[WAR] ... and AP

[Zenaan Harkness]

On Fri, Nov 01, 2019 at 04:27:21AM +0000, jim bell wrote:
>  On Thursday, October 31, 2019, 08:05:55 PM PDT, Zenaan Harkness <zen at freedbms.net> wrote:
>  
>  
>  On Thu, Oct 31, 2019 at 11:57:35PM -0300, Punk - Stasi 2.0 wrote:
> > On Fri, 1 Nov 2019 13:07:13 +1100
> > Zenaan Harkness <zen at freedbms.net> wrote:
> > 
> > > On Fri, Nov 01, 2019 at 01:44:38AM +0000, jim bell wrote:
> > > >  On Thursday, October 31, 2019, 03:47:24 PM PDT, Zenaan Harkness <zen at freedbms.net> wrote:
> > > >  
> > > >  
> > > >  On Thu, Sep 01, 2016 at 02:47:30PM -0300, Juan wrote:
> > > > > On Thu, 1 Sep 2016 22:35:47 +1000
> > > > > Zenaan Harkness <zen at freedbms.net> wrote:
> > > > > 
> > > > > > >On Thu, Sep 01, 2016 at 02:47:08AM -0600, Mirimir wrote:
> > > > > > > How about we implement a working AP system?
> > > > > >> 
> > > > > >> As I said in a previous thread, I now believe that to be fundamentally
> > > > > >> flawed - that it will not achieve anything resembling justice, even in
> > > > > > >the long term.
> > > > > 
> > > > >>     The idea of finishing off criminals like cops, soldiers,
> > > > >>     politicians, corporatist 'business' men, etc is pretty sound. 
> > > > >> 
> > > > >>     The problem is of course how to implement it. If AP can be
> > > > >>     turned against honest people then it's obviously not a good
> > > > >>     implementation. 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > >And I can conceive of no possible AP system "which cannot be turned
> > > > against honest people".
> > 
> > 
> >>     OK. I take back what I said. If AP can be used against honest
> >     people, so what. I mean, if it allows us to kill soldiers, cops,
> >     wall street bankers and similar animals, then it is a good
> >     system. 
> 
> 
> >The balance is of course whom (which class of users) gets to "use it
> more" against the other class(es).
> 
> Not necessarily.  A "billionaire" is not likely to be 1000 times
> more likely to use an AP-type system to attack his 'enemies'.  One
> major reason is that targeting people requires, first, that you can
> identify them.   How does anybody know who their 'enemies' are?  In
> a pre-AP world, many of their 'enemies' stand up and say that
> "billionaires" should be taxed at a 97% rate.   How many people
> would dare, in a POST-AP world, stand up and argue that
> "billionaires" should be robbed of 97% of their income?!?


Years of below the radar programming have achieved this result:

  7 In 10 Millennials Say They Will Likely Vote Socialist
  https://www.zerohedge.com/political/7-10-millennials-say-they-will-likely-vote-socialist

  How Six Years Of QE Transformed Young Americans Into Socialists
  https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-03-11/six-years-qe-transformed-young-americans-socialist



> >"AP is presupposed on an anonymous money betting ring - i.e. on money,
> which is collected by people who climb the hiearchy of the day,
> therefore they have more of it. Many orders of magnitude more of it."
> 
> But merely having more money, at least initially, does not
> translate into being able to USE that money to target his enemies. 
> And people who are CURRENTLY "billionaires" got that way using a
> NON-AP system.  Can you describe how anyone can become, or stay, a
> "billionaire" in a post-AP world?  Why should you think that would
> not change?

Game theory.

Sociopaths game the system, no matter what that system is.


> >In facto, the Fed seized the power to print money at its sole
> discretion, and does so to this day with QE-1, QE-2, QE-3 and now
> QE-notQE. Hundreds of trillions of fiats, Trillians per year now
> being "printed" in digital debt increment accounts on Federal reserve
> computers.
> 
> How many of these Government employees would survive in a post-AP world?  What happens to the printing press if the operators are all dead?  Or, at least, unpaid?   Or running in fear?
> 
> >What's a few extra billions in the mix?
> 
> >Explain how that would happen post-AP?
> 
> >Absolutely a drop in the ocean, to tptb!
> 
> >And, any functional AP market will mean multiple competing markets,
> multiple competing assassins, and therefore the lowest conceivable
> prices for the assassinations, therefore chump change for the powers
> that be.
> 
> How do those "powers that be" exercise their power if to do so
> identifies them?


OK, so now your AP system is NOT anonymously funded?!

And this is supposed to work in transition between hierarchies?

Please.

This has become too much work... sorry.

Good luck,








>  In a post-AP world, USING that power is about the
> most suicidal thing they could possibly do.   Do you really not
> understand this?
> 
> >What I don't understand,
> 
> OBVIOUSLY you don't understand this,. You make that clear with virtually every sentence you write.  
> 
>  >is why this fundamental fiat dynamic, so
> utterly stacked against us (and upon which (at least today) any
> functioning AP must be built) is not utterly and irredeemably stacked
> against us dissidents?
> 
> Because YOU DON"T UNDERSTAND!   "Us dissidents" aren't identified by what you call TPTB,  THEY, TPTB, however, are rather well-known.   It is THEY who will be running, in terror, if they have done anything to piss off the millions of "dissidents".  You haven't a clue about the power structure post-AP.  
> 
> 
> >Remember the marginal dissident. Even today, without AP, there are
> woefully few of us. You might be willing to be a dissident in an AP
> world ... many would not even try.
> 
> Remember that DISSIDENTS are not NECESSARY post-AP.    They can achieve what they want using AP, and without identifying themselves.  Your thinking is stuck in pre-AP mode.  
> 
> 
> > ps: oh yes, 'chaos' is (way) better than the current dictatorship. Not to mention, the current system, if not stopped, is going to get a lot worse. So yeah, we need chaos ASAP.
> 
> 
> >What we need is folks in numbers speaking truth.
> 
> Why do they have to "speak"?  TODAY'S system requires that "folks in numbers speak[] truth".   In a post-AP world, that "truth" can be "spoken" silently, and denominated in some form of digital cash.  And the people who will REALLY be scared are the ones everybody is aware illegitimately exercising power.  
> 
> >Statute law is used to make much normal human behaviour illegal and
> thereby makes criminals of most humans, and exposes those who would
> otherwise walk with good intention up the hierarchy, to blackmail.
> 
> And 'law' cannot effectively exist unless there is a mechanism to enforce it.  And that mechanism will, for the foreseeable future, involve flesh-and-blood humans, who can be targeted.  Who would dare offend against the masses in a post-AP world?
>                Jim Bell
> 
> 
>