General Phase 1: Pandemic (Event 201) - Phase 2: Cyberattacks (Cyber Polygon 2021)

[kneeblock]

It's my opinion(so take it for what you will) that your view of greed is far too simplistic, along with many peoples views of similar topics.

I'm on shift right now so don't have time to go into depth on a topic but can highlight a couple things.

Think to yourself how a government is going to remove greed. Are they going to take control of business to remove the motive of profit? Power takes over in that scenario. Power to control people, power to manipulate external markets, etc. Removing greed from business. There's one I believe many are confused on. It's pretty difficult to think of a monopoly that has ever existed without the aide of government. Competition is driven by greed, either for control of market share or quality of product or many other reasons. Large business loves large government as they can regulate away competition. Large business can absorb these costs while small business will struggle.

Each one of those examples can be a full blown debate & entire courses or even careers can be had discussing them. Many people tend to take the easy route in believing that some government entity or body can make their lives great by making their decisions for them. The US and many parts of the west are starting to move this direction. To cut this short, so I can get back to work, I offer the following as a simplified solution. Since we as humans are all very different in our beliefs & experiences, why not setup countries across the globe with varying forms of government from socialist to fascist to libertarian. Instead of people attempting to change a countries politics, move to the one that aligns with your beliefs. If you are a driven free market type who values personal liberty, move to the libertarian country. If you're a devout socialist, move to the socialist country. Making international relocation simplified should aide this experiment. The big downfall with this idea is jealousy. Once people start seeing the material things free market people will have they will become jealous & attempt to bring them down instead of enjoying the social programs they receive. Also, 2nd & 3rd generation family members may not agree with their parents/grandparents point of view & decisions. Families separating due to ideals is a difficult thing. It's a flawed idea but one that just came to mind while typing.

Anyway, back to work.

This is a surprisingly rational take that unfortunately gets completely derailed by history. Unfortunately, it's hasn't been the socialized countries in world history that have stopped at nothing to derail/destroy market economies, but the market economies that have through covert ops, open warfare, neocolonialism and economic isolation attempted to disrupt and dismantle nearly every nation exercising its right to self determination.

See Chile, Peru, El Salvador, Cuba, Angola, Vietnam, Guatemala, Panama, Grenada, and the list goes on. In most cases, wealthy elites in these countries conspired with their foreign counterparts to maintain their regime or get financial and military aid to bolster a market system. This has been the real conspiracy and it's plainly written down in hundreds if not thousands of books, but due to widespread illiteracy and propagandizing, many prefer rehashed distillations of whatever they grew up being told via YouTube videos.

 

[ThatOneDude]

This is a surprisingly rational take that unfortunately gets completely derailed by history. Unfortunately, it's hasn't been the socialized countries in world history that have stopped at nothing to derail/destroy market economies, but the market economies that have through covert ops, open warfare, neocolonialism and economic isolation attempted to disrupt and dismantle nearly every nation exercising its right to self determination.

See Chile, Peru, El Salvador, Cuba, Angola, Vietnam, Guatemala, Panama, Grenada, and the list goes on. In most cases, wealthy elites in these countries conspired with their foreign counterparts to maintain their regime or get financial and military aid to bolster a market system. This has been the real conspiracy and it's plainly written down in hundreds if not thousands of books, but due to widespread illiteracy and propagandizing, many prefer rehashed distillations of whatever they grew up being told via YouTube videos.

@Outlaw Shit kills a kitten everytime someone shits on YouTube.

 

[rmenergy]

This is a surprisingly rational take that unfortunately gets completely derailed by history. Unfortunately, it's hasn't been the socialized countries in world history that have stopped at nothing to derail/destroy market economies, but the market economies that have through covert ops, open warfare, neocolonialism and economic isolation attempted to disrupt and dismantle nearly every nation exercising its right to self determination.

See Chile, Peru, El Salvador, Cuba, Angola, Vietnam, Guatemala, Panama, Grenada, and the list goes on. In most cases, wealthy elites in these countries conspired with their foreign counterparts to maintain their regime or get financial and military aid to bolster a market system. This has been the real conspiracy and it's plainly written down in hundreds if not thousands of books, but due to widespread illiteracy and propagandizing, many prefer rehashed distillations of whatever they grew up being told via YouTube videos.

I wouldn't go that far. There are numerous examples of socialist states invading countries, moving borders, backing revolutions, etc...

When this happens in that "free market" countries step in, many times it is after a disgusting marriage of government & business. Just take one look at the military industrial complex in the US at present for an example.

The idea that I had above, well more like a stream of consciousness to be more precise, was a thought in how to avoid these marriages except in the fascist states. Run an experiment where countries are bound to retain their original ideals & people are free to move between these countries & align their ideals with the countries that match them. I'd be very curious to see the results of such an experiment & I'm positive that it would create surprises for everyone no matter their initial beliefs.

 

[kneeblock]

I wouldn't go that far. There are numerous examples of socialist states invading countries, moving borders, backing revolutions, etc...

When this happens in that "free market" countries step in, many times it is after a disgusting marriage of government & business. Just take one look at the military industrial complex in the US at present for an example.

The idea that I had above, well more like a stream of consciousness to be more precise, was a thought in how to avoid these marriages except in the fascist states. Run an experiment where countries are bound to retain their original ideals & people are free to move between these countries & align their ideals with the countries that match them. I'd be very curious to see the results of such an experiment & I'm positive that it would create surprises for everyone no matter their initial beliefs.

This is literally the foundation of international law. According to it, countries are prohibited from unilaterally violating one another's sovereignty, but unfortunately market economies didn't follow this rule for most of the 20th century and barely follow it in the 21st except they use softer pressure through economic interventions and occasional covert munitions support of "allies" rather than the old game of military involvement and spectacular assassinations, though the people getting blown up by drones would likely contest that. There's no need for such a thought experiment, just a need for nations to abide by the rules of non-intervention, much as the US pressed for in the early years of its republic. It's one of the reasons the US was able to grow a fairly robust political and economic system, because it didn't have to deal with any serious threats to the sovereignty of its appropriated territories after the 1890s. In most of our lifetimes, we've seen the US and its allies directly topple at least 5 governments and attempt to replace them with their preferred system. Grenada, Panama, Afghanistan, Iraq and Haiti. That's to say nothing of 3 unsuccessful coup attempts in Venezuela the US materially supported and one that worked in Honduras. Those are just the most obvious ones with plenty more elsewhere, often in the name of capital interests.

But I do agree with you that the marriage of the state and elite interests is largely the motivator. This is often the case regardless of the system in question.

 

[Qat]

This is literally the foundation of international law. According to it, countries are prohibited from unilaterally violating one another's sovereignty, but unfortunately market economies didn't follow this rule for most of the 20th century and barely follow it in the 21st except they use softer pressure through economic interventions and occasional covert munitions support of "allies" rather than the old game of military involvement and spectacular assassinations, though the people getting blown up by drones would likely contest that. There's no need for such a thought experiment, just a need for nations to abide by the rules of non-intervention, much as the US pressed for in the early years of its republic. It's one of the reasons the US was able to grow a fairly robust political and economic system, because it didn't have to deal with any serious threats to the sovereignty of its appropriated territories after the 1890s. In most of our lifetimes, we've seen the US and its allies directly topple at least 5 governments and attempt to replace them with their preferred system. Grenada, Panama, Afghanistan, Iraq and Haiti. That's to say nothing of 3 unsuccessful coup attempts in Venezuela the US materially supported and one that worked in Honduras. Those are just the most obvious ones with plenty more elsewhere, often in the name of capital interests.

But I do agree with you that the marriage of the state and elite interests is largely the motivator. This is often the case regardless of the system in question.

Maybe Britain continuing to tax ya would have been better in the long run. Canada and Australia for example seem to be lesser cunts.

 

[jason73]

Maybe Britain continuing to tax ya would have been better in the long run. Canada and Australia for example seem to be lesser cunts.

Australia is some right sick cunts mate

 

[rmenergy]

This is literally the foundation of international law. According to it, countries are prohibited from unilaterally violating one another's sovereignty, but unfortunately market economies didn't follow this rule for most of the 20th century and barely follow it in the 21st except they use softer pressure through economic interventions and occasional covert munitions support of "allies" rather than the old game of military involvement and spectacular assassinations, though the people getting blown up by drones would likely contest that. There's no need for such a thought experiment, just a need for nations to abide by the rules of non-intervention, much as the US pressed for in the early years of its republic. It's one of the reasons the US was able to grow a fairly robust political and economic system, because it didn't have to deal with any serious threats to the sovereignty of its appropriated territories after the 1890s. In most of our lifetimes, we've seen the US and its allies directly topple at least 5 governments and attempt to replace them with their preferred system. Grenada, Panama, Afghanistan, Iraq and Haiti. That's to say nothing of 3 unsuccessful coup attempts in Venezuela the US materially supported and one that worked in Honduras. Those are just the most obvious ones with plenty more elsewhere, often in the name of capital interests.

But I do agree with you that the marriage of the state and elite interests is largely the motivator. This is often the case regardless of the system in question.

I think you missed the point of having countries bound to retain their original ideals in the experiment and got yourself sidetracked trying to blame the US for interventionalist actions. I never said that the US doesn't or that it's "right", I had said they aren't the only ones and that socialist states have also intervened with countries. I don't agree with eithers actions.

 

[rmenergy]

As a side, I don't know why my notifications are so sporadic here. I checked this site an hour ago with no notifications, came back to only have one for this thread when there's multiple responses & no notifications to other threads that I've subscribed to that have new posts.

 

[kneeblock]

I think you missed the point of having countries bound to retain their original ideals in the experiment and got yourself sidetracked trying to blame the US for interventionalist actions. I never said that the US doesn't or that it's "right", I had said they aren't the only ones and that socialist states have also intervened with countries. I don't agree with eithers actions.

Your experiment doesn't work if countries aren't allowed to maintain their sovereignty due to outside interventionism.

 

[rmenergy]

Your experiment doesn't work if countries aren't allowed to maintain their sovereignty due to outside interventionism.

That would depend on the ideals(constitution) of said countries no? If bound by them they are limited to what actions they can take. There's nothing to say a state can't defend itself or that remaining states can't "purge" a bad actor. It's a thought experiment open your mind up past what happens currently & picture it as a reset.

 

[Enock-O-Lypse Now!]

May 13 2021: Cyberattack Forces a Shutdown of a Top U.S. Pipeline

June 1 2021: JBS: World's largest meat supplier hit by cyber-attack



They are increasing - Media is blaming Russia ...but eyes should be on the Globalists trying to restructure the World Order ...all eyes on the World Economic Forum.


The Great Reset ....

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hRPQqfwwuhU






View attachment 37609

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YBhQuOKWOkU

 

[Rambo John J]

As a side, I don't know why my notifications are so sporadic here. I checked this site an hour ago with no notifications, came back to only have one for this thread when there's multiple responses & no notifications to other threads that I've subscribed to that have new posts.

FYI notifications are sporadic or something like that
@Splinty explained it once...I still preferred to get each notification, you can always turn them all off in your settings

 

[Freeloading Rusty]

 

[Rambo John J]

View attachment 38368

I believe they took down one of the Official Klaus Cyber Attack Incoming warning videos

 

[Enock-O-Lypse Now!]

I believe they took down one of the Official Klaus Cyber Attack Incoming warning videos

Time must be getting closer.

 

[Rambo John J]

Time must be getting closer.

Warning has been sent.

Even if largely ignored.

Delete or memory hole it as needed.

 

[kneeblock]

That would depend on the ideals(constitution) of said countries no? If bound by them they are limited to what actions they can take. There's nothing to say a state can't defend itself or that remaining states can't "purge" a bad actor. It's a thought experiment open your mind up past what happens currently & picture it as a reset.

What I'm trying to put across to you is international law already guarantees your exact thought experiment, but nations violate it routinely. We live in a world. Isolating nations is unrealistic in any thought experiment because it hamstrings them to their local resources only and doesn't take trade conditions and the expansionist orientation of market logics into account. Discounting these factors makes it a disingenuous thought experiment. Ideological purity also forecloses democracy as any system will always have dissenters who will look to outside models and prefer them, whether market based or socialized or anything in between, as you yourself mention. Nations have always existed in a world, even in times of seeming isolation. What we could say is there should be stiffer penalties for nations who violate other nations sovereignty in order to get to your thought experiment. But who will enforce them?

 

[rmenergy]

Who will enforce sovereignty laws? In the context of the discussion I'm not sure as it's something to explore. Individual nations can defend themselves & also align to purge a rogue nation. There are plenty of other ideas people may have as well.

There was no mention of ceasing international trade. Just holding nations to their constitutions & allowing a people with different views or ideals to freely move to countries that more closely align with their ideals. That was the thought experiment. Take a look at how these different forms of government succeed & fail & in what areas do they succeed & fail when held to their ideals. The US as well as many other countries have moved far from their original ideals into a globalist mentality. China & Russia have moved greatly in the last century as well.

My opinion is that, as much as I hate it, fascist states are what will end up being created across most of the western world moving along our current trajectory.

 

[kneeblock]

Who will enforce sovereignty laws? In the context of the discussion I'm not sure as it's something to explore. Individual nations can defend themselves & also align to purge a rogue nation. There are plenty of other ideas people may have as well.

There was no mention of ceasing international trade. Just holding nations to their constitutions & allowing a people with different views or ideals to freely move to countries that more closely align with their ideals. That was the thought experiment. Take a look at how these different forms of government succeed & fail & in what areas do they succeed & fail when held to their ideals. The US as well as many other countries have moved far from their original ideals into a globalist mentality. China & Russia have moved greatly in the last century as well.

My opinion is that, as much as I hate it, fascist states are what will end up being created across most of the western world moving along our current trajectory.

By definition, a thought experiment involves thinking through all of the underlying premises and figuring out what the necessary preconditions are. It doesn't mean "I came up with this random scenario and let's just go with it." So in the first instance, the issue is how to get to your proposal reorganization of the world to make it possible. What you describe was also the premise of the treaty of Westphalia going all the way back to the 1600s and it was reaffirmed in human rights declarations and various treaties in international organizations since. It hasn't stopped encroachment.

Further, trade relationships are crucial to this experiment because nations who despise one system can easily make it a precondition for trade relationships with like minded nations that certain systems should be restricted from trading. This is how we refer to sanctions. For example, US disdain for Cuba during the late 1970s led to restrictions on the Canadian government's trade relationship with Cuba. They even went so far as to say no goods headed for Cuba can fly over US soil for a time. How does one build and maintain a system with this kind of obstruction? Taiwan is another great example as we've seen fairly recently. They wanted to declare their own system and the Chinese government has prevented any acknowledgement of it, including by celebrities doing business there. How does a problem like that get resolved? Who gets to say whether or not there is an independent Taiwan? How can we evaluate the success or failure of their system if one group refers to them as a province in rebellion and the people living there say they're a nation?

As for your last points, what does globalism mean to you and why would fascism be a preferred system?

 

[rmenergy]

Christ you are difficult to speak with. If you go back & read what I've written previously you would see that I completely understand what countries across the world have been doing for centuries. Yes, I understand there have been numerous treaties & broken laws throughout history. I'm well aware & even attempted to address it previously with limitations imposed in the though process. You keep referring back to the same rehashed topics, that have, to an extent been covered. I think you take much out of context or are reading through too thick of a lens/filter.

A good example of said lens would be your interpretation of my last sentence. I never said fascism would be a preferred system. I said that moving along our current trajectory, fascist states will end up being created across most of the western world. That was a comment about current day trends, not in the hypothetical. It's also not preferred for my own beliefs, it's preferred by those seeking power. It's just about the ultimate marriage of authoritative government & business.

I have to get back to work so will be signing off.

 

[kneeblock]

Hey, it's your thought experiment. I'm just living in it.

 

[jason73]

FYI notifications are sporadic or something like that
@Splinty explained it once...I still preferred to get each notification, you can always turn them all off in your settings

yeah i get it all the time. i get a notification saying someone liked your post and click on it to see 5 likes and a dislike or some shit . not too worried because they are just meaningless internet points .we still have more features than any other forum i post on so ya cant really complain too much

 

[Enock-O-Lypse Now!]

 

[Freeloading Rusty]

View attachment 38550

 

[Enock-O-Lypse Now!]

The National Guard Just Simulated A Cyberattack That Brought Down Utilities Nationwide

This year's Cyber Yankee exercises simulated the increasingly likely scenario of cyberattacks crippling massive sections of the nation's utilities.

www.thedrive.com