Telegram Archive - week 20, 2025, page 2
- 16 minutes read - 3346 wordsExactly. Collectivist and also wasteful.
I want individuals to choose how to spend their money
And I dont want their money supply to just come from banks.
Money does not come from banks. Money is a measure of value. You can’t make value out of thin air. Bankrupcies happen because of bad choices, and that’s why capitalism works, and why a government is not a corporation. Corporations die and are born, governments do not.
continuing with devil’s advocate. i do agree with you that when the issue is systemic, tackling the symptom is less efficient than tackling the cause. but devil still has this kind of argument: ok, there are a million starving kidds. you don’t have money to feed all of them. but you have “extra” money to feed three, or three hundred - then you must! (“extra” here means that your basic life needs (maslow) won’t suffer).
then.. suppose you know about immense suffering of people in place X. you can either:
- help just a few of them, by donating your meagre, but still “surplus” money
- be very smart and wise, and use that money to build a systemic solution, to help them. like actually “talking loudly about a systemic problem of that country” (as B said above, for example). you might be risking to be killed by that country’s King’s police though
- do none of the above. then Peter Singer will come to you in your sleep, and whisper “you’re bad immoral creaturessssssssssss!”
@participant-367 Dmitry Lunin is working on some kind of reputation system.
@participant-4233 about people leading you on, promising money. There was no contract signed, right ? It was just talk. I think that all such talk should be seen as interest in your idea, but in the form of “wait and see.”
Yes even with contracts signed. I had two investors who signed legal contracts, sent some money (“consideration”) and then just renegged on the rest.
One in 2018 signed a contract and was supposed to send $200K but sent $75K only. And then unilaterally said I’ll send $25K and thats it. He said that because ETH was going down in crypto winter.
Another in Dubai last year in 2024 had me pay his lawyer $3,000 (shoulda been a red flag), gathered his whole team, we signed all together for $500K, the contract said he must send the first $50K trache in 3 days, but he didn’t. For weeks he kept inviting us to his events and telling everyone we are his portfolio company. When my partner I asked him when he will send the first $50K he kept saying tomorrow, in front of everyone. He kept doing this until I left Dubai 60 days later.
These were the most egregious examples, but I have seen it all last year, including everything in between.
@participant-4233 Greg asks the mathematical question: if people borrow money, how can they all pay back? Wouldn’t it require printing more money? No. First, under the gold standard, there’s no money to print beyond matching the gold reserves. But even under fiat, if there was no inflation, the value of money would increase with time, and that will be represented in the lending terms. In deflationary market of 5% per year, the lending terms could be: you borrow $100, and you must return $95 no sooner than in one year. Replace $ with bitcoin, if it feels to you more realistic.
Note that civilization naturally means deflation of currency. So if nothing is printed, you will get deflation. Why? Because of natural impovement in productivity inherent in civilization. If a bag of potatoes cost $5 to produce, then in 50 years from now, it could be $1 to produce. (E.g. nuclear factory powering lamps for veritcal farming).
ETH, Dubai. That’s not a red flag? The whole crypto thing is a giant ponzi scheme, and Dubai is a place where they kill women for adultery. By going that way, you are going for a high risk investment, so why are you surprised that it backfires.
Boris what do you think about that situation? Since even signed contracts often dont guarantee anything, that is a complete breakdown of trust. After such experiences, why should I trust anyone going forward — unless they sent me money upfront so we can build together. This is the conclusion everyone comes to.
The first guy was in Miami and well respected and his son has a big multimillion dollar wedding at Cipriani’s
So why don’t you sue him for breaking the contract? Was there an exit clause in the contract?
It’s not just Dubai. It’s everywhere. Maybe less in NYC because NYC people are far more straightforward and dont pretend like many seem to do in Miami
I could, but then he could go to jail in Dubai under their laws. For that size of a debt and renegging. I dont want to do that to him. He is just a sociopath.
ok, again. Dubai. You can’t do business in a hell hole. And libertarians – pay attention: you need a safe environment for business. @participant-1046
See thats the environment I want to build. With smart contracts and reputations. Not violence and jails
Well, whatever you do, it should not be a trade of higher value for lower value (sacrifice). If you risk your life to fix a country (Iran) by drawing pictures of Muhammad, then you shouldn’t do it unless you really want to take this risk and whatever comes with it (e.g. Bosch Fawstin, the cartoonist).
It’s not a new idea, but no one was able to do it yet. The closest one was the fear of being “cancelled,” but it didn’t stop J.K. Rowling.
Second, do not forget that rich people pay an insane amount of tax, so from their perspective they already gave to charity plenty. Before income taxes were a thing, charities were a thing, and people indeed supported them – voluntarily.
About extra money. Again, there’s no extra money. The nice bed is deserved by the rich man. He didn’t become rich for no reason, he earned that money, and he deserves the nice bed. What’s a higher value for him? The bed he worked hard to get, or some child far away, he doesn’t know, born to parents who made decisions he is not responsibel for, the child that will die due to those bad decisions? In my view, the products of his own achievements should be more valuable to him. Any kind of charity on his part, if he wishes to undertake it, should be again “play,” not anyting serious in his life. But the bed, that is serious. The nice house, the mansion, the private airplanes, etc. – that is serious.
Finally, rich people are rich because they already provided a lot of “charity,” actually benefited society. Bill Gates made computers accessible to your grandma. He deserves all that money. But that money actually is less than what he gave to society.
What’s more valuable ? 18 billion dollars or WhatsApp, the first end-to-end encrypted messenger, widely used? I think WhatsApp. It’s not the rich who are obligated to society, it’s the society that’s obligated to thank the rich (for producing whatever they produced).
It’s us who have to thank the maker of Telegram, for making the best chat app for groups. It’s us who have to thank Zoom for making the best way to meet online. Same for many other great things (that are even hard to count).
I have two developers in Vietnam. I pay them per task. I write up the requriement, ask how much they want. The amount is usually reasonable, and I don’t argue. But in the end, I’m not worried about hours worked. If the task appears harder (lots of follow up bugs, etc), I make a new task for bugs.
Right, but why stop at a life-or-death situation?
What about more than just basic sustenance? Where does one draw the line?
I would imagine the answer has to be at a minimum the life-or-death, but again, why stop there?
I can play devil’s advocate too. It’s the old slippery slope. The big issue is almost always: by what right?
Yes, he’s a very nice guy. I think he’s trying to pick up where Tilata-YourJustice-Bitnation left off.
The line is always at where it becomes a sacrifice (you’re giving up your bigger value for a lesser value to you).
Fr? The guy was an Objectivist?
Dang. Am I indiscreet or against the group policy if I ask what kind of job you had?
I agree, how is fundamental to happiness, but there is no how with no life
We don’t have to thank them if we pay for the service they provide no more than they should thank us
I have now published my article “Stop waiting for Godot”
It’s not merely an article, but a catalog of historical personalities, and fictional personalities, which can serve as inspiration to anyone trying to embark on a project that appears to defy accepted ideas in society
No.
It’s not hard to say thank you. In a win-win exachange, each side is feeling a win, namely: the expense is less than the value gained.
If you want me to add someone to the catalog, let me know. It’s not supposed to be exhaustive, though.
In the case of Ukraine & Zelenskyy, there are so many mistakes already done, that you can’t treat this decision to side with Turkey in isolation. If Ukraine did things differently, it would not be in this position today. The most basic thing is: if you can’t win a war, how can you fight? You can’t. You must accept a protectorate. Ukraine had no guarantees from other countries, but it took Zelenskiyy three years to realize it. Why only now he asks USA where are the guarrantees?
Next, once the war started, there were a lot of patriots. But the politics of denynig men to leave the country, men who did not want to fight, has alienated many people. He should have capitulated when it became obvious that there are no more patriots who want to fight. So what became as a valiant, enthusiastic resistance to Russia’s aggression, turned out to be a stalemate with many young men hiding at home to avoid entering the war. Conscripton is evil, and Ukraine is an illustration of this.
It isn’t hard, but it isn’t necessary: if it truly is a win-win, then there’s an exchange of values and, thus, no need for thanking anybody
I understand
Then giving doesn’t have to be a “sacrifice” - granted that’s subjective and is highly individualistic and relative.
It doesn’t. It depends
I was thinking about Prometheism, as the name, instead of Anthemism, after receiving the feedback from several of you.
Prometheus is the name of the main protagonism of Anthem, after he escapes the dystopian society.
So this name is already used by a defunct movement that’s no longer revelant for 100 years
What’s interesting, it also was in the subject matter of starting an independent country.
Since then it also got used by some environmentalist, in the form of Prometheanism. This is more recent, from 1997.
sounds like that term is lost
How about planthemism ? combination of planning and anthemism ?
Or Xanthemism ? X doesn’t really mean anything, maybe “exit”. Or Janthemism (to use a different letter). Or Ganthemism
Panthemism ? Play of “pan” and anthem merged together.
How about transanthemism ? If anthemism is for individual exitism (kind of like agorism), here we have many indivduals exiting to start a new country.
There is an expression of “Going Anthem” (exiting), so ganthemism would be a linguistic merge of go+anthem+ism
Gangsterism?
Anything trans nowadays seems to have a bit of a connotation to it, no? You’re hardly ever see transcontinental anymore. It likely went out of style for other reasons.
That’s a pity because Prometheism sounds real good. Pro as a prefix even an unintended one sounds good.
Why not simply use the name of the potential new country directly?
Although the name has been used in the past, I would have called the whole thing the Atlantis Society or Atlantis Movement
Otherwise, you could go with something really plain — but much easier to find — like aynrandcountry.org or objectivistcountry.org
“Ayn Rand” is ARI’s property, so it can’t be used. I honestly like Willand/Will Land a lot
It needs to be an ism, I think. This way it can be placed into a sentence as an adjective, and it can be an idea, not a particular country, particular geography, etc. As it stands now, it’s not clear where to do it, and even if it was, it’s premature to make it public.
Neoamericanism ? Assuming the name of the new country is New America. I’m afraid that it will require too much explaining what’s meant.
then, atlantism
Too similar: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlanticism
It’s not too bad, if there’s this connotation. We’re not gansters, of course, but we are bold and rejecting things. Bad ass. (I mean, that if ganthemism will get confused by gansterism, for a joke or a pun maybe)
For now, I lean more toward calling it the Atlantis Movement
I’m going to sleep on “ganthemism” a few days, then probably change it to that. I like it, because it’s keeping the same meaning (going anthem), and parallels the more common expression of “going galt”
I see it very much the same way. In my system, there’s also a referral mechanism, but it’s not just about inviting people. The person who made the invitation is directly responsible for who they bring in. If someone they invited proves to be unreliable or causes harm to the network, this reflects on the inviter’s own reputation. At the same time, inviting valuable members is rewarded.
More than anything, it gives you an immediate reference to one of the most recognized works
That’s a good idea. It reminds that I wouldn’t recommend to hire someone if he is bad, becasue it will in the end reflect on me and my professionalism.
Galtism?
😁
This is actually a very good idea
Told ya
It could still serve well as a redirect domain
Lol
Well, it’s obvious most names will not be completely original, but what matters is the concrete action behind those names: If this movement were called “Galtism” and had success (which I don’t think will happen), it would overshadow any other movement with the same name
Galt is way over done. There have been so many Galt initiatives. It ironically lacks in originality.
How about Roarkism?
Galtism has wrong meaning of attempting to crashing the society and it’s not about a new country but a summer club
John Stossel published a 5 min video on Ayn Rand, featuring Yaron Brook. Video is titled “In Defense of Selfishness”
Ok, we can probably still use it. Could use a variant: Promethism or something like that
This is from google AI search result on “promethism”, which it automatically corrected to Prometheism
Prometheism, in its broadest sense, refers to the spirit of challenging authority and striving for progress, often associated with the myth of Prometheus who defied the gods to give fire to humanity. In a political context, it can also refer to a movement that supports independence movements against a perceived oppressive power, as seen in the case of Prometheism in Poland. In other contexts, Jason Reza Jorjani, for example, uses the term to describe a philosophy that emphasizes scientific and technological advancement and a rejection of traditional authority.
We are at this moment faced with the simultaneous entry of the United States of America into a Third World War and a Second American Civil War. I have warned about this for years and, most unfortunately, it now seems both inevitable and imminent. I hereby commit Prometheism to defending America in this struggle.
Jason Reza Jorjani, American Philosopher
Founder of Prometheism
February 7, 2024
The guy has 11K followers on Twitter (under his personal account). Sounds like we can’t use this name.
More “gems” from the homepage: “Prometheism is a techno-scientific, sociopolitical, religious, and aesthetic movement inspired by Prometheus and based on the philosophical writings of Jason Reza Jorjani.”
and,
“In order to ensure that the cities are never repopulated and reclaimed, they will be physically destroyed. One major mechanism to bring this about will be artificially triggered volcanic eruptions, earthquakes, and attendant tsunamis.”
And the guy is a fan of Heidegger
Also reminds me of https://t.me/americancolossus
Themis - greek goddess of justice. So we can just call it “themism” and say it’s still derived from “anthem”.
kind of similar to accepted term “thomism” (after Thomas Aquinas)
the only unfortunate part here is the pronounciation in English can be confused with “them” - ism. Perhaps “themeism” ?
I think ganthemism is good. It doesn’t have the connotation that you are anti somethnig. It’s kind of sounds strong, like Galt, or Gascone (from 3 musketeers), or galant