| Author
|
Anarchy and Fuck For Forest Video by TimeWaveZero TV
|
Login
IsraTrance Full Member
Started Topics :
65
Posts :
1707
Posted : Oct 15, 2009 19:44
|
Quote:
|
On 2009-10-15 13:26, Xolvexs wrote:
you think putting economics in the way of nature is a way to BALANCE the nature? are stupid? are you day dreaming?
Nature unlike humans does not calculate, it just keeps on happening. There is no 7 day week or 365 days a year...there is a full moon and the moon cycle. Nature does not believe in distribution...it believes in survival of the fittest...
|
|
Well in fact nature behaves like a perfect free market in dynamic equilibrium. Economics (specially free market ones) are not our invention, it’s a extrapolation of natures system, that’s why free market work better than any other system, its natural, its how nature distributes resources. Nature is 100% efficient, evolution it self is a process of specialization, diversification and “biological technology development”.
  "The dedication to repetition — the search for nirvana in a single held tone or an endlessly cycling rhythm — is one of electronic music's noblest gestures." |
|
|
|
-Abatwa-
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
42
Posts :
1087
Posted : Oct 15, 2009 20:32
|
wow that must be the crappiest anology I've heard in a long time, thanks for the jokes dood 
`Bottomless wonders spring from simple rules, which are repeated without end` Mandelbrot |
|
|
|
Xolvexs
IsraTrance Senior Member
Started Topics :
241
Posts :
2848
Posted : Oct 15, 2009 20:54
|
|
well global financial meltdown free markets under scrutiny..lehman gone bear stearns gone, northern trust barely surving, citibank on life support system, Merill lynch almost Bank of America, umm what else Jaguar is an indian company now..what exactly do you mean by a free market will depend whose side you took during the cold war...socialist have a different way of approaching freedom and capitalists have another way....unfortunately in economics Buddhism, the middle path has failed hence Tibet is a part of China...so how do these free markets function, if not with might and survival of the fittest? is a free market one where you grow your own food, or is a free market one where someone grows someone ploughs and third one reaps and is the land a leased land or is it communal? philosophically speaking nature doesnt give a rats ass about efficiency , evolution, distribution or whatever positive words you may use for economics...today you are here tommorow does not exist..its just today and now...nature and forest do not have powerpoint presentations which it can refer to nor are the animals and plants interested in such boring activities...go find your own berries and if you are not strong i will beat you and take your berries...why are we so bothered and concerned about nature when nature itself doesnt care? i mean if it did we humans would be long extinct.
When death comes to your doorstep, make sure you are alive |
|
|
|
Outolintu
IsraTrance Full Member
Started Topics :
63
Posts :
1477
Posted : Oct 15, 2009 21:14
|
interesting that human (public) sex can still cause a battle like this after all the millions of years we've been doing it. one of the true great mysteries, eh? 
"no one ever sweats on a plug-in" -moby |
|
|
|
Freeflow
IsraTrance Full Member
Started Topics :
60
Posts :
3709
Posted : Oct 15, 2009 22:10
|
Well covering all aspects of public sex we must consider the abuse that some people might get into by it..
If public sex was the norm you could not tell if a sexual molester was actually raping or just having some nice wonderful public sex with another "free" individual.
And i would call this a very important aspect, really!
But maybe you who are pro public sex dont care about this? well i know you do, but what do you have in mind to get around it?
i must say that i agree with Axis Mundi on many aspects! he has some nice arguments. And Xolvexs for his superb facts about how it really is in the forest  and that its up to us to create our common reality! No matter race or religion we must come to some kind of terms how certain basic things should be, otherwise its a war about that, and it can be war about a lot of things...
anyway i like this thread and to read about peoples opinions in this matter, some of you have truly great ones! and i respect all and even if some of them might be a little utopic.
I think its maybe also a good idea to think ahead a little and make a good debate and that neither side have too fixed views.
There are so many different tribes who has very different views on things, but now when the global is getting closer and closer to eachother its really a big question how we should solve certain things.
Its a highly philosophical debate! So get your arguments straight
|
|
|
|
Login
IsraTrance Full Member
Started Topics :
65
Posts :
1707
Posted : Oct 15, 2009 22:37
|
@Xolvess,
First of all the definition of �freedom� I will use is the negative conception of it: No physical or juridical limits. Freedom as John Locke, John Stuart Mill, Hamilton, Benjamin Constant, Karl Popper, Hayek, Rothbard, Luis von Misses or Robert Nozick understand and define it.
Of course any interpretations of positive freedom as Plato, Rousseau, Hegel or Marx understand it is discarded in my explanation.
Free market.- private property is granted, there are no restriction to economic interchanges. No government intervention in the way of taxes, regulations, subsidies, customs or restrictions of any kind.
Obviously I�m not talking about our everyday reality where government intervention is everywhere, that�s not free market. We live in a oligarchist capitalism where some actors with the help of the government interfere and cause market distortions in their benefit.
Also is not a free market because one of the biggest production factors is not free: labor. Labor is not free to go where it wants (we can�t migrate freely), in western societies there are limits to work hours, days and minimum wage also.
(by the way I�m talking just about economics here I�m not making a judgment about if it will be good or not).
Now, why nature and free market is a valid analogy:
Free market economics (some of them, I know this is incomplete and that I am making some conclusions that would need further explanation and proof but I�m lazy, go and pick some microeconomics book in any case).
Individuals make choices trying to maximize their benefits.
There are scarce and infinite resources.
In order to maximize benefits individual must make efficient use of resources.
Your choices are limited to the resources available in the market and your capability to obtain, administer and trade them.
Now, how living beings behave?
They have two goals: survive and reproduce them selves.
In order to achieve this they have their abilities and:�
There are scarce and infinite resources. (Food is scarce; oxygen is not in some cases, waters in some in others not)
Depending on what is abundant and scarce on their ecosystem animals and plants will specialize in order to survive: Speciation for example works as specialization in the work force, mutation work like random technology developments, extinction as bankrupts, co-operation as complementary industries, productive chains, etc etc
So the ecosystems reach, as markets, equilibrium until some external shock alters them or some mutation of one species inside the ecosystem breaks the balance 8as new technologies do inthe market). After it they will move in to some new equilibrium.
Obviously, non-organic factors are totally uncontrolled and unpredictable, they are shocks in ecosystems as they are for economic markets.
Hope I make my point clear.
One more argument that support this is that biology and economics share to a very high degree their research methodologies, their models are very similar , Right now Social simulation and artificial society methods biology and economics share a very common ground.
To finish my point I will add that Marxist argument about how capitalism and free market turns humans into mere animals, which are subject to economic forces (basically scarce resources). He was upset because he believed that what made us human was our ability to have control over nature and escape the restriction of limited resources. So naïve. "The dedication to repetition — the search for nirvana in a single held tone or an endlessly cycling rhythm — is one of electronic music's noblest gestures." |
|
|
|
Freeflow
IsraTrance Full Member
Started Topics :
60
Posts :
3709
Posted : Oct 16, 2009 00:05
|
maybe we are bound to be in war! bound to make our tribe a strong one and fit for fight! maybe its the sad truth....
so what happens when the whole world has been overtaken by the west! will it then be a civil war?
haha... total destruction of the human species..
and we are the one who destruct our selfs... lol, yeah sounds pretty plausible....
|
|
|
|
braininavat
Started Topics :
5
Posts :
233
Posted : Oct 16, 2009 04:38
|
Quote:
|
On 2009-10-15 11:57, Fria Tantrumm wrote:
I think our fundamental differences on the topic stem from the fact that you equate sex to be the same as wearing a T shirt, playing with a tricycyle and other such benign activities....
|
|
Do you think the public consumption of drugs should be ok at a trance party? Are you offended if someone is smoking a joint?
If you are not, its probly because you have no problem with these things yourself and would make the arguement that it is ok because it is not actually hurting anyone.
Someone who does not do drugs can make the exact arguements you are and be just as offended as you are by public displays of sex. Personal preferences though is meaningless, they are beside the point. The point is you either have tolerance or you do not. If you do not like drugs then don't take them. If you do not like public sex then don't fuck in public. You can not make the arguement that viewing 2 people fucking in the woods is somehow injuring you, otherwise someone who does not like drugs is "injured" by viewing someone else smoking a joint.
Its absurd.
Hell, I'm sure some people are offended by loud weird music.. |
|
|
|
Xolvexs
IsraTrance Senior Member
Started Topics :
241
Posts :
2848
Posted : Oct 16, 2009 10:59
|
login,
i do not deny that economics is derived out of nature. an ideal free market is based on on efficiency or factors of production...nature in my view its based on symbioses and everything, dead or alive has a role to play. for example when a tree due to age naturally falls down, it becomes a refuge for algae and fungus and certain type of insects (wasps, termites etc)...similarly animal carcass too is fed on. While according to economics upon death, decay etc the object becomes worthless in most cases. Economic life begins at birth and ends at the onset of death. In nature there is no separation of birth and death..survival is probably the only common factor. whether you take marx's socialism or adam smith's capitalism, you will notice that both of them pay immense attention to Labour...this labour comes with a cost. The notion of cost determines the demand and supply. In nature cost has no real function. Nature is based on abundance and even though Truffle mushrooms may cost $1200 a killo, in nature its totally free. Nature is about finders keepers and losers weepers. In nature cost is paid by life, the concept of middle men, governments, governing council, opinions, view points dont matter. Nature does not discriminate...even nature itself is not capable of understanding itself..nature of its own is unpredictable. One year it rains like crazy next year you face a drought another year incessant amount of snowfall. Nature just keeps on flowing, whether the flow has use or no use...it just keeps moving...free markets are based on needs and wants...you purchase condoms to stop procreation or spread of disease...in nature you have no control and even if you fall sick you find other things in nature that will cure you. You dont have pharma companies, but have abundance of malaria which if you contract can be cured by another specie of the malaria family. In nature to hoard, and store is not as easy as free markets. Take a bear for example, at the start of spring when it comes out of hibernation, a full grown bear would weigh roughly around 600lbs ...at the end of the summer the same bear weighs nearly 1200-1500lbs and in some cases upto 3000lbs. Then it goes into hibernation in winter and utilizes all that it has stored within itself. the bear uses up all its stored energy for the winter sleep. Human free market on the other hand is capable of recreating the same process except not within their biological structure but by using gadgets and technology...Human Nature and Jungle/ forest nature are different. Free markets seem natural for humans.
Wild Animals eat only when they are hungry, hence most of their body mass is muscle. Food consumption for humans is in todays society no longer a biological need, its an economic need. The humans have been cognitioned to eat sleep work on a 24hr cycle.. we feel hungry not in our stomach but in our brain...your brain tells you to eat. thus obesity. when its your brain that tells you eat or not to eat, the stomach simply obeys the brain rather than sending a signal to the brain, the stomach receives a neurological signal from the brain and activates the hunger hormones. strange...because eating has become a function of the brain rather than the stomach, there is an agriculture industry, a poultry industry,...this industrialization of biologicaland natural processes is what drives free markets. Everyones brain benefits but body suffers. For a lone human estranged on an island full of resources is considered punishment...free markets run on social needs rather than individual needs. Also in nature there is no difference between wants, needs and desires as nature is based on instant biological gratification. unlike us humans animals cannot extend their hunger...when they are hungry they eat, they dont wait for someone to bring them their menu card or check their bank balance. Most animals are comfortable being alone, we humans call that isolation and its a negative emotion...we humans get depressed and psychologically unstable because we mix up economics with nature and try to convince ourselves that economics is purely natural and free markets function like nature? can you tell me in which forest can i find the price tag of $19.99 plus V.A.T and a 15% service charge for bowl fruits? and another $3.55 for a cup of coffee?
Human believe "i think therefore i am", nature is "oh yeah, see those teeth, they can tear your flesh apart, do u still prefer to think, analyze, run a probability test, rationalize with the salivating alligator or lion and inform them that it makes economic sense for them to let you live? or do you prefer to run and climb up the nearest tree?" ...and who do u think will do your post-mortem or autopsy in nature?...guess what it will be the Vulture or the hyenas or any other scavengers. whatever little sympathy or mercy the alligator or lion bestows upon you will simply be snatched by the scavengers...thats a free market...there are no trends or curves there is you and there is someone preying on you...kill or be killed...very simple very easy very intelligent very clever..Intellect is of minimal use Instinct is of maximum use. in a free market you can afford to be lazy, in nature u will be gasping for breath.
When death comes to your doorstep, make sure you are alive |
|
|
|
TranceVisuals
TranceVisuals
Started Topics :
23
Posts :
743
Posted : Oct 16, 2009 11:11
|
hmmm
free market, another of those neurolinguistic constructs, that describe an abstraction but seemingly has no basis in reality. The mere quantification into capital or monetary terms is a "human" abstraction that does not occur outside the realm of symbolistic metaphor.
I like the oxymoron though
FREE and MARKET
People who generally use these terms, generally are either generally ignornant of terms as applied to the real world, and its "non-use" by those same "free market proponents", or "have something to prove".
Like Bill Hick's "look at the furrows on my brow, I have a mortgage, job, kids, commitments, bank account etc etc to maintain"...
Or as Alan Watts preferred to use the analogy of "prickly people" as opposed to "goo".
We generally conform to the ideas in our head about reality, which is UNSANITY (sorry folks Korzybski quoined the term decades before Posford put in a bastardized sample), rather than to how things are, or a rather more inexpressable zen outlook.
This UNSANITY, or living through ideas, and language (the two go hand in hand, our thoughts are our language and vice versa) is dangerous due to suppositions that most people aren't even aware of.
The nature of "is" that is to say "objects" do not occur in the "real world", objects are our abstraction of what could be called space-time processes, or as Alan Watts said "do-happenings"......
Until we learn to communicate, in what I term "higher order functioning" there seems little prospect for us transforming the dialectic from a futile egotistic display, into a radical transformative process, that means we might escape from this "black iron prison". |
|
|
|
Dogon
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
50
Posts :
8779
Posted : Oct 16, 2009 14:37
|
|
Dogon
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
50
Posts :
8779
Posted : Oct 16, 2009 14:58
|
|
moki
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
38
Posts :
1931
Posted : Oct 16, 2009 15:12
|
zoki is much more sexy. please sell this profile to me, please please please. ))) i had to carry this boring moki thing for 17 years now. hey, i need a new libido finally.
|
|
|
|
braininavat
Started Topics :
5
Posts :
233
Posted : Oct 16, 2009 15:42
|
"People who generally use these terms, generally are either generally ignornant of terms as applied to the real world, and its "non-use" by those same "free market proponents", or "have something to prove"."
And people who quote Watts and Hicks in general have not studied economics for shit.
Its a simple matter of the fact we have scarce resources and there is no better way to allocate those scarce resources with less waste of those scarce resources(which at the least does not amplify scarcity)than a market based system. Its the ignorance of the concept of minimax that throws off people who haven't studied economics.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minimax
Markets are the optimal minimax strategy for an economy...
Argueing against markets is like argueing for monarchy over democracy...Who gives a shit what positive arguements someone can give for monarchy, its already lost the arguement on the stage of history.
If we had infinite resources there would be something to argue about, but we dont have infinite resources... |
|
|
|
moki
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
38
Posts :
1931
Posted : Oct 16, 2009 15:47
|
Quote:
| Argueing against markets is like argueing for monarchy over democracy... |
|
and what about neoliberalism?
|
|
|
|
|
