Cars are weighing ever more over time. Not just because even the very smallest ones are now available with heavy items, (like air conditioning) formerly reserved for the biggest and heaviest models. There is also the matter of regulations making cars heavier with crumple zones etc. And those heavier cars guzzle more energy, not just in production (mining/working more metals) but also during daily drives. True, they may be safer, but they are also worse for the environment. If consumers were to be left with a choice, maybe some informed ones would consciously opt for a lighter car, that was cheaper to run, and leave them with more cash in pocket at the end of each month, therefore more likely to have to drive to work one less day that month – causing less pollution – and exposing them tono danger that day.
Sees to me that giving people a choice sounds like a mighty fine idea, better than having god the all-wise president/king impose his will on people, “for their own protection!”
You can’t really blame statist citizens for their naive & foolish statism: they’ve fallen victim to the Stockholm syndrome.
Therefore, in,order to find out how to deal with them, one has to find out how to deal with patients suffering from Stockholm syndrome.
I’ve looked up a little bit of information, here are a few links that seem promising:
I posit that evil doesn’t exist, only effects people consider evil; effects of acts committed by people that would traditionally be locked up, or beaten, or otherwise punished. These people committed their acts because of the combination of genetic predisposition and environment (upbringing, contemporary exposure to bad examples).
Therefore, the solution to crime presents itsef very clearly. It is sadly (?) politically incorrect to engage in epigenetic programs of social darwinism, as happened in the west before WW2. We may be glad that such policies (themselves aggression of the worst kind, genetic purging) are not practiced anymore: they are always done by people in charge, who wish to impose their views on the population)
So: change the only other factor that can be changed: environment.
Here I again chose to disagree with Mr. “Solitary, nasty, brutish and short” Thomas Hobbes. Remove the insane institute of aggression, called government. (Anyone who is drawn to the idea of telling millions of others what to do, is not mentally healthy). Maybe the bad (aggressive) genes will then automatically be purged from the human gene pool, following social exclusion.
I osted this in an FB-threat (about gun control?) the other day, and thought I’d repost it here, it seemed useful.
I must say: probably not a good idea to let yourself get drawn into an escalating power struggle. Unless us citizens gain access to cruise missiles that can reach DC, it won’t work, they keep having the power, and as http://freeross.org proves, the regime isn’t above taking political prisoners – using the court system.
It’s up to us to rise above their level, set the right example to the multitudes, and inspire them that way. So become Ghandi jr. and set the entire nation (planet) against them. This may require a clever marketing campaign, because it’s been done before, obviously (by Ghandi himself), and the mood created by the MSM is that anyone going against their opinion, is a paranoid paramilitary nut.
How come (almost) nobody makes as big a fuss about mall-guard brutality as people do about police brutality? (Hints of the Stanford prison experiment come to mind)
Sulppoze Napolein had not existed, or had not been as succesful as he had been; there would not have been compulsory schooling, resulting from the Battle for Jena (Prussia), the history of the (western) world would have been so different would have been so different: https://fee.org/articles/logans-slashing-attack-on-war-and-demographic-planning/
So then there would not have been the conditioning of pupils to respond with delight to the Pavlovian bell at the end of every hour. Only a population conditioned as such would be good soldiers, or at least good (quiet, obedient) citizens.
Napoleon only had amateur soldiers, not professionals, but he used so any of them that Wellington, who was aware of Napoleons successes on the battlefields and had expected/hoped for a “worthy adversary” was dismayed when he discovered Napoleon’s tactics were those of a “mere pounder”
#Friedman about #SocialEntropy: it’s people that should take care of people, government should play no role in that.
Ps go watch more Milton Friedman-videos, they’re delightful!