___  __        ___     _       ___   _               _               
|_ _| \ \      / (_)___| |__   |_ _| | |__   __ _  __| |   __ _ _ __  
 | |   \ \ /\ / /| / __| '_ \   | |  | '_ \ / _` |/ _` |  / _` | '_ \ 
 | |    \ V  V / | \__ \ | | |  | |  | | | | (_| | (_| | | (_| | | | |
|___|    \_/\_/  |_|___/_| |_| |___| |_| |_|\__,_|\__,_|  \__,_|_| |_|
                                                                      
 _____     _              ____ _                     _               
| ____|___| |__   ___    / ___| |__   __ _ _ __ ___ | |__   ___ _ __ 
|  _| / __| '_ \ / _ \  | |   | '_ \ / _` | '_ ` _ \| '_ \ / _ \ '__|
| |__| (__| | | | (_) | | |___| | | | (_| | | | | | | |_) |  __/ |   
|_____\___|_| |_|\___/   \____|_| |_|\__,_|_| |_| |_|_.__/ \___|_|   
                                                                     

My political beliefs are weird.

I don’t like corporate apologists, since large companies clearly go hand-in-hand with large problems for large numbers of people, and other animals. But the standard reply of ‘bring down capitalism’, make no sense[i].

I’d like to take an interest in Politics, but nobody’s talking about the primary key which could allow for real change – switching voting mechanisms. Every problem raised is a problem with one of the two parties, in a two-party system. Everyone who complains that they couldn’t trust any politician proceeds to ignore the mechanism which has pinned them down to a pair of rotten apples. The rest of the conversation sounds like discussing how to bake the rotten apples instead of just getting new apples.

Decades and decades of how to bake rotten apples.

I think in terms of Memetics. On some level, every social movement or group I hear about, I parse through the lens of Memetic theory, but that’s an analysis which will never return get a reply, or even return an echo.

I would love to have shows, or just YouTube videos, where people take Utilitarian theory as true, and proceed from there, rather than rehashing some clumsy high-school-level debate on basic ethics. I’ve been there, got the piece of paper, and I want the next level of the conversation, but it’s beyond unrealistic.

I hear the same stuff over and over on the web, and generally don’t engage, because someone’s 10 stages of assumptions into their ‘anti-capitalist’ rant, or whatever, and I’m so far removed from their belief system, I can’t engage without parsing everything they say through some kind of theory-translator, and leaving the results a mess.

I often think it’d be nice to have an echo-chamber, even a small one, with a couple of podcasts or just a chat board. Humans think in groups, and so far I’ve had to do most of my thinking by reading people’s thoughts (mostly dead people). It’d be nice to have a space where I could hear these ideas develop, because even good ideas can fester.

[i]