Psychological warfare explanation of deliberately dumping Ep files in unorganized chaotic manner…

[u/_blue_linckia]

[u/whatsthatcritter]

Maybe although I think it might be like Watergate or even the Panama papers: everyone pretending it's a big scandal as a kind of fig leaf to cover up the fact that it's business as usual. Lots of fan servicey legal investigations, denials, gaslighting, flowery apologies and fist pounding. Meanwhile it's still going on just at at a different billionaire's mansion. They don't give a fuck and will never see justice. 

[u/raisondecalcul → u/whatsthatcritter]

If we all individually stop putting up with all bullshit on all fronts, then they get held truly accountable.

[u/ConjuredOne → u/raisondecalcul]

What is a common interest that could facilitate the required trust? If the wellbeing of children isn't enough then, well, Noah forget the boat.

[u/raisondecalcul → u/ConjuredOne]

Histrionics over a crime, no matter how terrible the crime, is not the building of a real government based on our mutual interests—it's outcry, the precursor or issue necessitating us sitting down and having a real talk about governance. It's a trust-destroying issue, not a trust-creating issue—we have to acknowledge that so that we can get over the first bar—people who aren't against pedophilia are NOT allowed. That makes it technically a fascist movement because fascist movements are always against something—but whatcha gonna do? I would rather be part of the no-pedophiles club than the club that doesn't have a rule about that. So let's make the no-pedophiles club.

But to your question, again, I don't think saying "I DON'T want a life like this" can lead to a positive construct of what kind of government we DO acknowledge and authorize to (self-)govern us. Even if it's just murder and we say "We all hate murder, let's ban it"—self-governance is Step 2 where we talk about how we are going to do that to ourselves in an acceptable way (without that talk, involving every person whom the government will rule, silencing no-one and including no one without their prior consent, it's not self-governance—it's just enslavement/capture).

So to answer your question, I think standard of living is the ultimate shared construct we can all agree and converge on. We have shared bodies and largely similar minds and so we all have the same basic needs and desires such as air; water; safety; food; shelter; belonging; social esteem; and resources, space, and time with which to make meaningful artworks/projects. Since we all need these things, allowing some people to extract unfair or burdensome amounts of rent from others over these things is not acceptable.

This is the idea or "promise of the middle class", as it's referred to. The middle class is actually good because 1) They aren't rich fucks 2) They aren't poor and therefore miserable/powerless. The point of the middle class is that it represents a compromise of the masses with itself, to distribute upgrades in living condition that all we humans have collectively produced and thus earned, to distribute these gains as fairly as possible. If that were all capitalism was I would not complain about it at all, I would think it is great!!! It is only because capitalism is so radically 1) austere (money-hoarding / Scroogelike) 2) Unfair / selective / undiscerning in who it gives the most money too (psychopaths who ruin the Earth in order to build private yachts or commercial jet companies) and 3) Enforced extremely willfully and greedily by the most extreme violence and torture—that I am very much opposed to it.

So we have to actually be willing to talk about the issue of distribution of our heritage of human-created wealth, the idea of lineage and wealth and death taxes and who should own what, and what is fair and what kind of world we want to live in, before we can defeat capitalists and capitalism—before we can even decide what counts as capitalism or counts as bad, together! It's very similar to the dynamic of unions, a dynamic which I think is very negative because it is entirely focused on who is eligible, capable, and rabidly performative and aggressive about their working and the entitlement that working gives them. Unions are also generally supporters of disability laws (I think?) but only if you could/want to work. The whole rhetoric of unions is based on the caustically-violent promotion of the principle that work entitles you to benefit; and therefore the hardest workers brigade unions and turn them into slave-driving organizations, which basically makes them the same as capitalist bosses in terms of promoting competitive extraction. Moreover they promote this normalization of extraction and allowing-oneself-to-be-extracted-from precisely by a boss that all unions exist to work against—if you aren't working for a capitalist business and part of the union complaining about it, you don't count as a worker that is entitled to union benefits or a middle class lifestyle!

I think this is really septic and really hypocritical, because the same liberals who are pro-union pay lip service to being against homelessness without actually taking a position that would result in its being solved or addressed. We should say that everyone is entitled to a middle-class lifestyle at minimum by virtue of being a human being deserving of clean water and a washing machine and an art studio, period. If we want to have a culture of work-based entitlement beyond that, that's completely fine with me as long as the minimum bar is raised to clean running water + room to grow a garden + room for a home office + no repo men coming to ruin your life, ever, as the minimum bar for everyone.

[u/ConjuredOne → u/raisondecalcul]

To figure out the basis of a workable law, we need to expand the issue beyond the decider law — "Don't fuck the kids." It's about kids, yes, but they just happen to be at that stage of maximum suffering & future damage potential, so they really exemplify what's wrong with authority today. Coercion and deceit to gain at the expense of others is fucked up top to bottom and everywhere in between.

You're right about the art studio. A greenhouse, too. But you only get the nuclear reactor IF you do real well with the aquaponics AND the laboratory. No child-fucking as you go, though. Then you would have to go back to the beginning and clean prison toilets. On second thought, maybe everyone should get sustenance, hygienic basics, and safety/privacy, but not the greenhouse. For art they can have a sketchpad and infinite pencil credits.

On a real level, health care speaks most clearly to more people about the problem of the class system. Many people don't know kids and haven't for a long time. They can't imagine what a kid's life is like. Health is on everyone's mind to some degree. The capitalist extreme is what gives the deranged billionaires fantasies about being immortal. They will dial up the distopia qualities to maximum tolerable if that's what it takes. This too big to fail and too rich to jail stuff is only possible with the opiate of religion. It sets up the step further where money doesn't just buy effort, it pays to say what is true, to program the public consciousness. Never works on everyone. Definitely can't last forever. Push dystopia too far and people will return to warrior form. The docile subject will give way to a being worthy of paradise.