Calyx institute announces web site

Zenaan Harkness zen at
Fri Feb 6 16:16:33 PST 2015

On 2/7/15, Georgi Guninski <guninski at> wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 04, 2015 at 07:35:35AM -0800, Seth wrote:
>> On Wed, 04 Feb 2015 00:37:42 -0800, grarpamp <grarpamp at> wrote:
>> I like Richard J. Maybury's 'The Two Laws' concept; Two laws are
>> necessary for civilizations to develop and advance:
>> 1) Do all you have agreed to do.
>> 2) Do not encroach on other persons or their property
>> It's dead simple and all we really need IMHO.
> Your model is very good on paper.
> I am _very sceptical_ about _good_ real world implementation of
> your model in the near future, even with the help of deities.

There may be problems with the USA foundation documents in terms of a
"more ideal" structure for a democracy.

Unfortunately it's the power-hungry and self interested actors who
dominate the system (and I dare say any system) which is the problem,
not so much the system. This occurs because most sheeple want to be
shorn, as long as they have their golden cage (and their tummies

As has been said round here before, we aint seen a system properly put
into practice without bad actors. With enough bad actors, no system
can protect against, since they just change the system to suit

A robust system can only ever be as good as its people. Not its
rulers/ government, but you and I, those who actually live their
rights - speaking truth when it needs to be told, traveling the
highways and byways and refusing to pay the corporation taxes (road
tolls), keeping silent when ordered to tell a lie, and on it goes.

> On paper the dear USA is good model, in practice it is a
> Ponzi scheme (check the debt).

You are mixing up things here. Putting the USA foundation documents
into practice, does not result in a ponzi scheme.

The bad actors who desired and achieved control of the money power
(and lost it, and regained it - go read up on your history, it's all
over the interwebs) now run a ponzi scheme where inflation is the
exact measure of the (illegal) transfer of wealth from the people (via
the people and its government debts) to the currently privately held

The money power is ultimately a power of the people, but two (or
three? - I'm in Australia, I don't know your exact history) times, the
money power was stolen by private hands, at the point of guns. The
money power is unfortunately currently in private hands, and yes, is
currently run as a ponzi scheme (rather than a credit based credit
expansion system it's now a debt based credit expansion system, which
is mathematically guaranteed to "reset" once in a while causing
enormous transfers of wealth to the (private) bankers in a much
shorter time period than normally occurs - a mathematical certainty in
such a system, and the time of reset is also entirely controlled by
the central bank).

> If you implement your model now, here are some difficulties
> about implementation:
> 1. Software/hardware is full of batshit. This empowers
> "h4x0rs".

You mean bad hackers (crackers) or good hackers too?

> 2. Your humans will include current mafia/overlords (unless
> you manage to kill them all, which might be considered bad
> by sheeple).

It's more that there will always be those who desire wealth, prestige
and power, and tomorrow it might be you or your children, and of
course you or they would of course do the "right" thing with that
money, prestige and power, unlike all the other wealthy, prestigious
and powerful people. And so there's a kind of innate standoff. Those
who have thoughts of how to achieve such things, are often the ones
who imagine themselves in such positions (of wealth etc).

The word mafia implies "bad" overlord. And overlord (wealthy
prestigious powerful person) may use their position for the
furtherance of the development of mind, creativity and spirituality.
In which case they would be in the class "benevolent dictator" or at
least "benevolent (over)lord".

I believe (but can't back it up right now) that historically, the
benevolent dictatorship is about as good as a system can get. The
challenge is transitioning from one benevolent dictator, to the next
(ie, finding/ training/ testing someone to actually be benevolent in
their high position).

Oligarchies go to war with each too often.

But as I said before, I think any system can be successful, as long as
there are enough humans worthy of the term.

> 3. Humans are relatively easy to exploit, search for
> `clinton blowjob scandal` (no quotes).

The impeachment because of his lie - not because of the blowjob.

Yes it's depressing, even those who achieve high rank fail to tell the
truth in dignity when it needs to be spoken.

A system can be no better than its people.


More information about the cypherpunks mailing list