master
Miloslav Ciz 1 year ago
parent a83b4d5d51
commit 82c02a1627

@ -4,6 +4,6 @@ Corporation is basically a huge company that doesn't have a single owner but is
The most basic fact to know about corporations is that **100% of everything a corporation ever does is done 100% solely for maximizing its own benefit for any cost, with no other reason, with 0 morality and without any consideration of consequences**. If a corporation could make 1 cent by raping 1000000000 children and get away with it, it would do it immediately without any hesitation and any regret. This is very important to keep in mind. Now try to not get depressed at realization that corporations are those to whom we gave power and who are in almost absolute control of the world.
**Corporation is not a human, it has no emotion and absolutely 0 sense of morality.** The most basic error committed by retards is to reply to this argument with "but corporations are run by humans". This is an extremely dangerous argument because somehow 99.999999999999999999% people believe this could be true and accept it as a comforting argument so that they can continue their daily lives and do absolutely nothing about the disastrous state of society. The argument is of course completely false for a number of reasons: firstly corporations exclusively hire psychopaths for manager roles -- any corporation that doesn't do this will be eliminated by natural selection of the market environment because it will be weaker in a [fight](fight_culture.md) against other corporations, and its place will be taken by the next aspiring corporation waiting in line. Secondly corporations are highly sophisticated machines that have strong mechanisms preventing any ethical behavior -- for example division of labor in the "[just doing my job](just_doing_my_job.md)" style allows for many people collaborating on something extremely harmful and unethical without any single one feeling responsibility for the whole, or sometimes without people even knowing what they are really collaborating on. Of course, most just don't care, and most don't even have a choice. Similar principles allowed for example the [Holocaust](holocaust.md) to happen. Anyone who has ever worked anywhere knows that managers always pressure workers just to make money, not to behave more ethically -- of course, such a manager would be fired on spot -- and indeed, workers that try to behave ethically are replaced by those who make more money, just as companies that try to behave ethically in the market are replaced by those that rather make money, i.e. corporations. This is nothing surprising, the definition of [capitalism](capitalism.md) implies existence of a system with Darwinian evolution that selects entities that are best at making money for any cost, and that is exactly what we are getting. To expect any other outcome in capitalism would be just trying to deny mathematics itself.
**Corporation is not a human, it has no emotion and absolutely 0 sense of morality.** The most basic error committed by retards is to reply to this argument with "but corporations are run by humans". This is an extremely dangerous argument because somehow 99.999999999999999999% people believe this could be true and accept it as a comforting argument so that they can continue their daily lives and do absolutely nothing about the disastrous state of society. The argument is of course completely false for a number of reasons: firstly corporations exclusively hire psychopaths for manager roles -- any corporation that doesn't do this will be eliminated by natural selection of the market environment because it will be weaker in a [fight](fight_culture.md) against other corporations, and its place will be taken by the next aspiring corporation waiting in line. Secondly corporations are highly sophisticated machines that have strong mechanisms preventing any ethical behavior -- for example division of labor in the "[just doing my job](just_doing_my_job.md)"/"[everyone does it](everyone_does_it.md)" style allows for many people collaborating on something extremely harmful and unethical without any single one feeling responsibility for the whole, or sometimes without people even knowing what they are really collaborating on. Of course, most just don't care, and most don't even have a choice. Similar principles allowed for example the [Holocaust](holocaust.md) to happen. Anyone who has ever worked anywhere knows that managers always pressure workers just to make money, not to behave more ethically -- of course, such a manager would be fired on spot -- and indeed, workers that try to behave ethically are replaced by those who make more money, just as companies that try to behave ethically in the market are replaced by those that rather make money, i.e. corporations. This is nothing surprising, the definition of [capitalism](capitalism.md) implies existence of a system with Darwinian evolution that selects entities that are best at making money for any cost, and that is exactly what we are getting. To expect any other outcome in capitalism would be just trying to deny mathematics itself.
TODO

@ -1,9 +1,9 @@
# Free Speech
Freedom of speech means there are no arbitrary punishments, imposed by government or anyone else, solely for talking about anything, making any public statement or publication of any information. **Free speech has to be by definition absolute and have no limits**, otherwise it's not free speech but controlled speech -- trying to add exceptions to free speech is like trying to limit to whom a [free software](free_software.md) license if granted; doing so immediately make such software non-free. Freedom of speech is an essential attribute of a mature society, sadly it hasn't been widely implemented yet and with the [SJW](sjw.md) cancer the latest trend in society is towards eliminating free speech rather than supporting it (see e.g. [political correctness](political_correctness.md)).
Freedom of speech means there are no arbitrary government or anyone else imposed punishments for or obstacles (such as [censorship](censorship.md)) to merely talking about anything, making any public statement or publication of any information. **Free speech has to be by definition absolute and have no limit**, otherwise it's not free speech but controlled speech -- trying to add exceptions to free speech is like trying to limit to whom a [free software](free_software.md) license if granted; doing so immediately makes such software non-free. Freedom of speech is an essential attribute of a mature society, sadly it hasn't been widely implemented yet and with the [SJW](sjw.md) cancer the latest trend in society is towards eliminating free speech rather than supporting it (see e.g. [political correctness](political_correctness.md)). Speech is being widely censored by extremist groups (e.g. [LGBT](lgbt.md), see [cancel_culture](cancel_culture.md)) and states -- depending on country there exist laws against so called "[hate speech](hate_speech.md)", questioning official versions of history (see e.g. [Holocaust](holocaust.md) denial laws present in many EU states), criticizing powerful people (for example it is illegal to criticize or insult that huge inbred dick Thai king), sharing of useful information such as books ([copyright](copyright.md) censorship) etc. Free speech nowadays is being eliminated by the strategy of creating an exception to free speech, usually called "hate speech", and then classifying any undesired speech under such label and silencing it.
The basic principle of free speech says that **if you don't support freedom of speech which you dislike, you don't support free speech**.
Some idiots (like that [xkcd](xkcd.md) #1357) say that free speech is only about legality, i.e. about what's merely allowed to be said by the law. **This is wrong**, true free speech mustn't be limited by anything -- if you're not allowed to say something, it doesn't matter too much what it is that's preventing you, your speech is not free. If for example it is theoretically legal to be politically incorrect and criticize the LGBT gospel but you [de-facto](de_facto.md) can't do it because the LGBT fascist [SJWs](sjw.md) would [cancel](cancel_culture.md) you and maybe even physically lynch you, your speech is not free.
Some idiots (like that [xkcd](xkcd.md) #1357) say that free speech is only about legality, i.e. about what's merely allowed to be said by the law or what speech the law "protects". Of course, **this is completely wrong** and just reflects this society's obsession with law; true free speech mustn't be limited by anything -- if you're not allowed to say something, it doesn't matter too much what it is that's preventing you, your speech is not free. If for example it is theoretically legal to be politically incorrect and criticize the LGBT gospel but you [de-facto](de_facto.md) can't do it because the LGBT fascist [SJWs](sjw.md) would [cancel](cancel_culture.md) you and maybe even physically lynch you, your speech is not free. It is important to realize **we mustn't tie free speech to legal definition**, i.e. it isn't enough to make speech free only in legal sense -- keep in mind that a [good society](less_retarded_society.md) aims to eliminating law itself. Our goal is to make speech free culturally, i.e. teach people that we should let others speak freely, even those -- and especially those -- who we disagree with.
Despite what the propaganda says there is currently no free speech in our society, the only kind of speech that is allowed is that which has no effect. Illusion of free speech is sustained by letting people speak until they actually start making a change -- once someone's speech leads to e.g. revealing state secrets or historical truths (e.g. about [Holocaust](holocaust.md)) or to destabilizing economy or state, such speech is labeled "harmful" in some way (hate speech, intellectual property violation, revealing of confidential information, instigating crime, defamation etc.), censored and punished.

@ -2,6 +2,6 @@
Hero culture is a [harmful](harmful.md) culture of creating and worshiping heroes which leads to e.g. creation of [cults of personality](cult_of_personality.md), strengthening [fight culture](fight_culture.md) and establishing hierarchical, anti-[anarchist](anarchism.md) society of "winners" and "losers". The concept of a hero is one that arose in context of [wars](war.md) and other many times violent conflicts; a hero is different from a mere authority in some area, it is someone who creates fear of disagreement and whose image is distorted to a much more positive, sometimes godlike state, by which he distorts truth and is given a certain power over others. Therefore [we](lrs.md) highly warn about falling to the trap of hero culture, though this is very difficult in current highly hierarchical society. **To us, the word hero has a pejorative meaning**. Our advice is always this:
**Do NOT create heroes. Follow ideas, not people**.
**Do NOT create heroes. Follow ideas, not people**. And similarly: hate ideas, not people.
Smart people know this and those being named *heroes* themselves many times protest it, e.g. Marie Curie has famously stated: "be less curious about people and more curious about ideas." Anarchists purposefully don't name theories after their inventors but rather by their principles, knowing that people are imperfect, they carry distorting associations and their images are twisted by history and politics. Abusive regimes are the ones who use heroes and their names for propaganda -- Stalinism, Leninism, corporations such as Ford, named after their founder etc. Heroes become brands whose stamp of approval is used to push bad ideas... especially popular are heroes who are already dead and can't protest their image being abused -- see for example how [Einstein's](einstein.md) image has been raped by [capitalists](capitalism.md) for their own propaganda, e.g. by [Apple](apple.md)'s [marketing](marketing.md), while in fact Einstein was a pacifist socialist. This is not to say an idea's name cannot be abused, the word *[communism](communism.md)* has for example become something akin a swear word after being abused by regimes that had little to do with real communism. Nevertheless it is still much better to focus on ideas as ideas always carry their own principle embedded within them, visible to anyone willing to look. Focusing on ideas allows us to discuss them critically, it allows us to reject a bad concept without "attacking" the human who came up with it.

@ -56,4 +56,5 @@ TODO
- [trade-free](trade_free.md)
- [Zeitgeist Movement](zeitgeist_movement.md)
- [TROM](trom.md)
- [One Community](one_community.md)
- [One Community](one_community.md)
- [Positive Revolution](positive_revolution.md)
Loading…
Cancel
Save