no originality to it. It’s just like the medieval act of stone-throwing enacted by the Romans and the church. For better or worse, force should be prioritized, as in the case of agreed competition to determine punishment outside of the hivemind, as an individual to individual dealing.

2. In the case of minarchy, negative liberty – negative liberty, as in: the absence of obstacles, barriers, or constraints on actions, on the condition that the individual is lawful by, for example, not committing murder and not enslaving people – is the hallmark of self-defense, whether through martial arts or being armed by objects like guns. Population coercion is also ideally guarded against by the state’s army, although the caveat is that private companies and individual civilians can also help defend people, or defend themselves. The threat of civil war maintains civil liberty.

Anarcho-corporatocracy:

What we are actually looking at, is companies, and learning environments within all companies to prevent statism.

I do not promote corporatocracy’s rigidity. I admit that statism exists in the corporate world, as it does in public institutes. So, we need to elect the right people for making decisions in a company. If someone does not agree, he should have the freedom to ‘fork’ a new company from the main company, just like programmers do with software applications; the traditional non-compete agreements hamper progress. Getting the best deals comes from the ability to support bids – for example, companies bidding on who can make the best roads at the best price. An online page where people vote for the bids assumes people are intellectually well-informed about each and every bid – having representatives may be more practical in the short term. There is probably little much better mechanism to that than the Compound Protocol that I have seen some degree of potential in.

Explanation of how a Protocol could work to choose representatives (ideally, technocrats) to bid, grounded in the original use of the Compound Protocol:

Policies based on monetization of representants’ value (instead of moneyless votes), as done during the Compound protocol – or any new protocol – in some crypto social media arbitration systems, means that it’s like an auction, where the highest bidder highlights the ‘most promising’ individual representative to invest in. Then, respecting the assigned values given to each representative, the people who are users of the system get to vote the top-invested representatives, although there could be some other, grassroots or dark horse candidate earning the people’s votes, as long as said candidate forms part of the system, and has a platform, as a minimum. Let’s be real, though. Paupers, both in personal value and assigned value, rarely get to become people’s representatives, unless they are mounting a rebellion. When it comes to arbitration of corporate bills, each individual representative’s vote counts as having the same value.

Therefore, representatives are elected based on proof of weight (PoW, crypto term), among other proof types suitable (proof of designation), and this makes for a more dynamic economy of politicians and corporate managers, who can easily be downvalued if they don’t perform well. For example, the value of followers to a politician is what ‘X’ platform, owned by Elon Musk, represents. Money is used in guise of merit and replaces identity politics. Black-box money-investment in politicians – compared to disclosure of how politicians spend the money, as in the case of the United States – is how politics has been done through donations and inside privileges; it’s the reality.

[Spoiler: The congress can be replaced by the organic hivemind. Clearly, crypto smart contracts could be examples of corporate legislation consented to, if used by the corporation. Settling disputes via contracts with Dispute Resolution Organizations becomes a necessity between clashing hiveminds.]

Anarcho-corporatocracy: A better legislative branch or the hivemind?

“If I can pick DRO A over DRO B, the state isn’t the sole arbiter of violence; the market is. Even if the state contracts DROs, it’s not wielding force directly—it’s a client, not a sovereign.”

A necessity to anarcho-corporatocracy: separate DROs from corporations. I mean to say that DROs will replace government’s executive and judicial branches. Paralegal DROs (used by Ebay and Paypal privately) should be held as private ‘temples’/courts of law with negative liberty enshrined at best, through prior hardlined crypto-staking (e.g. anti-slavery) – the Cardano blockchain or the Ethereum blockchain comes to mind as intrinsic decentralized platforms on which to perform amoral corporate legislation and private legislative duties, based on the premise that, once tied to the blockchain, the private legislation (Scroll down for an example of private legislation to get what I’m talking about.) becomes immutable and difficult to alter or remove without consensus from the entire network. (One blockchain per belief group, another blockchain for corporate legislation)

Corporatocratic representatives and corponauts (see below #-note) will have to debate laws – in the same way as engaged in the proposal and consequent funding of projects to integrate on the Cardano blockchain (Project Catalyst Cardano, kind of like the Kickstarter site) – such that it becomes ‘corporatocratic representatives and corponauts having a common platform (‘Corporate + Private-Laws (for use of private-legislation DRO) Catalyst’ platform?) to be engaged in the proposal and consequent funding of [private laws] to integrate on, for example, the Cardano blockchain, although the private laws must be put to vote, as a final call, by solely the elected blockchain representatives’

#Corponauts, based on Grok 3’s suggestion: Combines “corporate” with “-naut” (from Greek “nautes,” meaning sailor or navigator, as in “astronaut”). Suggests someone navigating or living within the corporate world, perhaps with an active or exploratory role.

Among legislative (deciding of laws), executive (military/police force) and judicial (court) branches, I see [paramilitary DROs] as enforcing laws and [paralegal DROs] (Distinctive from social media moderation) protecting due process, private laws and amoral corporate legislation. (Hard science education is amoral. Land disputes are amoral and clearly require authority. So at least some use of military is required, from both sides. ) The legislative branch is tricky – it cannot be autonomous or have a monopoly over the authorization of use of physical force.

If congress – the legislative branch – prevents pure ‘anarcho’-corporatocracy, we can just decentralize the congress’s legislative power.

Definition of a ‘state’, according to Max Weber:

“In his lecture “Politics as a Vocation” (1918), the German sociologist Max Weber defines the state as a “human community that (successfully) claims the monopoly of the legitimate use of physical force within a given territory.” Under feudalism, no lords, including the king, could claim a monopoly over the use of violence, since their vassals promised to serve them but remained free to exercise power in their fiefdoms.” (Munro, 2013)

The state is deemed to be the only actor that can legitimately authorize the use of physical force, within a given territory; the state deals with legislations that authorize use of physical force, depending on the situation.

Just like the 50 US states have major autonomy in the US federation, the fiefdoms in a feudal system have significant autonomy, unless, in the case of federations, martial law, and in the case of fiefs, wars.

I’m thinking of ‘anarcho-legislation’ – abolition of public legislation. However, we don’t need anarcho-legislation in the case of amoral legislation (hard-science education; land disputes are amoral and clearly require authority The damage calculation on land infringement is also objective. So at least some use of military is required. Clearly, murder during land disputes is a moral issue. and therefore, a ‘private legislation’.)

Maybe, you have heard of [private legislation]:

Examples of private legislation include grants of citizenship to individuals who are otherwise ineligible for normal visa processing, alleviation of tax liabilities, armed services decorations, and veteran benefits.

Now, with anarcho-legislation (differing private legislations for moral crimes), It might sound like I’m inviting chaos. But honestly, that’s what anti-state anarchy means.

Explanation: I am basing myself off a hybrid model of legislation, based on whether a person subscribes to a ‘unique’ belief – yes, belief. If the Freudian life instinct means coexistence, even with criminals, the Freudian death instinct means non-coexistence with said criminals.

If the legislations match up, when inter-belief group violence occurs, that’s just synchronicity at play – although, I’m not a believer. I don’t believe in absolute laws, with the exception of slavery and voluntary homicide – related laws can be hardlined through massive crypto-staking in the different private legislative blockchain platforms.

Each blockchain represents one private legislation. Obviously, the number of legislations will have to be strictly curated by a private managing body, to prevent duplicate legislations, with recourse to a paralegal DRO to dispute duplicate claims. There must be a hard limit on the number of private legislative bodies. Settling disputes via contracts with Dispute Resolution Organizations becomes a necessity between clashing private legislations (as much as hiveminds). Either way, the most absurd legislations exist in the world:

Napping in a Cheese Factory in Illinois: It is illegal to take a nap in a cheese factory in Illinois, though the law is more about maintaining hygiene in food production facilities.

Culinary Programs in Illinois: Individuals under 21 can handle and serve alcohol as part of their employment in establishments with a valid liquor license, specifically for educational purposes in culinary programs.

There is no such thing as cosmo-legislation. (a comparison to ‘cosmopolitanism’).

I’m confident that the Freudian death instinct/selfishness and life instinct/selflessness will clash, particularly when it comes to death penalties over moral crimes.

Examples of ‘moral crimes’: 1) Slavery, 2) homicide, 3) rape, 4) abortion, 5) Drug-trafficking (especially hard drugs) 6) Domestic violence 7) Censorship

The reference is point (7), of my below-linked blog post, with the sub-title ‘7. Morality is not just about being ethical or not being ethical and instead relies on life instinct (coexistence) and death instinct (non-coexistence).’.

https://harishkgujudhur.wordpress.com/2025/02/13/here-is-to-naivety/

[Reiteration of the ‘spoiler’]:

The congress can be replaced by the organic hivemind.

Settling disputes via contracts with Dispute Resolution Organizations becomes a necessity between clashing hiveminds. Mutual paramilitary recourse – threat of violence – is required for a fair trial of the accused.

“An online page where people vote for the bids assumes people are intellectually well-informed about each and every bid” – the case for the hivemind is that individuals will have to obligatorily be ‘well-informed’ when it comes to, rather than bids, moral legislations, when forming a contract to associate with the hivemind, instead of relying on representatives.

Unless the contract of ‘ethical law’ is commodified, much like you pay for a good waiter, or get employed as a good waiter, anarchy cannot work. Conscience is the sole reason anything huge (e.g. a congress) or global gets created.

Distinct hiveminds and decentralized corporate legislations (e.g. maid cafes & butler cafes within a corporate facility) can cater to the question of ethical law. Corponauts can finance their own private prison system, using the anonymity of cryptocurrency, including for rehabilitation purposes if motivated and funded enough.

The argument against the organic hivemind? Mob rule.

Counter-measure to mob rule:

1. physical force as a final resort – only after contractual agreements fail. DROs could enforce pre-signed escalation clauses in contracts between individuals and companies. These clauses would outline specific steps (e.g., mediation, arbitration, or asset forfeiture) to resolve disputes before any violence becomes necessary.

2. Mumbo-jumbo hiveminds focusing on intolerance and purity spirals should be avoided.

What’s left to discuss is executive power:

In the US context, the power of executive orders lies in the hands of the president.

According to Grok 3 (March 2025):

[Executive orders (EOs) are directives issued by the President to manage the executive branch or implement laws. They’re practically necessary because:

• Speed of Action: Congress moves slowly—legislation can take months or years, bogged down by debate or gridlock. EOs allow rapid responses to emergencies or pressing needs. For example, EO 14042 (2021) mandated COVID-19 vaccinations for federal contractors during a public health crisis, bypassing legislative delays.

• Administrative Management: The President oversees a sprawling bureaucracy (e.g., over 4 million federal employees). EOs streamline operations—like EO 13583 (2011), which promoted diversity in federal hiring—without needing micromanagement from Congress.

• Filling Gaps: Laws often lack detail. EOs clarify implementation, as with EO 13636 (2013), which bolstered cybersecurity standards under existing statutes. Without EOs, the executive branch would be paralyzed, waiting for Congress to address every operational tweak or crisis—a recipe for inefficiency in a fast-moving world.]

Clearly, the executive power, in the case of amoral issues, lies with the corporatocratic representatives – except that executive power in anarchy with DROs cannot enforce vaccine mandates, and instead risks voluntary dissociation. The corporatocratic body has its recourse to paramilitary bodies; the corponauts have their own private recourse to paramilitary DROs. Either party may or may not choose to protect the other one, depending on the contracts they signed together. [si vis pacem para bellum: “If you want peace, prepare for war.”]

Then, we come to this executive order example:

“Executive Order 13873(US): This order declared a national emergency to address the threat to the information and communications technology and services supply chain, aiming to secure and protect the United States from potential threats.”

As a corponaut, such an order would apply more to your professional life, rather than your private life. We have to choose between an oligarchy and a Chief Executive Officer (CEO)/technocratic leader. In the spirit of efficiency, decentralized executive leaders (no sovereignty, compared to statehood) – leaders with executive power over specific domains of business – makes sense. The executive body should be limited, for the sake of efficiency, and based on democratic voting.

We have established democracy (and anarchy). Next is political identity:

• In an anarcho-corporatocracy, there is only one economic-political identity at corporate level – that of the ‘anarcho’-corporatocrat; no corporate tax (To prevent monopoly, non-corporate socialist communes may be accepted.)

• At the individual level, you are either an anarcho-capitalist (no individual tax) or a capitalist.

[Moral assertion: 'Taxation is theft'/'taxing people is good for the welfare'. The hivemind decides whether it wants anarcho-capitalism or capitalism at the individual level, compared to the corporate level (anarcho-corporatocracy).

Real estate agencies handle private property.]

• We can have different moral-political identities, clashing with the moral-political identity of the corporation. I believe in the non-monopoly resilience of capitalism, that is, competition (Notes on vulture capitalism further below).

I say companies, but it might actually end up like a multi-corporate-guild system, due to automation trimming down the jobs available. However, we should be careful when it comes to actual ‘conglomerates’, rather than thinned-out corporations.

Corporation: A corporation is a legal entity that is separate and distinct from its owners. Under the law, corporations possess many of the same rights and responsibilities as individuals. They can enter into contracts, loan and borrow money, sue and be sued, hire employees, own assets, and pay taxes.

Conglomerate: A conglomerate is a type of multi-industry company that consists of several different and unrelated business entities that operate in various industries.

In an ideal anarchy,

1. Traditional banking corporation is replaced by Decentralized Finance (DeFi) platforms, which use blockchain technology and smart contracts

2. Big Tech is replaced by decentralized search engines, decentralized email services, and a choice of front-end social networks vs. self-hosting.

3. Big pharma is replaced by explicit private interests, even if it comes down to favoring natural food, as in the case of activist Vani Hari.

4. Centralized education is replaced by decentralized private nodes/companies.

5. Automation becomes a liability that requires decentralization. Either automation hampers workers’ contributions by dominating production lines, or automation hampers creativity, as in, for example AI artwork, and dominates more complex work, like coding or operating a hospital/clinic patient.

Here’s a interpretive definition:

[Positive] – Vulture capitalism is the pumping of money into any dying company to revive it, possibly resorting to cutting back on costs and even having layoffs of employees for the revival goal.

[Negative] – Vulture capitalism is also the stripping of the chosen company naked, and selling it off to turn over a profit. Interest rates for pumping money into the company are usually high enough to warrant for quite some disapproval. Compared to the [Negative] definition of vulture capitalism, venture capitalism is more about the prosperity of the companies, and giving a kick-off to promising new investments, among others. (Liberto, 2020)

I think it is better that [Negative] vulture capitalism or [Negative] vulture culturalism do no perpetrate themselves. Certainly, capital-on-(new) capital terror should not perpetrate itself, nor should culture-on-(new) culture terror perpetrate itself. It is for new religions, if ever, and new companies. Suppressing an emerging, non-offensive ideology, is foolishness, than competing ethically with it.

Argument for anarcho-corporatocracy, with hiveminds:

Affiliation, where companies are already morally political – but without the moral legislative power – in an overt fashion (and they currently are), is only a natural progression to prevent gaming of a political system.

Workers’ rights is a byword for political affiliations, in many urban areas; private corporations often may miss out if they don’t get involved – they finance both parties of any election, often having their own interests at heart. Employees, having the same interests as their overhead company, vote accordingly. The common private individual is more concerned about the politics of his own company.

That’s why anarcho-corporatocracy is a good political alternative.

Point 1 about politics: The support of governments or, in the case of democratic anarcho-corporatocracy, companies, is inevitable when following job prospects and incentives. Often, employment is basically political, but since that political aspect is already informally conducted, and provided that the chances of a government employing you is already based on political backing, actually decentralising politically-motivated employment is a viable exploration. Best case scenario, decentralization deradicalizes the nature of politics.

Point 2 about politics: At first glance, the abolition of the federal reserve of any country is a daydream, since crypto-staking follows the same principle for currency valuation as does the federal reserve, governments being replaced by companies. The only cases where we currently don’t need federal reserves, which control fiat currency (government-issued money not backed by gold or silver) valuation, are the gold standard and the cryptocurrency system, as in the case of Bitcoin.

Essentially:

Corporate-affiliation identity: individual identity represented by 1) Corporations with corporate amoral stance and legislations, then 2) moral political stances, without moral legislation (‘toothless’ congress). Corporations can fork, without non-compete agreements in place.

Hiveminds-affiliation identity: individual identity represented by 1) hiveminds with hiveminds moral political stance, with moral legislation (hivemind replacing congress) 2) No corporate amoral stance.

Corporate representatives: People who are voted to represent corporate stances and to vote for corporate amoral bills, without the ability to vote for moral legislation. A higher-level portion of the corporate representatives are endowed with amoral executive powers, decentralized across domains (CFO, CEO, CIO, for e.g.). Moral conflicts between corporate representatives and other corponauts become a hivemind issue, requiring corresponding hivemind DROs.

Individuals: Primary – Corponauts 1) who create new corporations & vote for/get voted as corporate representatives 2) form smart contracts over moral legislation with group of people, as to form hiveminds, or form contracts with existing hiveminds. Corponauts are free to leave or join 1) corporations 2)hiveminds. Secondary – Clients 1) anarcho-capitalists who don’t form part of corporations and haven’t joined any hivemind 2) Socialists who form part of socialist communes and do business with anarchists/corporations.

Freethinkers: Potentially sovereign entities that philosophize about what’s moral and what’s amoral; they don’t distinguish between moral and immoral. (Contrasts with Plato’s idea of the philosopher-king, compared to a modern constitutional republic)

About anarchy:

DISCLAIMER: Self-worth is not the same thing as authority. That’s why slavery was abolished, another reason being the desire to coexist.

People dislike the lack of allowed Random Number Generation (RNG: ‘luck element’) in consumerism, the cause of which is monopoly/stasis, when it comes to capital enterprises and cultural projects. By the same token, total anarchy is bullshit RNG, based on the altruism of anarcho-communists or acquisition by power by the same people. As for anarcho-capitalists, most of them might be more violent, as you might see in the corresponding section of this blog post. RNG is what freedom allows for.

The free market could become a lie, replaced by mercantilism. Mercantilism, under which any system of power works, is ideally flexible. Mercantilism is a process of selection and alliances, based on what the culture or capital needs. Mercantilism seeks to maximize the accumulation of resources within the country and to use those resources for one-sided trade. At the micro-level, different towns and merchant companies create profitable alliances to keep the trade in their favor. I guess it’s called ‘stockpiling’.

When it comes to RNG, that is luck, being seen as a healthy property of capitalism, it can be said that a gambler of the stocks market is a capitalist. That said, gamblers can be codependents of the system, and ruthless abusers at worst, in the spirit of vulture capitalism stripping down a company. Unlike with socialism, at least the risks are decentralized

In Karl Williams’s ‘Social justice in Australia’, a Georgist kept asking some land baron how the baron and his ancestors, ad infinitum, got their land. After saying a good deal of ‘he bought it for good money’, the baron says the original land-possessing ancestor won it in a fight. The Georgist says that he would now fight the baron to get that land the same way. (isocr, 2012) It’s basically about claiming land whenever there is no defense.

Hippolyte Havel (1932) is also cited, this time in the comment section, about how ‘it (the act of offering oneself up for sale ‘of one’s own free will’) is ironically called ‘free competition; but behind every miserable free competitor stand want, hunger and anxiety, more effective and compelling than the slave driver’s whip.”

That was from an article on defining anarchism as distinct from voluntaryism. Given what it says, what happens when a universal basic income prevents every free competitor from being miserable? Maybe the free competitor is just happier. I would say that actually possessing a share in an automation index public stock which can be traded for various things, like territory, and such, can be viable, while skipping the hassle of having to kill each other or having to accept loss merely due to lack of defense, and to instead devote one’s time to research if one wants.

On the other side of this isocr publisher, there’s Doug Casey. Casey (2020) does not believe that anyone has a right to initiate violence against anyone else. Since government is institutionalised violence, it should apparently do nothing but protect people in its territory from physical coercion. Casey explicitly says that it implies a police force to protect a citizen of the government, from coercion within its boundaries, an army to, also, protect you from coercion threats from outside its boundaries, and a court system to allow you to resolve disputes peacefully.

Collins (2014) says ancoms and ancaps should both become voluntaryists, for whatever the reason he thinks voluntaryism will work. Collins sees ancaps as folks trying to justify force, and he sees ancoms (anarcho-communists) as folks trying to justify brute force to take over factories or other means of production; ancoms jump onto inefficient people’s means of production.

For justification of violence by anarcho-capitalists, Collins says they categorise these as non-physical – shame, blackmail, initiatory ostracism/isolation – and physical – aggression, force and violence. Let’s hope there’s a difference between physical and non-physical force in the minds of many anarchists. Collins mentions DROs (Dispute Resolution Organizations) as voluntarily used, staying out of violence, unless self-defense is required. Being armed through DROs, or guns, as the law allows it, is a necessity, rather than a voluntary action. Schools should have armed security to hamper school shooters/aggressors.

[Other political explorations]:

Nazism, according to Britannica encyclopedia:

“Nazism. or National Socialism, was a totalitarian movement led by Adolf Hitler, head of the Nazi Party in Germany. It shared elements with Italian fascism, such as intense nationalism and dictatorial rule, but was more extreme in its ideology and practices. Nazism emphasized the will of a charismatic dictator as the sole source of inspiration and aimed to annihilate perceived enemies of the Aryan race.”

The Nazism definition is not available on iq.wiki, as of 13.03.25. The definition might change. The wikipedia definition on Nazism has certainly changed as the theory, on what Nazism entailed, evolved. The Nazi Party was officially known as the National Socialist German Workers’ Party (NSDAP).

If there are upper classes and lower classes, by race, it becomes national socialism, which essentially means that you stay in your race-class, unless you are promoted. The Jews were regarded as bankers, and robbers as such.

How can totalitarianism be implemented? By power, in Richard Dawkins style, if that makes more sense. If not brawns and brains, if not capital, if not racism, then purity. What identity politics achieves is the decentralization of dictators, by race and gender, for instance. The purity spiral is a good take. “A purity spiral is a sociological theory which argues for the existence of a form of groupthink in which it becomes more beneficial to hold certain views than to not hold them, and more extreme views are rewarded while expressing doubt, nuance, or moderation is punished”. Unless you are an inhuman ‘other’ (that is, ‘law’), or god, ‘social justice’ will crush you. The prerequisite for this form of power-wielding to function is ‘I am special and you are special in being ‘wrong’. So, both of us should be miserable.’ The perpetrator is troubled, but is not as unfortunate as the victim.

The economy of meaning is class-based; each class is presupposed to hold certain ideas on a pedestal, That’s why author Charles Dickens is relevant. He wrote about the reality of the working class. He did not do a biography of some Louis XX or the like. Dickens even wrote ‘Great Expectations’ (1861), a novel that defies classism by making inter-class connections. It is thought that mostly the rich people and the orthodox are capitalist-leaning in terms of ideas. Does that remain true in today’s world? Isn’t it instead much more acceptable that, after ditching aristocracy, a preference for lofty coexistence, owing to comfort, has been achieved? Certainly, it’s not bad that slavery and racism have been mostly ditched. The rest is a matter of temperament.

Dickens (Kirschner, p. 774) uses fairy-tale imagery in ‘Hard Times’, apparently to attack education aimed at grooming the poor to serve the rich. Dickens likely would not want education which grooms the poor to serve the more powerful government officials either, than just the rich. Dickens probably would support school choice.

Classes are the natural consequence of economic freedom.

Freedom cannot exist without order – it’s down right to the atoms; if there are no black holes at one extreme, there is no reason to label empty spaces as vacuums. Therefore, pure anarchy cannot exist, since it would negate the existence of communities necessary for ‘free development and learning’. Neither can pure statism exist.

When it comes to anti-communism, Nazism might seem to be an example, until you examine its finer details:

“Even the mightiest concerns were denied the right to set up new fields of business in areas where the highest profits were to be expected, or to interrupt a production where it became unprofitable. These rights were transferred in their entirety to the ruling groups. The compromise between the groups in power initially determined the extent and direction of the production process. Faced with such a decision, the title of ownership is powerless…” (Zitelman, 2022)

Nazism had private ownership. However, this privatization was applied within a framework of increasing state control over the economy through regulation and political interference, as you can tell from the Zitelman quote.

I don’t think anyone should be prohibited from trying to buy company stocks, or from trying to sell his own company’s stocks. What’s important is the right to establish a means of production.

I don’t know what to do about scarce resources, like petroleum, when it comes to the tragedy of the commons.

1 – Thomas’s (2020) view on fascism:

Thomas (2020) notes the incumbency of corporate collectivism. He quotes Mussolini as follows. “Fascism should more appropriately be called corporatism and it is the merger of corporate and government power.” Thomas situates collectivism, big time, on the other hand, from since the introduction of the Revenue Act and Federal Reserve Act in 1913, by President Woodrow Wilson. The Federal Reserve is owned by the larger US banks, which gives them the power to control the currency of the US.

Thomas notes that governmental regulation has diminished the ‘free market’, diminishing opportunities for the average American. Prior to this evening-out at close to rock-bottom poverty, collectivism will, according to Thomas, share the wealth of the rich with the poor, in return for capturing their freedom.

There is a problem with the power-balance/merger between corporation and government. The current definition of ‘limited liability company’ as corporation is not to be confused with [Mussolini’s corporation].

2 - Quoted directly from Bier (2013):

““Corporations” were not individual businesses. Under fascist corporatism, sectors of the economy were divided into corporate groups, whose activities and interactions were managed and coordinated by the government. The idea was to split the difference between socialism and laissez faire capitalism, letting the state control and direct the economy from the top-down without itself owning the means of production.

The National Council of Corporations was the government body in charge of managing Italy’s economy, and membership included representatives from labor unions, employers, public sector workers, government ministries, and social groups. Special committees would plan the technical details of specific policies. At its inauguration, Mussolini stated, “The [NCC] is to the Italian economy what the Chief of Staff is to the Army: the thinking brain that prepares and coordinates.”

The idea was that this body would negotiate contracts and centrally plan production throughout the economy, regulating the sectors of art, industry, agriculture, trade, comm-unication, transportation, and finance

…The system was not about welfare for private companies, but rather about totalitarian central planning of the whole economy through legislation and regulation. Corporatism meant formally “incorporating” divergent interests under the state, which would resolve their differences through regulatory mechanisms.”

It is intellectual laziness to dismiss corporatocracy as ‘corporatism’ – the assimilation of corporate power into government power. The relationship is as below diagram:

As you may infer from the quote taken from Bier (2013), the army does not own economic corporate groups; leaders of the corporatism section have private ownership.

Grok 3:

“In Mussolini’s Italy, private ownership of businesses and industries was not abolished. Many companies remained in private hands, and industrialists, landowners, and business owners formally retained ownership of their enterprises.

For example, major Italian companies like Fiat (automobiles) and Montecatini (chemicals) were privately owned during Mussolini’s regime. These companies operated within the corporate groups that represented their respective economic sectors (e.g., the automobile sector or chemical sector), but their owners retained formal ownership.

However, this ownership was heavily constrained by the state. The National Council of Corporations ensured that private owners within these corporate groups operated in alignment with fascist goals, as the state had divided these sectors into monopolies under corporatism.”

In the absence of governments, corporatocracy would effectively be the concentration of power into the hands of a small number of people (an oligarchy), who respectively control corporate upper echelons, but without the omniscient presence of governmental regulations imposed on all the corporations. If you want a concrete example of corporate oligarchy (except that the government is still in the picture), look to Russia.

Let’s look at corporatocracy.

Corporatocracy: Corporatocracy or corpocracy is an economic, political and judicial system controlled or influenced by business corporations or corporate interests. (Wikipedia, 2025)

Brave Search Engine AI: “The Russian oligarchs gained control of substantial portions of the Russian economy, particularly in the energy, metals, and natural resources sectors, following the privatization of state-owned assets after the dissolution of the Soviet Union. The Russian oligarchs maintain close ties with Russian government officials, especially the president…” However you flip it, Russia shares traits with fascist regimes, although it is argued that Russia is an authoritarian regime.

Well, I’m just making a case for corporatocratic oligarchy. For better or worse, it’s the modern aristocratic system. If you have ever played Genshin Impact, an anime-style RPG game, you would come to Liyue, a fantasy rendition of China, but under the lens of oligarchy.

My end-goal is to consider anarcho-corporatocracy in favor of anarcho-capitalism. There is still the problem of welfare; how will the poor people, children, sick people and old people fit in? It requires a practical solution that does not involve the state. Clearly, Sweden, a welfare ‘state’, is not the best example of capitalism’s private-health-insurance use, despite not being a democratic socialist country (Article on Sweden – Zitelmann, 2019). Rather than being left to starve to death or to bare minimums (AnCorp avatar in this political meme page), I believe in safety nets initiated by private companies offering family insurance and private ‘charity’, in the form of automation dividends by companies.

Brave Search Engine AI: ” Anarcho-capitalists advocate for the abolition of the state and its functions, including welfare programs, arguing that such programs are coercive and interfere with individual freedom and the free market. Instead, they propose that voluntary associations and private charities could provide for individuals in need, without the use of force or taxation.”

Note on government: When it comes to minarchy, it’s obvious that public-private partnerships (PPP) are required for the government to actually aim at mutual profit, although the notions of regulations and controlled production are harmful to the economy.

Nuances:

[The political distinction is that of socialism versus capitalism.]

Britannica encyclopdia says communism not only rejects classes, but also governments. When I take China and Cuba as examples, the absence of governments is not what I see.

Which is more pro-government? A centralized redistribution of collectivized properties, that is, socialism? Or is it the flawed free/mercantile market of capitalism, that could be less mercantile? In one case, a necessary government holds the goods. In another case, the few – allegedly, only them – who can afford it can hold the goods. The second case analysis should cover private properties and non-corporate businesses (e.g. family businesses) as distinct from governments and corporations.

[Chavez, the socialist, expropriated company businesses explicitly. Fascism only gives the semblance of ownership.]

I say, we should either abolish the government (anarcho-corporatocracy, with use of DROs and private charity) or make it smaller (minarchy). I am not in favor of anarcho-communism. Either way, it’s just decentralized communism which does not allow for private property.

Throw in the conundrum about of ‘The Big Lie‘ (Dinesh D’Souza), potentially seen as a piece of fiction.

-> I am tax-resistant, as an ‘anarcho’-corporatocrat; I don’t favor economic redistribution.

1. I prefer charity auctions on non-utility products like artificially unique accessories, figurines, Non-Fungible Tokens/Digital Collectibles and new looks (basically customization, just like character skins in the MOBA game ‘League of Legends’), like elf ears and non-gender related forms of transhumanism, specifically listing what the charity is for (e.g. basic education for the poor). Grok 3: “For consistency of funding, auction branches/companies should consider offering subscription services, with unique privileges, such as early-access or even voting rights on which projects the charity funds support (e.g., education for children vs. healthcare for the sickly) – kind of like the board of directors.”

2. Grok 3: “Corporations could offer discounts on their products or services (e.g., reduced fees for DeFi transactions, lower prices on decentralized education modules) to employees or corponauts who contribute to family insurance pools or charity subscriptions. For example, a company providing decentralized email services might offer a 10% discount on annual fees for contributors, tracked via blockchain for transparency.”

3. Grok 3: “To further ensure consistency in financing, we could introduce a reputation staking system for corporations. Companies that consistently contribute to automation dividend funds or charity subscriptions could stake cryptocurrency in a public blockchain pool, earning a “social responsibility score” that boosts their market reputation.” Although, such a form of virtue-signaling blockchain asset should not get in the way of efficient competition. Granted, such consistency promotes coexistence. You can debate having such a blockchain as necessary. I don’t care.

Arguments (1 caveat included) against ‘the rich keep getting richer’:

1. There is a saying that generational wealth ends in three generations; decentralization of Hollywood to YouTube and AI-generated art make wealth-enabled jobs be for peanuts salary.

2. Needs reinvestment incentives to produce new wealth that overflows to the population.

3. Wealth is the endgoal of capitalism. You could see it as a societal curse or an enabler for private spaceships. I choose the latter. Mass-adoption of proposing spaceships as a paid means of transport makes it more affordable, the more rich people there are.

4. Gambling, real estate investment, biohacking (age-reversing – huge money dump) and general consumerism ruin the rich; they can’t stop spending. Their assets become liabilities. Ownership requires competent wages or people will stop working for them – the more developed the world becomes, the less they can rely on cheap labor.

5. Caveat: when it comes to automation of the means of production, dividends should be paid to the employees and goods-airdrops (as compared to crypto airdrops) should be made to consumers, particular the deprived consumers – the idea of ‘noblesse oblige’. Noblesse oblige is a culture thing. I am not a neo-aristocrat. I believe in meritocratic inheritance. Merit-based aristocracy is better than technocratic aristocracy, since it considers manual laborers as well. It’s better to be a wise meritocratic-aristocrat that considers decentralization of wealth over just settling for being a meritocratic aristocrat. Can’t keep all your eggs in a single basket. Meritocratic aristocracy can be hero-aristocracy (All Might – One-For-All power can be inherited by eating the current holder’s ‘hair’ or something) or anti-hero-aristocracy (Shigaraki – All-For-One power relies on stealing powers and body possession). For further elaboration, for better or worse the US aims to be hero-capitalism.

6. A technocrat is superior to a neo-aristocrat/meritocratic-aristocrat. If you got a lazy job that pays well, you might be on your way to aristocracy, but you are not a technocrat.

7. Some rich people become life-long philanthropists and others establish scholarship funds, which remain even after death. There is no limit to desire. At any given time, there should be a fair rate of social mobility, that prevents the Gini coefficient from being reached. If you are poor, you can mostly only beg in the US, compared to European countries. In anarchy?

A minarchy is neither national socialism, nor is it communism. Minarchy also works in US’s Alaska, where universal basic income is given. My choice remains between anarcho-corporatocracy and minarchy.

Do let me know of your opinions in the comment section below.

[Links] :

Bier, D. 2013, ‘Fake quote files: Benito Mussolini on fascism and corporatism, February 7, The skeptical Libertarian, Corporatism, viewed on 19th March 2025, <https://blog.skepticallibertarian.com/2013/02/07/fake-quote-files-mussolini-on-fascism-and-corporatism/>

Casey, D., 2020, ‘Anarchy and voluntaryism’, June 25, LewRockwell.com, viewed on 30th October 2020, <https://www.lewrockwell.com/2020/06/doug-casey/anarchy-and-voluntaryism-2/>

Collins, S.J., 2014, ‘Voluntaryism vs. anarcho-capitalism’, December 13, Everything-Voluntary.com, viewed on 30th October 2020, <https://everything-voluntary.com/voluntaryism-vs-anarcho-capitalism>

isocr, 2020, ‘Voluntaryism: exploitation pretending to be anarchism’, December 20, The Isocracy Network, viewed on 28th October 2020, <http://www.isocracy.org/content/voluntaryism-exploitation-pretending-be-anarchism>

Kirschner, P., 2004, ‘The dual purpose of “Animal Farm”’, The Review of English Studies, New Series, Vol. 55, No. 222, pp. 759-786

Liberto, D., 2020, ‘Vulture capitalist’, July 10, Investopedia, Alternative Investments, Private Equity and Venture cap, viewed on 30th October 2020, <https://www.investopedia.com/terms/v/vulturecapitalist.asp>

Munro, A, 2013, ‘state monopoly on violence’, March 6, Encyclopedia Britannica, Politics, Law & Government, Politics & Political Systems, viewed on 16th March 2025, <https://www.britannica.com/topic/state-monopoly-on-violence>

Thomas, J., 2020, ‘The coming of corporate collectivism’, n.d., Doug Casey’s International Man, viewed on 30th October 2020, <https://internationalman.com/articles/the-coming-of-corporate-collectivism/>

Zitelmann, R., 2019, ‘Bernie Sanders dreams of ‘Scandinavian socialism’. The only problem? It has long since failed’, November 11, Forbes, Leadership, Leadership Strategy, viewed on 14th March 2025, <https://www.forbes.com/sites/rainerzitelmann/2019/11/11/bernie-sanders-dreams-of-scandinavian-socialism-the-only-problem-it-has-long-since-failed/>

Zitelmann, R., 2022, ‘Hitler’s views on private property and nationalization’, February 24, Mises Institute, Mises Wire, viewed on 13th March 2025, <https://mises.org/mises-wire/hitlers-views-private-property-and-nationalization>

If you master one thing to the limit, it’s like moving up the pyramid of your own attention, and simultaneously avoiding total naivety, and avoiding what would be close to total sophistry or total superstition.

There are some points to consider:

1. You can’t expect not to get kicked back if you kick someone.

Authority figures which reward your meritorious actions or care for you tend to think themselves immune to the feedback loop. Even in a professional environment, employees make sure they are respected for their investment and skills. So, using authority and old age as a shield is sometimes crass. Historically, some kick-backs have taken the form of rebellions.

If your parent had a gun at your head, you would go for self-defense. If you had a gun at your parent’s head, he would go for self-defense. Wishful thinking is the only opposition, to this absolute situation.

In the following video, the iterations clearly show that tit for tat is a good long-term strategy:

If I were an abuser, for instance, I would not expect to get kicked back. Subjectively speaking, if I were a cult leader or company head, I would not like unofficial vloggers who talk about my cult or company

1. You got snowplowed, and now, you got cheated big time of your buck and can’t have legal recourse. This has made you cynical about capitalism or people who can’t seem to handle their money around shaggy products.

People who are snowplowed are people who are not exposed to certain experiences, which are good to have, and knowledge, which is practical to know, by the ones empowering them.

“The Federal Trade Commission reported last week in its annual data summary of consumer complaints that 40 percent of Americans in their 20s who reported fraud in 2017 also said they lost money. By contrast, only 18 percent of victims aged 70 or older reported losing money.

The dollar value associated with the fraud complaints were much higher for those aged 70 and older, however. Those in their 20s reported a median loss of $400. That’s compared to $621 for those in their 70s…”

Guzman (2018) goes on to talk about the most popular scams in 2017.

40% of how many millennials both reported fraud and lost their money? There were 2.7 million complaints in total. 500, 000 millennials? Compared to 18% of how many people above 70 years old?

Even assuming it were somewhere close to the amount of the millennials, here’s the maths:

0.4 x $400.00 = $160.00; 0.18 x $621.00 = $111.78

Assuming the ratio of 0.4 to 0.18 is 160.00 to 111.78, and that enough complaints from people in their 70s were registered, to make the amount of people the same for both (though it’s probably more millennials), the millennials clearly lost quite some money as a whole.

1. Myopic vision exists.

Having a myopic vision means you zoom in to the best thing you think is out there, price tag and all, and you think you can’t get a better deal than that. One tends to be driven more by necessity that broader analysis. I often fall for this.

1. You have been in enough damaging relationships, or at least as much relationships which you perceive to be damaging, over the years. So you develop an allergy to people who are immediately suspicious when handling relationships, or who display the first signs of being different and perhaps thereby connotationally dangerous

Naivety is not an invitation for people to abuse you, or for you to abuse others. You have the choice to wizen up, and stop the abuse. Whatever choice you take, you might join or leave a structure relating to that choice. Said structure either caters to removing your naivety, or reinforces your ‘need’ :

1. To be taken advantage of.

2. To take advantage of someone else.

Therefore, you have ‘identity socialism’. Identity socialism at once engages in transhumanism (plainly, only transgenderism, compared to fururistic cybernization, or prothetics or neuralink) and caters for child play, beyond any doubt. It is a political system that elects to favor individuals doing child play for a longer period of time, and more often. Not dicing gays, lesbians, transgenders, asexuals, eunuchs and intersex (0.05%). What’s good about a person identifying as a cat, or as a car, or even an elf just because he/she has elf ears?

You are either a conman or you are changing who you are, like a transcendentalist or you are conning yourself.

1. Entitlement

The word ‘deserve’ is a big word. To ‘deserve’ something lies on the assumption that natural rights exist. The notion of ‘rights’ is predicated on the necessary existence of an agreed right course of actions, while the notion of ‘natural rights’ is predicated on the necessary existence of a natural, non-negotiable right course of action.

However, that’s not the case. For example, you don’t ‘deserve’ to be free. You were given freedom by people before you, or won that freedom, instead of relying on survival of the fittest and the mercy of your moral master.

1. You blindly believe in psychology (and ideology)

Psychology is a pseudoscience.

For example, the Big five personality traits (Openness, Conscientiousness, Extroversion, Agreeableness, Neuroticism) are not really telling much, despite being the best form of pseudoscience. Their numbers don’t reflect what you actually do. Intelligence/Openness is pretty much like a questionnaire for your IQ, rather than a test for it. Conscientiousness only tests if you are orderly, speak the truth, don’t break laws (even questionable laws) and like punctuality, and does not distinguish between the bigger picture and finer details. Agreeableness is a bogus personality trait, because there are so many ways to interact (facts or emotions, for example) and it only makes sense to be agreeable with the info on hand, to me, rather than just be plain gullible and trusty. Like, would you care about a baby? And the answer would be yes or no, more about motherliness or fatherliness rather than agreeableness. For example, a female bear would protect her baby from the male bear. Extraversion is dumb, since you only talk when you have to, and that means you can easily be a big extrovert. However, it does not cover MBTI tertiary and inferior functionalities. (More specialized, with more dubious real-life examples though) Neuroticism is like personal-space requirement differences and the level of intuitive forecasting. Only the conscientiousness part is worth any salt.

Ideology, with respect to political pills:

Political pills were born as an analogy to cure or be oblivious about one’s naivery. They work similarly to gender identity. Here’s one, from Anthony (2015), which describes the red pill and the black pill, simplistically:

“The Black Pill is a nihilistic philosophy, which is a tangent off of the Red Pill. Where the Red Pill exposes people to uncomfortable truths, the Black Pill ultimately states that there’s nothing we can do about these truths, and that we should stop trying to change them.”

Anthony goes on to talk about race and looks, and practically opening side-businesses if you don’t have money. I don’t think that the focus on the sex market is remarkable, though it’s a part of the red pill ideal.

The black pill is nihilistic.

The red pill wants you to take action. It is not quite representative of traditional conservatism in the historical sense, but it does have elements of conservatism. The red pill community has some orthodox members.

The blue pill is kind of blind, despite engaging in political thought. It is mixed with increased child play and compulsive lying within some theories.

The purple pill is about getting laid across the board and accepting ‘half-truths’ for that. That’s close to the black pill. It is purported to be a combination of the red pill and the blue pill, if that makes sense.

The yellow pill, which I thought was mainly related to anarchy, is specifically related to anarchy in the sex market:

“The idea in White Nationalist circles that unmixed white men procreating with Hapas is acceptable because the result will yield a physically white child, despite ancestry and minor changes such as lactose intolerance. This also applies to castizas.”

‘I’m yellowpilled because it’s hard to find white women who didn’t start fucking at 15 years old.’

(Urban Dictionary, 2020)

The white pill says you have indestructible foreskin. You are an eternal wizard,

If you wanna find out more about political pills, do your research.

Personal Note:

I’m an atheist, even though I have a slight fear of supernatural dreams. I’m agnostic about ‘love’, but not agnostic about serotonin and oxytocin — still makes me agnostic to religion, compared to trying to love a real person. It is my belief that unconditional love is what one gives to a baby, or when one has a ‘savior complex’ (see below). An adult is usually more opiniated, unless he’s a snowflake whose belief system has never been shattered. Or someone who was raised by a theoretically perfect ‘god’ and never rebeled against said ‘god’.

As an atheist, I don’t believe in karma. It is to my conscience’s belief that if a person kills another person out of boredom, that person who kills must die. However, I don’t believe divine power will kill him. I would rather kill him myself. Capital punishment and armed citizens are good concepts.

I don’t believe in specialized, grand terms like ‘Oedipus complex’ or ‘electra complex’, or gender envy. Why make it grand and invent terms, when it’s minor preferences? Developing a saint/victim complex or a tyrant/perpetrator complex is another thing. Although I don’t believe in ‘sexual frustration’ as an answer to everything other than sex itself, or worse, being compared to drug cravings, as opposed to plain frustration, I do believe in the theories of ‘Beyond the pleasure principle’, that is, the death instinct and the life instinct, which necessarily indicate toward the development of a saint, and that of a tyrant, at their extremes.

It does not make sense for ‘god’ to be either loved (life instinct, serotonin) or feared and obeyed (death instinct, cortisol) — that’s like the distinction between Christianity and government.

If confused about life instinct and death instinct, just read my research project:

https://mega.nz/file/0NYA2KSJ#iJ925N7SHxNNp4eo78ERp3nraG8DgLn_pZ0r2lLznVY

#: Don’t plagiarize, acknowledge the source: https://library.uom.ac.mu/libero/WebOpac.cls?VERSION=2&ACTION=DISPLAY&RSN=10223893&DATA=UOM&TOKEN=OtxZVvrite2362&Z=1&SET=1, and don’t sell.

Both instincts indicate toward power, since, if you go against the norm, you go against the prevailing life instinct and either become cut off or become a successful revolutionist. Morality is either that of the death instinct, whereby the fittest person or more intelligent/richest person survives, or that of the life instinct, whereby altruism — which is the insidious concept Ayn Rand talks about, compared to stealing — is about everyone surviving or morbid martyr-cannibalization.

The game theory shows a clear preference for the life instinct, if there is voluntaryism and no need for laws, whether governmental, psychological or religious, particularly if discrimination is indoctrinated within identity itself (either it’s about superiority/inferiority — and envy (including the much dumber emotional intelligence — took the truity EI test. The questions were dumb, and it turns out I’m a ‘rock’)– or nobody gets butthurt and it’s just MBTI, or the theory that contradicts polymaths, that is, the theory of multiple intelligences, compared to IQ tests.) Essentially, criminals, altruists and tyrants get a free ticket.

The idea [of internalizing the death instinct (discrimination, as it happens in Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World) and discarding individualism in favor of oblivious coexistence/life instinct] simply discards the notion of ‘responsibility’, particularly for work. The death instinct may be about taking, exploitation and at its worse, enslavement, while the life instinct is about sharing, sustainability and a disregard of natural predators and other natural perils. You might say the life instinct is clearly better, but that’s only if you keep engaging in cooperative gameplay (the game theory) rather than competitive gameplay. In a relationship, the death instinct is about [individualism] while the life instinct is about [coexistence]. Naturally, coexistence is about as boring as living with an NPC co-inhabitant of an apartment, while individualism (e.g. the lack of sublimation of race and gender) ensures loneliness.

Examples of non-coexistence:

1. People who are more introverted or object-oriented (MBTI theory)

2. Carnivorism by squirrels, snakes, lions, sharks and humans, in an attempt to survive and best serve one’s body (ketone bodies vs glucose)

3. The attempt to get rid of disease-spreading vectors, like mosquitoes, and bacteria-full cockroaches

4. The desire for dopamine detox over constant, social or otherwise, reward, the attempt to honor memory by allowing sadness to be felt, rather than suppressing emotions through substances (Note on Mark Manson’s book ‘the subtle art of not giving a fuck’, about the chapters on drugs)

5. Desensitization over social media or detachment from war situations or otherwise where one cannot help. (Lack of empathy) Chinese expression: The tears of strangers are salt.

6. Predators like wolves or bears, including arctic bears, who are fed by humans, either attack or starve to death: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=60I2b5gf1lo&pp=ygUXZG9uJ3QgZmVlZCB3aWxkIGFuaW1hbHM%3D

7. Tragedy of the commons should be avoided:

• Private Property (e.g., 50 farms): Each farmer owns their land and cows, so they’re motivated to maintain the land’s productivity for future profit. Overgrazing or mismanagement directly hurts their own bottom line, encouraging sustainable practices.

• Shared Property (e.g., 50 cows on common land): With no individual ownership, each person maximizes their own gain (e.g., letting their cows graze as much as possible), leading to overgrazing and depletion since the cost is spread across everyone. This is less sustainable long-term.

  The internet is partly global (unless we are talking about yandex or LINE or China’s WeChat), so while I might get regionalism, I don’t get nationalism other than as a protection of political philosophies. Conflict and cooperative alliances are inevitable, while ‘moral’ alliances are also ‘tragedy of the commons’ in waiting.

Either way, after years of word salad, that’s what I’ve reduced my belief diet to. I also believe we shouldn’t presume we live in a simulation, in order to make life sound more impactful.

Faith is the habit of long-term memory in theories and space-time constants like truth. After all, you are just a camera if you don’t have faith. According to Lisa Feldman Barrett, even emotions are ‘predictions’, and the prediction gets stronger with habit. Basically, the stronger your conviction in the space-time constant known as truth, and in the concept of duality of life instinct and death instinct, as much as your conviction in who you really are, the easier the time you’ll have with discarding powerlessness and the consequent problem of not having an opinion (except to feed yourself like a clueless baby, although babies are not afraid of snakes and still afraid of strangers), compared to simply being powerful and owning your morality, whether you want to be alone and take from everyone, or you want to be selfless and let people take from you, or just somewhere in the middle, actually possessing a self, although sharing occasionally. I’m not telling you to believe in god. I’m telling you to have a self-ideology, that believes ‘we live outside of a simulation’, even if by an AI god.

You would be naive to think there is only one answer. Even though the game theory dictates cooperation, you might still be out for revenge, for example. Being bitter is as much a state of mind as being grateful.

Side-note: if the idea of life-instinct and death-instinct ‘morality’, relating to sainthood and tyranny, as explained in the blog, becomes mainstream, and MBTI dabatases become more accurate (MBTI lists becomes more empirical), I think ‘Ethics’, as per the below reference, becomes OBSOLETE.

Harpham, G. G., 1995, Lentricchia, F., McLaughlin, T. (Eds.), ‘Ethics’, Critical Terms for Literary Study, Second Edition, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago and London, pp. 387–395

https://harishkgujudhur.wordpress.com/2021/06/30/ethics/

Image linked to life as a theory: https://mega.nz/file/QJg3iRZY#oPVtnI3yr-xbvAYZRwhoee4pujHb479YUPbDUCfyjeA

AI just can’t achieve subjectivity and sentience with relation to feedback loops (Correction on the source of 'continuation thesis'. It's 'LFSA - Chapter 2: Savepoint' - LFSA as in Looking For Something Appropriate.):

https://x.com/i/grok/share/BTM2pDKPjK15Mcf8GtWGcxjFQ

Note: [I don’t have enough material to monetize my insights. If you wanna support me, visit my paypal: https://paypal.me/HKGujudhur?locale.x=en_US ]

If you want more content, try accessing my wordpress blog:

http://harishkgujudhur.wordpress.com/

Links:

Anthony, J., 2015, ‘What is the Black Pill? A closer look inside the new “Red Pill”’, December 15, Masculine Development, viewed on 11th September 2020, <<masculinedevelopment.com/is-the-black-pill-the-new-red-pill/>> Anthony goes on to berate black pillers after briefly explaining their perspective. (Edit: link is probably dead, even though the title is searchable.)

Guzman, Z., 2018, ‘Millennials fall for financial scams more than any other age group’, March 7, CNBC Make It, viewed on 10th September 2020, <<cnbc.com/2018/03/07/millennials-fall-for-financial-scams-more-than-other-age-groups.html>>

Jehovah’s Worst Nightmare, 2020, ‘Yellowpill’, April 2, urban dictionary, viewed on 11th September 2020, <<urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=yellow pill>>

Bonus:

#Don’t worry about the songs’ message too much. They are just 1. examples of aggression and ambition 2. examples of life and contentment. The four-letter words are MBTI theory labels. You might wanna access an MBTI real-life people list, to get a general idea. I believe theoretical MBTI typing hampers individual progress by boxing weaknesses, rather than active typing, just to see how far each person can go, without relying on his stereotypes, while the theory is certainly useful for understanding personality.

[For dopamine] Linkin’ Park — Heavy is the crown, Luck Life — Symbol, Civilian — Akairo, Kavka Shishido (daring INTP) — Ashita wo narase, ASCA (ISTP) — Howling, Lisa — Shouted Serenade, Spyair (ESTP vocalist) — Rage of dust, Man with a Mission — Dark Crow, Nothing’s Carved in Stone (ESFP vocalist) — Out of control (and more);

2. [For serotonin/partial detox] Post Malone — Circles, Lisa — unlasting, Maroon 5 — One more night, Aimer (INFP) — Ref: rain, ClariS — Primalove, SCANDAL — Harukaze, Ikimonogakari (ENFP vocalist) — Hanabi, Ikimonogakari — Blue Bird, Sukimaswitch — Ah Yeah!, Nagi Yanagi (ISFJ) — Megumi no ame, Tia — Nirvana, Takigawa Arisa — Kisetsu, Lisa — Shirushi, Unlimits (ISFP vocalist) — Cascade

[Cross-posted from wordpress and medium]

https://harishkgujudhur.wordpress.com/2025/02/13/after-years-of-word-salad-i-have-become-better-like-an-ai-still-faillible-no-problem-heres-to-naivety/

https://medium.com/@hkgujudhur/after-years-of-word-salad-i-have-become-better-like-an-ai-de8e4de1d347