Mediaboss Marketing

Beyond Order

12 More Rules for Life

By Jordan Peterson

Penguin, 2021

432 pages, $29

To order: amazon.com

During an April 2021 podcast with Los Angeles Auxiliary Bishop Robert Barron entitled, Christianity and the Modern World, Jordan Peterson marked the striking exodus of many young Catholics from their cradle faith and offered his own diagnosis of the problem: The Church did not ask enough of them, and so it had failed to make the adventure of faith challenging and thus appealing.

Bishop Barron took Petersons judgment seriously. Afterall, the best-selling author of 12 Rules for Life: An Antidote to Chaos (5 million copies sold in English and translated into 50 languages) has attracted a vast global audience by exhorting his youthful followers to embrace responsibility, resist a culture of victimization, and engage with faith traditions and classic texts that uphold inconvenient moral truths.

Some parts of 12 Rules for Life are the stuff of self-help literature (Stand Up Straight with Your Shoulders Back). Others are rather whimsical (Do Not Bother Children While They Are Skateboarding). And a few are profoundly anti-woke (Set Your House in Order Before You Criticize the World).

Taken as a whole, they reflect the authors belief that many young adults who have failed to launch did not receive a strong practical or philosophical framework from their families and schools and are in desperate need of help.

Bishop Barron, reviewing the Churchs mixed record of catechetical and moral formation, agreed that Catholic lite had failed to tap the imagination and idealism of the next generation. In contrast, he said, the Canadian psychologist had a particular gift for biblical exegesis, bringing the Old and New Testament stories to life in a way that spoke to millennials.

Petersons new book, Beyond Order: 12 More Rules for Life, returns to the familiar terrain of his first best-seller. But chapters that address the interplay of order and chaos are less structured and punctuated by digressions and occasional banalities. Likewise, readers who savored the authors fresh, illuminating interpretation of Bible stories in 12 Rules for Life may be disappointed with his treatment of the text less memorable this time around.

Nevertheless, Beyond Order offers timely principles for readers who are just emerging from a pandemic that cost lives and livelihoods, stirring fear and alienation.

In the wake of violent political protests and the random vandalization of public statues commemorating historic figures, Rule I: Do not carelessly denigrate social institutions or creative achievements and Rule XII: Be grateful in spite of your suffering bookend this spirited defense of organized religion, democratic practices and plain common sense.

Like many other conservative public intellectuals, Peterson believes that the decline of organized religion has made totalizing ideologies more appealing. Readers are warned to be wary of this path (Rule VI: Abandon Ideology). And those seeking an integrated vision of life are directed to the worlds great faiths as a starting point.

The core idea is this: subjugate yourself voluntarily to a set of socially determined rules those with some tradition in their formulation and a unity that transcends the rules will emerge, he writes. That unity constitutes what you could be if you concentrate on a particular goal and see it through.

A related theme in Petersons arsenal is the moral and curative power of gratitude.

This virtue has deep spiritual roots, and the author turns to the Bibles seminal account of Gods creation of the world, observing that the goodness of creation reflected the fact that Truth, Courage, and Love were united in his creative action. Thus there is an ethical claim deeply embedded in the Genesis account of creation: Everything that emerges from the realm of possibility in the act of creation (arguably either divine or human) is good insofar as the motive for its creation is good. I do not believe there is a more daring argument in all of philosophy or in theology than this: To believe this, to act it out, is the fundamental act of faith.

But as an experienced therapist, Peterson also knows that childhood trauma, or some other brush with adversity or injustice, can destroy a persons belief in the essential goodness of the Creator, and by extension faith-based values and institutions. For this reason, many of his readers must consciously nurture an appreciation for what they have received.

Shockingly, the author is counseling gratitude at the very time that Americas racial reckoning has badly damaged the moral credibility of its social and political order. Nevertheless, he believes that gratitude is an essential element of human flourishing and posits it as a precondition for fruitful reform, at both the personal and societal level, with the example of Jesus Christ (I have not come to abolish the law but to fulfill it) as a model for emulation. To be clear: This is not a blind, nave endorsement of tradition. Rather, his argument is grounded in a highly realistic approach fully alive to both the stubborn existence of sin in the world and the tragic outcome of atheistic systems that sought and failed to eradicate it.

Beyond Orders most distinctive contribution, however, arises from the authors expertise as a clinical psychologist.

In several fascinating case studies of former patients, he shows how the particularly modern problem of overly protective parents leaves their adult children ill-equipped to navigate tough times and call out bad acters. Another chapter examines the hold that inaccurate and unexamined memories can have over our present-day choices and relationships. We must recollect ourselves or suffer in direct proportion to our ignorance and avoidance, he writes.

Compared with the more basic guidance of 12 Rules for Life, which famously admonished readers to make their bed every day, Beyond Order is an attempt to nudge readers to the next level. Now that they have achieved a measure of stability, with a job and a relationship, how do they hold onto both while continuing to learn and grow? Much of his guidance has a practical bent (Rule II: Imagine who you can be and then aim single-mindedly at that or Rule VII: Work as hard as you possibly can on one thing and see what happens).

More broadly, Petersons work is driven by a deeply personal quest to unlock the mysteries at the very core of the Churchs response to the human condition: the meaning of suffering, Gods toleration of evil in the world, and Christs redemptive act on the cross.

The father of a beloved daughter diagnosed in her childhood with a painful debilitating condition, he spent two decades at her side during almost 20 surgeries. This grueling trial is surely a key to Petersons appeal, for his firsthand experience with suffering gives his voice real authenticity and makes his tough-love solutions more palatable.

During the three years since 12 Rules for Life became an international best-seller, Peterson has suffered through many more trials. In the Overture of Beyond Order, he describes the cascading series of medical and psychological crises, including an addiction to the sedative benzodiazepine, that resulted in his physical collapse. He has since regained his health, but recent YouTube videos reveal that his characteristically gaunt face has aged significantly during this period.

The authors deteriorating condition had been global news, so the revelations in the Overture will not come as a shock to his supporters. But his predicament points to the enormous burden this curious modern prophet carries on his shoulders as he goes against the grain of contemporary mores and touches millions of lives in the process.

Peterson preaches the practical and psychological value of faith, but he does not have it, and thus he is cut off from this wellspring of hope. Many of his Catholic friends, including, no doubt, Bishop Barron, are prepared to accompany him on his idiosyncratic pilgrimage.

But the weight of the responsibility he carries should also provoke deep soul-searching among Church leaders and educators. Why are his efforts so necessary and urgent? And why have so many Catholic pastors, teachers and parents failed to make the faith matter in the lives of young Catholics?

Link:
Jordan Peterson Preaches the Practical Value of a Faith He Doesn't Have: Hope Is the Missing Link - National Catholic Register

Iowa State quarterback Brock Purdy is anxious to play on Saturday

Iowa State quarterback Brock Purdy provides honesty about emotional highs and lows during the past seven months

Iowa State athletic department

Well have had a lot thrown at us, by the time Iowa State opens the football season against Northern Iowa on Sept. 4 at Jack Trice Stadium. The grand re-opening of stadiums, a return of the wonderful smells that go along with tailgating, and players taking advantage their pandemic-allowed Super Senior season.

By then, the player opportunity for name, image and likeness compensation that the NCAA should have figured out at least a year ago, finally will be a thing. And by the time we hear the sweet sound of foot kicking football at the start of a game, plans will be moving even more steadily toward the 12-team playoff thats going to make college richer, while also adding a layer of teams to the Alabama-Clemson-Ohio State trio that seem to always headline the college football playoffs.

More: Name, image, likeness compensation: It's a revolution, but NCAA, Congress, Iowa Legislature leave coaches, athletes in limbo

Theyre game-changers that could have been pushed forward last year, until the focus rightfully shifted to figuring out how best to safely play sports amid a coronavirus pandemic that rocked everyones world.

I looked back on stuff that was in the news a year ago around this time:

My initial reaction?

See ya, Cy-Hawk 2020, a reality that followed by 24 hours the cancellation of the 2020 Iowa State Fair.

Talk about a one-two punch to the gut, former Iowa State coach and Iowa player Dan McCarney said a year ago about a game that had been played consecutively since 1977. Those are fabrics of the State of Iowa. Even non-football fans look toward that special Saturday every season, that special fall tradition of the Iowa-Iowa State football game.

No State Fair. No Cy-Hawk. No trash talking among fans that I vowed I would never miss.

More: Peterson: Cy-Hawk TV flap annoys you? Plan ahead, or you might miss the biggest game of the series

Whats changed? Cy-Hawk lives again. Sept. 11. Jack Trice Stadium at 2:30 p.m. Cyclones athletics director Jamie Pollard said about a month ago that the stadium will be back to 100 percent capacity. Tailgating for all six home games will be allowed. Kinnick Stadium is open for business, too. Fans are ready to rock again. Business establishments like restaurants and hotels cant wait to greet fans. For many of us, the season cannot get here quick enough.

Some players even threatened to opt out of the 2020 football season, if demands for protection such as long-term medical coverage wasnt addressed. Players were vocal. Iowa football players brought up disturbing issues that eventually led to longtime strength coach Chris Doyles departure.

Whats changed? Administrators not only are listening, theyre acting. Sometime in July, student-athletes everywhere will have an opportunity to cash in on their name, image and likeness in whats being hailed as a revolutionary decision that could alter athletes lives.

Would it be surprising to see recognizable mugs of Iowa State quarterback Brock Purdy and running back Breece Hall plastered on a billboard between Des Moines and Ames? Absolutely not. Id be surprised if Iowa basketball player Jordan Bohannons podcast doesnt soon include a money-paying sponsor or two.

Its long past time college athletes have an opportunity to at least see what their brand might be worth on the open market.

The nitty-gritty of that discussion obviously became overshadowed last year. Administrators had a tough enough time figuring out a 2020 playoff field among schools that didnt play the same number of games or comparable competition, than how to add eight more teams to the mix.

Whats changed? Momentum for a 12-team playoff not only increased in recent weeks, its likely happening.

More: Iowa Poll: Iowans support name, image, likeness compensation for college athletes, but split along generational lines

"The four-team format has been very popular and is a big success, a four-person working group within the College Football Playoffs, combined to say in a statement. "But it's important that we consider the opportunity for more teams and more student-athletes to participate in the playoff.

After reviewing numerous options, we believe this proposal is the best option to increase participation, enhance the regular season and grow the national excitement of college football.

Opinion: College Football Playoff's expansion to 12 teams is long overdue and complicated

More discussion will lead to more discussion and eventually, possibly in five years, the playoffs will be increased to 12 teams.

No fans. Only families from players and staff were admitted. Its a picture I never again want to see. Fall is about stadiums full of fans, not what transpired on the Cyclones Opening Day. Fall also is about experiences outside the stadium pre-game traffic jams and mingling. Fans were robbed of that last in 2020.

Whats changed? College football is open for business again.

Iowa State columnist Randy Peterson has been writingfor the Des Moines Register for parts of sixdecades. Reach him at rpeterson@dmreg.com, 515-284-8132, and on Twitter at @RandyPete.

Read this article:
Peterson: Thankful for college sports game-changers, even though they could have started long ago - Des Moines Register

In the slew of rightist culture-war bogeymen, from cultural Marxism to critical race theory, one of the most surprising candidates for obloquy is postmodernism.

In December 2020, the women and equalities minister Liz Trussbewailedpostmodernist philosophy pioneered by Foucault that put societal power structures and labels ahead of individuals and their endeavours. The malign influence of postmodernism, she suggested, had reached directly into working-class Leeds communities in the 1980s, where children were taught about racism and sexism but not how to read and write. Remarkably, then, the putative failures of education policy, above all the supposed failings of local authorities, weredown to20th-century French philosopher Michel Foucault.

To an extraordinary degree, postmodernism has become the universal scapegoat of the era, thebte noirof Resistance liberals, reactionaries, New Atheists and trademarked defenders of Reason. The irrational and incoherent fear of the pomo, or pomophobia, has claimed minds from across the political spectrum. According to the American literary critic Michiko Kakutani, postmodernism is responsible for the assault on knowledge and reason that allowed Donald Trump to lie his way into the White House.

The journalist Matthew DAncona claims that postmodern intellectuals have encouraged a toxic relativism by treating everything as a social construct, and so allowing fake news to thrive. YouTuber and clinical psychologist Jordan Petersonarguesthat postmodernism is the new skin for an old Marxism that seeks to subvert the West. In Petersons account, postmodernism is essentially the claim that all truths are relative, and all truth-claims are instruments of the struggle for power: Peterson calls this bastardised Nietzscheanism the resentful pathology of Marxism.

For New Atheists such as Richard Dawkins, postmodernism is aninsidious assault on reason and the scientific method, led by academic careerists. There was even a time, now passed, when muscular liberals such as Christopher Hitchens and David Aaronovitch blamed postmodern relativism for the lefts apparent softness towards dictators and Islamic fundamentalism, manifest in its opposition to the invasion of Iraq in 2003. While postmodernism peaked as a cultural trend in the early 1990s, it has now come to symbolise something corrosive, insidious and threatening to the social order.

***

Before asking what postmodernism is, it is worth clarifying what it isnt. Michel Foucault (1926-1984) did not pioneer postmodernism. He would not even have described himself as a postmodernist. In its post-Second World War inception, postmodern was principally an aesthetic category, referring to literary and architectural forms that superseded the formal ambition of modernism. Only in the 1970s did postmodernity acquire social and political content, inasmuch as the postmodern world was thought to be post-industrial, beyond class conflict, and increasingly beyond left and right. Far from exhorting a militant confrontation with societal power structures, early postmodernists tended to be sceptical of left-wing politics.

Nor did the postmodern style become more militant over time. The first major work using the term was Jean-Franois LyotardsThe Postmodern Condition(1979), the main concern of which was the collapse, in a post-industrial economy, of modernitys grand narratives of history. Lyotard celebrated this because he feared that these narratives, above all Marxism, were totalitarian. Lyotards sense of how meta-narratives were collapsing resonated with many left-wing intellectuals who had been formed by the uprisings of 1968 and their subsequent retreat.

In the ensuing faddish uptake of postmodernism, the work of philosophers such as Foucault and Jacques Derrida, and sometimes the psychoanalyst Jacques Lacan, was often cited as its intellectual antecedent because of the ways in which it challenged conventional views of the Enlightenment. Specifically, their work drew attention to the often subtle forms of power that were concealed in the trappings of reason and scientific advancement, and the ways in which colonialism, racism, sexism and class shaped the European idea of reason.

[see also:Deconstructing Jackie: How Jacques Derrida became one of the most influential thinkers in the world]

But the category of postmodernism was almost completely vacuous. It did not describe a single philosophical enterprise, political agenda or sociological outlook which could be identified and pilloried. At most, it described azeitgeist, an intellectual sensibility arising from the decline of industry, the rise of knowledge economies, mass consumerism and the crisis of Marxism. A sensibility that was pluralist, sceptical, resistant to any form of essentialism or reductivism, and in most cases politically accommodating.

This was particularly the case on Pariss Left Bank, where postmodern intellectuals such as Lyotard were likely to have been swayed by the violently anti-Marxist new philosophers who campaigned to stop the election of a union of the left French government that brought together the Socialist and Communist parties: a campaign that reached its hysterical zenith in the 1978 legislative elections. And as it filtered into US academia, postmodernism was far more likely to be associated with pragmatic left-liberals such as Richard Rorty than any militant tendency.

What, then, of the postmodern assault on reason? Whatever political direction the attack comes from, all seem to agree that postmodernism is essentially the claim that everything is relative, and everything is a social construct. Even the scientific method isnt politically neutral, and even reality is linguistically constructed.

This is not a wholly unreasonable conclusion to reach, owing to the way postmodernism aligned with two other intellectual trends that emerged in the 1970s and 1980s. The first was a pronounced culturalism, in which various philosophers and social scientists laid extraordinary emphasis on the organising role of culture and language in all areas of life, including our inherited notions of science, experimentation and truth. The second was scientific anti-realism. In the philosophy of science, realists assert that scientific theories are not just workable explanations for the data but are likely to be approximately true. And, as scientific endeavour progresses, these theories get ever closer to the truth.

Anti-realists, such as the US philosopher Hilary Putnam, dispute this. They argue that all scientific theories are underdetermined by the data, particularly when they relate to non-observable objects such asgenes, so there is no good reason to assume they are correct. Moreover, they draw a pessimistic inference from the fact that past scientific theories have usually been in some important ways false, to suggest that current theories are probably false too. Far from being an inherently unreasonable view, this position is usually grounded in empiricism and ahistoricist reading of scientific practices.

***

This is all academic and far from exciting, so anyone wanting to wage a culture war against postmodernism has to find an emotionally potent oversimplification that cuts through the complexity. Emblematic of the pomophobes approach is the enormous fuss they have made about a minor scandal in 1996 known as the Sokal hoax. Alan Sokal, a mathematician and physicist, used his authority as a scientist to get a hoax opinion article published in the cultural journalSocial Text. The premise of the hoax was that American academics were so intoxicated by trendy postmodern relativism that they would publish anything that expressed scepticism towards reality and the scientific method, no matter how absurd.

Since the hoax was revealed, the ersatz defenders of reason havent stopped guffawing. But the hoax was meaningless.Social Textwas not a postmodernist publication. The editors mistake was not being seduced by the articles pomo affectations it seems that they asked Sokal to remove most of this material, and he refused but their willingness to trust a credentialled expert to know his field and deal with them honestly. Even if the worst were true, it would tell us little about postmodernism. One lousy parody published in a small journal proves nothing. If it were a scientific experiment, it would be a dud.

It is, however, the titillation of scandal, of pointing out the emperors nudity, that licenses the cheerful ignorance and philistinism of the pomophobic backlash. For as little as the Sokal hoax did to advance knowledge, it became the basis of a book Sokalco-wrotewith the Belgian physicist Jean Bricmont, published in English asFashionable Nonsense(1997), attacking what they saw as the impostures of postmodern intellectuals. This was no better than yobbish jeering about inscrutable texts. In presenting examples of what it claimed as intellectual pretensionwhether Luce Irigarays feminist reading of science or Jacques Lacans use of mathemes in exposing his psychoanalytic methodthe book made minimal effort to understand them.

Yet while Sokal and Bricmont at least engaged with their opponents ideas at some level, many critics no longer feel the need to do so. It is sufficient for Kakutani, Peterson or Truss to knowingly mention the term postmodernism, for many people to assume they know what they are talking about. Recently, a number of right-wing culture war entrepreneurs have engaged in a similar credential-building exploitation of slightly obscure references. Consider conservative documentarian Christopher Rufo,who appeared on Fox Newsin September lastyear claiming to possess insider knowledge about the dangers posed by critical race theory, a gambit that worked because of his audiences clickbait-driven appetite for scandal. One might call it disinfotainment. The overall effect of this is to tranquillise thought, stifling curiosity with bullying appeals to the obvious. And as mathematician Gabriel Stolzenberg warned in the wake of Sokal, sometimes the obvious is the enemy of the true.

Most worrying of all, however, is the countersubversive edge of contemporary pomo-bashing. As with the attack on critical race theory, there is an element of shooting the messenger: blaming critical theory for the social problems it diagnoses. Where postmodern intellectuals such asJean Baudrillard have described a collapse of the reality principle as socialisation is measured by the exposure to media messages, pomophobes like DAncona have accused them of hastening this process.

The culture war against postmodernism is conducted in the spirit of inquisition, whether postmodernism is deemed an obscurantist attack on truth, or a neo-Marxist attempt to deconstruct the West (as right-wing Australian news anchor Chris Uhlmann once complained). The logic appears to be that these left-wing intellectuals are always complaining, criticising, dividing people and undermining our self-confidence. Theyre always doing us down. The crises in political trust, in traditional gender norms, in scientific consensus, and in the historical self-image and self-belief of modern states, are all the fault of these postmodernists, critical race theorists and cultural Marxists. If only something could be done about them.

[see also:The UK is immersed in a class-culture war and Labour is incapable of winning it]

Originally posted here:
How postmodernism became the universal scapegoat of the era - New Statesman

Bitcoin 2021. Miami.

This is an article which formed the basis of my talk at Bitcoin 2021 in Miami (see video above) and was inspired by the longer-form article I wrote a couple of months back entitled Fiat, Fascism And Communism:

Fiat, Fascism And Communism

My intent during the talk, and in this article here, is to remind you, the reader, of what you may already know or what perhaps you are starting to slowly realize about Bitcoin.

Yes. Bitcoin is the most important economic decision youll make in your entire life. Nothing else comes close. In fact, its probably the most asymmetric economic opportunity any group of people will ever have had, in the history of humanity. And youre lucky enough to be alive during this period.

Bitcoin is the final Cantillon opportunity in the sense that by reading this, youre early enough and close enough to the greatest wealth transfer in documented history. That is a big deal.

But no, thats not what Im here to talk to you about. NgU technology is important, and of course its the centerpiece of the Bitcoin flywheel, but I dont need to remind you of that.

What I want to remind you of is the moral duty of moving into Bitcoin. Its at the core of why were all here, whether you realize it or not.

The world is being overrun by collectivist statists and central planners of every kind. You see it all around us. Whether theyre democratic, or conservative, fascist or communist, socialist, globalist, MMTist, utopian or another misshapen form or blend of authoritarian dictator it doesnt matter.

They are tearing apart what humans have built for millennia, theyre sucking the energy, will and passion out of people, turning them into empty automatons and their short-sighted stupidity is going to drive us back into the Dark Ages.

The soulless gaze of an individual who owns nothing and has no privacy. Source: Twitter.

Bitcoin and Bitcoiners are here to change that, not by replacing one group of arbitrary rulers with another, but by removing rulers altogether and replacing them with a set of verifiable, incorruptible rules that nobody can take advantage of at the expense of someone else.

Source: Reddit

When the means via which human action is measured, stored and transacted is OUTSIDE of the hands of any group, organization, foundation, institution or state, we have TRUE equality of opportunity.

Until then, we have stagnation. We have corruption. We have theft. We have waste. We have poverty. We have wealth redistribution by bureaucrats (the dumbest of the dumb in society). We have environmental destruction. We have state indoctrination instead of schooling. We have the oppression Olympics, where everyone is a victim. We have sludge instead of food. We have scientism instead of science.

Bitcoin rug-pulls the statists and changes not only the returns to violence as discussed in The Sovereign Individual, but it transforms each individuals relationship to time, their future and natural resources.

When the individual changes their behavior for the better, the world changes for the better.

That is why Bitcoin fixes this. You start with the individual and spread outward.

So, lets look at Bitcoins impact on the world in a few key areas.

Fiat standard on the left, Bitcoin standard on the right.

Classes will always exist in human society. Its normal and perfectly natural. People are different and dynamic. We excel at different things, we apply different levels of effort, we have varying degrees of talent, were born to parents of a different level of competence and have teachers and friends throughout life who all impact us in different ways.

The result is an unequal distribution of wealth and resources. Which is, once again, perfectly fine. That is natural in a society that is layered, diverse and multifaceted.

The problem is more nuanced. We dont have natural 80/20 inequality anymore (pareto-type distributions), but we have completely unnatural inequality (99.9/0.1 distributions).

This is something very few seem to understand, even people who I highly admire, like the Jordan Petersons of the world. They seem to think that, somehow, concentration of wealth (for example) can continue unabated without some form of rigging the game.

I like to differentiate inequality as follows:

Static Inequality

This is the bad kind. Its the world we live in today and its the kind that continues to make the poor poorer and the rich richer because whoever controls the rules of the game (the money) can play heads I win, tails you lose. Its central feature is moral hazard and the goal as the ruler is to remove skin from the game (i.e., someone else pays the consequence for your bad decisions).

Dynamic Inequality

This is the good kind, in which everyone is playing by the same rules, everyone has skin in the game, you can move up the social hierarchy and, just as importantly, if you make stupid decisions you can move down the social hierarchy. A key characteristic of this type of natural, complex system is a beautiful, dynamic equilibrium that forms over time because social mobility is tied to competence, effort, value and energy.

How does Bitcoin fix this?

The central banking, statist and government model today is the bastion of moral hazard. You have the public officials with zero skin in the game making decisions on behalf of us and our future generations, with no regard to the cost or the consequences of such decisions.

In a similar vein, central banks, banks, Wall Street, tech oligopolies and anyone else who is close to the monetary spigot can privatize any gains they make, and then socialize any losses theyve incurred.

Boeing is a great example from 2020. You and I paid for it to stay in business. It stayed at the top of the hierarchy and us idiots in the middle funded it. Todays tech giants are similar. They are major beneficiaries of the ridiculous amount of money being created, borrowed and subsequently handed to Wall Street, who then ploughs it into their stock. They become unnaturally strong and any upstart with a better product or service has no chance of competing.

You wonder why censorship is such a problem? Its not a lack of some decentralized alternative that nobody is ever going to use. Its a lack of viable competition.

Break the corrupt game of fraudulently concentrating wealth through direct and indirect confiscation (taxation, inflation, regulation) and you re-introduce competition into the system. With competition, you begin to get quality.

When a business requires customers in order to survive, they treat them well. When a business can get bailed out or be the recipient of all the free money being created by the bureaucrats, then it doesnt give a shit about its customers. It can censor them, force them to breathe through face diapers and much more.

Anyway, I digress.

The world we live in today is split into feudal-like castes or classes that are extraordinarily difficult for individuals to move between.

If youre at the bottom, you cannot climb because the product of your labor (the money you earn) is being debased faster than you can earn it. You barely have enough to feed yourself and youre completely disincentivized to save.

Savings are the cornerstone of civilization. One cannot climb without having a foundation upon which to build. Its like building a house made of sand, on ground made of quicksand.

The result? Youre stuck at the bottom, and relatively speaking, you get poorer as time passes.

It gets worse. If youre at the top, and parasitic enough to stay there, you not only have access to more, but what really decays the system is that you can privatize any gains you make and socialize your fuck ups. You can stay at the top fraudulently and this is just as bad for the system as being stuck at the bottom. This is how the system rots (to quote Nassim Taleb, the IYI).

And who foots the bill for this entire thing? Me, you, your friends and your family. The productive engine of society. The middle class (whether lower, mid- or upper) who produce most of everything, we pay for it all.

We support the poor, and we simultaneously pay the jailers to keep us enslaved. Its pretty messed up.

This concept right here, the transformation from static inequality to dynamic inequality, is what I believe Bitcoins greatest impact on the world will be.

The right-hand side of the diagram above is what Bitcoin enables. A playing field in which classes of people will still exist, but that are separated by a permeable membrane.

Yes, if youre broke, poor and young, youre going to have to work to climb, but the product of your labor cannot be debased, and your time, effort and energy can be better valued. You have a solid foundation upon which to build your wealth.

If youre at the top, and you got there through competence and merit, you must either keep producing to stay there, or invest in other up and coming entrepreneurs/producers who are climbing and building value for everyone in the stack. At the same time, if youre at the top through luck, or you were early and youre either a parasite, a moron, you make bad decisions or you just want to blow your wealth on hookers and coke, you will fall down the social hierarchy. You can no longer stay there at someone elses expense.

This means each individual is not only free to do what they want, but each individual bears the cost of their decisions and the fruits of their labor.

This has profound implications on society, moral behavior, meaning, time preference, the environment, generational wealth, art and so much more which will require a book. Ill save that for later

Next up, we have the environment.

There are other writers, namely Hass McCook and Nic Carter, whove both written at length about this topic, so I wont rehash their work.

You can check it out for yourself and discover that Bitcoin is far more efficient than the infrastructure required to support the existing monetary and financial system.

I will also point out that there is a lot of talk about using renewables to support Bitcoins hash rate and network security. I dont entirely buy that because I believe that unreliable, dilute energy capture mechanisms are far worse for not only the environment (you have all the energy input upfront, which rarely gets paid back) but for human prosperity (how much better were able to allocate our time when we have energy abundance), and as the backbone for the most reliable money to ever exist.

But again thats another topic, and for now, Bitcoin is not only more efficient, but its actually making those unreliable forms of renewable energy more useful than they would otherwise be.

My argument for Bitcoins impact on the environment goes deeper.

My contention is that the greatest harm we can do to the planet is to pollute without consequence and waste scarce natural resources on moronic mandates and ridiculous pipe dreams conjured up by statists, bureaucrats, academics and governments who dont pay the bill for the damages (you, me and the natural environment do).

Its possible that more than 10 billion masks are disposed of monthly, according to the author of this article. Image source: Twitter.

Money literally measures time, energy and scarce resources (matter).

When money is fake, valueless, meaningless and has no basis in thermodynamic reality, the things that it represents are squandered and wasted.

The existing monetary system is literally burning up the worlds resources and our collective lifeblood because they can produce money out of thin air, and waste it!

In this way, by supporting the fiat monetary system you are directly destroying the environment!!!

Furthermore, because human time and energy, when directed toward productive ends, means the creation of better, more energy efficient products and services, by cutting the bureaucratic waste out of the system we further help the broader natural environment by using the capital stock more intelligently (were confronted with the reality of its cost).

The natural incentive of the productive individual is to do more with less.

This is actually the very essence of capitalism. Its the process of taking scarce time, energy and natural resources and transforming them into something of higher value and utility.

Capitalism is the transformation of chaos into higher order.

The implications of Bitcoins impact on the environment and the more sustainable and efficient use of energy and resources is staggering.

I imagine we could likely feed 100 billion people, transform the toughest of terrains, green the desserts, clean up the oceans, master energy production and learn to build gardens and monuments, instead of barren concrete wastelands.

Source: Twitter

I wrote about this in more length in Fiat, Fascism And Communism, and will dedicate an article to just this topic, but suffice it to say the following:

Once again, the state not only produces the absolute worst product imaginable, but they do it with your money, that you worked for, that they took from you at the point of a gun or the threat of imprisonment.

Dont believe me? Try not paying your taxes for a few years, and see what happens. Even if you dont use any of their shitty services.

Its like walking into a shop to buy a new sofa. As you walk in, the agent punches you in the face, takes a dump on the sofa and charges you triple for taking it.

On a Bitcoin standard this wont happen. Their entire eDucAtIoN system will collapse, and hallelujah for that.

Parents are far better educators for their kids*, the internet has made better education cheaper and practically free to just about anyone, anywhere and there are millions of brilliant teachers, educators, philosophers, writers and mentors who will have the opportunity to build their own centers of excellence, whether large or small.

*Yeah, I know, there are a few asshole exceptions, but you dont handicap the vast majority of good parents for the few dipshits.

I wont go into much here except to state that as the sound money foundation broadens and solidifies, the system will naturally re-introduce accurate price signals and true information will flow orders of magnitude more efficiently.

Money is the fabric that binds us all. It measures human action and is used by humans to measure subjective value. One of its most important functions is to transmit information and it does so with prices.

If you fuck with the money, you fuck with the transmission of information and those on the receiving end make the wrong decisions, which then creates a positive feedback loop (with a negative consequence) that further spirals the system out of control. And while there are rational players in the system which counteract some of the madness, when the transmission medium is broken, theres only one destination: destruction, waste, misallocation.

Our mOdeRn eCOnoMy looks like this guy here:

With Bitcoin, we fix this too.

Bitcoin is an information and energy superconductor.

- Svetski, Bitcoin, Chaos And Order

When price signals are accurate, when the right information is flowing, we can discover not only opportunity, but truth. The result will be the creation of solutions for the biggest problems, because that is where the greatest opportunities lie.

Need is what drives demand, which in turn is what drives supply, which is what incentivizes the producer.

Need Demand Supply Production Entrepreneur/Producer.

Today, we have a completely deformed economy where money filters through to moron VCs and bankers who believe that what people need is another dick pic app, or convoluted gambling platform disguised as fintech.

They pump money into these dumb ideas, they then market the shit out of them on the mainstream and social media networks that they also fund and control, and we all wonder how we become users of the next dumb app that nobody needs or wanted in the first place.

Meanwhile, over in Africa, Latin America, Eastern Europe and Southeast Asia, people are dying of starvation, living in the dirt, in the darkness, with no clean water or clothes.

Its fucking disgusting. And its a direct result of the legacy monetary system.

Not only does it enslave these poor nations with dirty loans from institutions like the IMF and World Bank, but smart, intelligent people who would otherwise go solve problems over there are instead incentivized to work on Wall Street or program for the morons at Facebook, or some other ridiculous Silicon Valley startup that got major funding because they knew a guy.

The fiat-toilet-paper price of bitcoin will go up, down and around in circles in the short term, and if you focus on that, youll lose your mind.

I want you to remember why youre really here.

You, as Bitcoiners, are here as the white blood cells of the network. You are the cyber hornets. Each and every one of us is here with a moral duty.

We are here to slay the frauds. The collectivists. The eco terrorists and fascists. Were here to slay the cry babies, the fiat slaves and think bois.

Source: The author

And as we grow this, our very existence will slay the evil cartoon villains who believe that they know how to run your life better than you do, and will stop at nothing to make you pay for their lavish lifestyle.

The shitcoiners and charlatans are irrelevant. Theyll continue to be pathetic, desperate slobs with dreams of being the next Epstein or Fragile Taleb.

Source: Twitter

You and I are here to be warriors. To fight. To build a free world. To help each individual become sovereign, starting first and foremost, with ourselves.

See the original post here:
Fix The Money, Fix The World - Bitcoin Magazine

ANALYSIS/OPINION:

Leftist hatred for the Canadian psychology professor Jordan Peterson is really something to behold. He stands as an example of what happens to someone who strays from the crazy line of thinking by modern campus bigots.

Mr. Peterson is the canary in the toxic coal mine of political correctness and petty thought police.

Lets start with the professors crime.

Simply put, Mr. Peterson does not share the monolithic, prevailing liberal orthodoxy on university campuses dictating that Western White males are the worlds evil oppressors and anyone who does not belong to that evil race is a victim trapped in circumstances beyond his or her control.

Consider for a moment the leftist premise to which the radical Mr. Peterson objects.

On its face, it is blatantly racist. Divvying up, defining and punishing groups of people based on their race (or gender) was racist 200 years ago during slavery times. It was racist 75 years ago. It is still racist today.

Yet, astonishingly, this reborn racism is widely embraced by the racists who dominate college campuses today.

The second obvious flaw in this racist orthodoxy is the message it sends to non-White, non-males.

Any challenges, failures or misery you face in life are not your fault. And, even worse, there is nothing you can do to change your circumstances. So, just stew in your bitterness and hatred for White males along with the rest of us, goes the leftist campus orthodoxy of the day.

Is there any more destructive and devious lie that could be sold to young people? Is there anything more dystopian or hopeless?

Mr. Peterson has become something of a rock star among beleaguered youth suffocating in the coal mine of modern academia with speeches, lectures, podcasts and a book titled, The Twelve Rules of Life: An Antidote to Chaos. His message has been particularly devoured among young men many of them White who have been vilified and emasculated by crazy university teachings.

Find meaning in life. Take responsibility for yourself. Surround yourself with good people who want the best for you.

Pretty nasty stuff, huh?

The chapter titles of his book include radical instructions such as: Stand up straight with your shoulders back, Tell the truth or, at least, dont lie, and Pet a cat when you encounter one on the street.

These lessons have earned Mr. Peterson a level of blinding hatred that is normally reserved for former President Donald Trump.

So it has been with considerable glee that the leftist media the Revolutionary Guard of modern academia hunted down Mr. Peterson as he suffered from a pestilence of personal maladies that no decent human would wish on his worst enemy.

Over the past year, Mr. Peterson has suffered physical illness and serious mental disease including suicidal thoughts. His wife was diagnosed with cancer. As his life spiraled out of control, Mr. Peterson developed a near-fatal drug addiction.

Actual humans read those lines and are struck with pangs of angst and sorrow for Mr. Peterson and his family. They mutter a prayer for them.

But not the campus bigots and the jackals in the media. Every bleak detail is catnip to them. Their desperate war to destroy all who disagree never sleeps.

When the story of Mr. Petersons troubles emerged about a year ago, a creature named Amir Attaran, a professor of both law and medicine, began his public hot take on Mr. Petersons travails: #KARMA.

Jordan Peterson, oracle to gullible young men, preacher of macho toughness, and hectoring bully to snowflakes, is addicted to strong drugs and his brain is riddled with neurological damage. He deserves as much sympathy as he showed others.

Says the law professor.

A new interview with the Sunday Times of London about his tribulations sparked yet another avalanche of glee and gloating over the unimaginable pain Mr. Peterson has been through.

Introducing her interview, reporter Decca Aitkenhead opines openly referring to herself no fewer than three times in the lead paragraph that she is unable to diagnose the root of Mr. Petersons problems.

I dont know if this is a story about drug dependency, or doctors, or Peterson family dynamics or a parable about toxic masculinity, she sneers.

If these are the purveyors of social justice, we are truly doomed.

Charles Hurt is opinion editor of The Washington Times. He can be reached at churt@washingtontimes.com.

The rest is here:
The war on Jordan Peterson - Washington Times