On: The three stages in the development of Capital.

[Parodites]

That is fairly true. When I transition into lucid dreaming directly from waking-consciousness, it's not like you just go from one state to the other. There is this process, and it happens exactly the same way every time I "sleep". At first you feel an incredible surge of electricity, movement, heat, like your body is being sucked into a hole or something, and then you feel a very sudden jolt and lose all feeling (I believe this is when the spinal cord disconnects your body from your brain,- an evolutionary mechanism to protect you from walking around while you're unconscious, that is, sleep-walking) save for a feeling of 'falling''; you hear the air rushing past you until it's so loud you hear a "pop", after that you're pushed through this ... I don't know how to put it, some kind of wall. (This process happens, nearly identically, during a DMT trip. Hence the as yet unproven, though commonly hypothesized idea, that DMT has something to do with the science of dreaming. In that context, this "wall" that you're pushed through is called the "chrysanthemum"; it's exactly the same thing going on with lucid dreaming and DMT as far as I can tell, having lucid-dreamed for the last 10 years and used DMT a few times myself.) Then finally there's nothing. Just black space. Slowly, you start to perceive movement in that blackness, like ripples on water, and lines start to form on its surface, then the lines begin to intersect, then the lines become simple shapes, then you begin to perceive depth as the shapes become 3-dimensional. At that point you begin to see vague outlines of things drawn with these shapes, maybe a face, or an animal, a house, etc. Just fleeting forms. But then the forms begin to interact, they start to move; they aren't drawings anymore, they are animated objects. And slowly, piece by piece, the dream forms from simple random shapes to fully developed 3-d scenes populated by objects and beings.

I assume this happens to everyone but, unless you do lucid-dreaming, this is not a process you ever observe, as you lose (you're supposed to lose) consciousness before you ever experience the jolting sensation of disconnecting your body through the spinal cord, the first stage in this emergence of the dream. While lucid dreaming, you get to see this whole process unfold,- something that happens to your body every night but which is hidden from you, something you're never supposed to be conscious of in the first place. But once it is done, if you are lucid dreaming, it is at that final stage that you can begin to try and control the dream. A person's first lucid dream: they're not going to be able to control anything in the dream except themselves, let alone invoke a projective avatar of their own unconscious. So there is a learning curve, and techniques you must learn, to get the most out of lucid dreaming. With mastery of it, you can summon entire environments, create 3-d memory palaces as a kind of quasi-sentient, living library to store information in; you can gain access to a projective avatar of your own subconscious and utilize its basically limitless creative power to extend your own work in the waking-world; you can create realistic simulations and re-live important memories, etc. etc. etc.

The experiment I am doing on myself, to actually bring that projective avatar into the waking world, so I can utilize its creative power while I am walking around here in the real world- gaining permanent access to it; that experiment is ongoing. I believe the ancients knew how to do it, following my comments on Pnouthis and the 'synthemata', and that I am simply rediscovering something.

[MagsJ]

_
All I know, is that sometimes, but not too often, I feel asleep even though I’m up and awake,
and I cannot truly discern one state from the other, but it’s a tranquil and very surreal place,
and in it, time does not exist, for existence becomes transient and transparent, and dreams become living realities.

[MagsJ]

that may be what's required
but that's no way to sell an idea man
you need some bullet points

Nah, don’t !

I didn’t mean to interject so.. I know that some in the past complained about having their intellectual property stolen, but Paro might not mind, but many did and that’s why many left here/ILP. Someone might like what he wrote, and lift it.

[Parodites]

Nobody has anything here worth stealing except for me, and I don't care because I don't even believe in the concept of "intellectual property" or copyright.

Matter of fact, I believe that you have a moral duty to pirate everything, even stuff you don't even use, just so you can give it to a friend that might need/want it for free. Why? Because all of these big industries, like the music industry, parasatize on the gullibility and inexperience of, in that example, young musicians. Then they also push out mediocre garbage too, which is an ever greater crime. SO when people talk about how pirating hurts the video game publishers or film and the music industry: good, fuck em, I hope they die. I think they are malignant blights on human culture and also as morally vacuous as their little monkey-business-suits are empty-headed. Intellectual property and copyright are extremely modern concepts that have precisely zero precedent in history, and as far I can see, are just produced out of thin air for the sole reason of aiding what I talked about in the OP: Braudelian state-monopolization of Capital, as well as to more generally keep these big industries afloat. They kill human creativity, make it difficult to have a thriving artistic community when everyone is afraid of getting sued for lifting some fragmentary idea or something from somebody else. In the past, in the world of music, art, literature, everyone "stole" from everyone all the time. Milton lifted whole passages from Massenius' Sarcotis in his Paradise Lost; composers used material in one another's works all the time, nobody gave a fuck.

That's one of the injunctions of my new secret society: you have a moral obligation to steal as much intellectual property as you possibly can. Give it out to other people if you have no use for it. Especially pirate from academia; anything behind a paywall, find a way to pirate it for free. And if you can't, and you're able, then buy it yourself and upload it for free, for others.

But just be aware if you steal a passage from me, you cannot reproduce another passage like it or in its style, so it would be kind of pointless given the fact that it couldn't be concealed as part of some other work. Ideas though, cannot be stolen. Ideas are. They don't have owners.

Porsti usitker, pegaiko igekopa!

...............PORSTI....................
PGAIKOIGKOPAPGAIKOIGKOPA
IGKOPAPGAIKOIGKOPAPGAIKO
PGAIKOIGKOPAPGAIKOIGKOPA
IGKOPAPGAIKOIGKOPAPGAIKO
..............USITKR....................
IOPGKAPKAOGIPKAOGIIOPGKA
PKAOGIIOPGKAIOPGKAPKAOGI
IOPGKAPKAOGIPKAOGIIOPGKA
PKAOGIIOPGKAIOPGKAPKAOGI

A G I K O P R S T U(V)
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

[Parodites]

I felt the need to really explicitly state my position on the treason/Trump/etc. shit.

There exists no legal or constitutional mechanism by which, should the last election be proven conclusively to have been fraudulent, Donald Trump could somehow re-assume his former position. The office of the US presidency is restricted to a four year term: Trump's four year term expired, and he was neither inaugurated again, nor confirmed in the electoral college by the electors. So it is simply factually incorrect to assert that somehow he is still president, as Biden's legitimacy or illegitimacy is simply not a factor in that. His four year term expired and the Electoral College did not confirm him for re-assumption of the office: he's not the fucking president of the US right now. (Thus, following the implication Fixed ventured, as to which elements of the military were still supporting Trump or not: if any military faction in some way rebelled against the Biden administration and began to take and follow directives from Donald Trump,- a person who is not the president of the US and Commander-in-Chief,- they would be engaging in the literal constitutional definition of treason, breaking their sacred oaths and engaging in activities that are rightfully punishable by death sentences. If any military faction began to take orders from Trump, I would sincerely love watching them all get rounded up, court marshalled, and executed. I despise anyone who would so flagrantly violate our Constitution, be it in the name of Trump or against Trump, for there could be fewer more extreme transgressions against it than what I just described. I might personally despise Biden, but the name of the man in the chair doesn't have anything to do with the principle itself, as articulated by the Constitution, which is the thing I pay more deference to than any particular president. Biden will come and go, it won't.) *

If the courts could, all the way up to the level of the Supreme Court, conclusively affirm that the last election was fraudulent, either due to voter fraud or due to the mail-in voting being found unconstitutional, it would be legally impossible to somehow place Trump back into play: the only thing that you could do would be to impeach Biden for his involvement in whatever illegal activities occurred during the campaign. His personal involvement would likely need to be demonstrated, because the electors did actually confirm him in the College,- either his involvement or lawsuits would need to be levied against every single elector for their own involvement in whatever illegal activity occurred. A legal struggle of that magnitude would last longer than the four years Biden has left to serve- and even if you got it all settled in court, and the impeachment resulted in a successful conviction ... all that would do is make our current vice president Kamala the new president, which would be as bad or worse than Biden. So it is simply wrong at every conceivable level of discussion to proclaim that Trump is "still the president". It doesn't actually make sense to say. It's literally nonsensical constitutionally. And to call me a traitor for refusing to recognize any validity to this nonsensical idea, that Trump is still president, (or the corollary, that Biden is currently,- be aspects to the election fraudulent and potentially illegal or not,- officially president of the US) is even more nonsensical than the idea is itself.
* After proclaiming Trump was still president, you added that you did not know which elements of the military were on his side or not, or to what extent the military were taken with observancy toward Biden's administration. So am I "mis-reading" you again? Is there some other implication being tacitly suggested?

[Parodites]

The next phase of the culture war, in case you hadn't noticed; the Internet figured out that, with enough people behind you, you can actually weaponize the stock-market for political ends. 70 billion dollars have been "re-distributed" from Wallstreet to memelords so far, meaning the lower classes. I wasn't saying much about it, as I was waiting to see how long it would last. Some of these people could have become millionaires overnight if they sold but they're not, and the longer they don't, the more these hedge funds will lose- a potentially indefinite loss. 70 billion could become 200 billion in losses, or a trillion. With that kind of money you could re-structure society, just like the elites have been doing themselves for generations. Like I said in the OP: Trump "losing" is no impediment to what has already been started. He was always a kind of avatar or initiator, a catalyst. What is the point of being an elite member of the political-corporate class, if the people you are ruling over are able to use the very systems of control (like the stock-market) you created- against you?

[MagsJ]

Nobody has anything here worth stealing except for me,

Well that has been proven to not be the case, but it doesn’t matter.

[Parodites]

A philosopher who sees his equal in another, isn't a philosopher. As in the Timaeus; Philosophy demands one World, one Soul, one Universe, one KOSMOS.

It's still going; does anyone realize what is ... happening to the market? Hedge funds are losing billions upon billions upon billions of dollars because of the same kind of internet meme-army that got Trump elected.

[MagsJ]

A philosopher who sees his equal in another, isn't a philosopher. As in the Timaeus; Philosophy demands one World, one Soul, one Universe, one KOSMOS.

As long as no-one here continues to try to undermine me, I’m good.. had enough of everyone tryin that shit tho.. that’s not the Way! or as they say.. if you don’t know, you don’t know (shit). There are no shortcuts!

It's still going; does anyone realize what is ... happening to the market? Hedge funds are losing billions upon billions upon billions of dollars because of the same kind of internet meme-army that got Trump elected.

Is that the whole redistribution of wealth thing, that the Dems sorely wanted to happen?

Who is gaining, from these losses..? What’s your take on it.. or are you simply looking on, or have a vested interest in proceedings?

[Parodites]

A bunch of random people trolling on Reddit are gaining from the losses.

If the Government redistributed wealth, well.. they can't even run a DMV efficiently. These hedge funds have the ability to manipulate the market using their info, connections, pre-existing capital, friends in government, the media, etc. so that they can take a stock that isn't doing well, bribe some agent to pass a regulation and get a news channel to talk about it, such that it makes a bunch of people lose faith in that stock and sell it ... while, at the time this is going on,- because the hedge fund knows for a fact the stock is going down, since they helped to make it go down artificially,- the hedge fund can short the stock for more than the actual thing the stock represents is worth: for example, they were shorting gamestop 140 percent more than gamestop itself was worth. That would be insane to do, unless you knew for certain that stock was going down. Well a bunch of people on reddit figured this out and realized that if they all bought this stock, because the funds were shorting it more than 100 percent of its value, the funds could not meet their commitments to their investors as long as this mob was holding on to their share, (because their stock shares were worth more than 100 percent) and the longer they held on, the more money these hedge funds would lose.

[MagsJ]

A bunch of random people trolling on Reddit are gaining from the losses.

If the Government redistributed wealth, well.. they can't even run a DMV efficiently. These hedge funds have the ability to manipulate the market using their info, connections, pre-existing capital, friends in government, the media, etc. so that they can take a stock that isn't doing well, bribe some agent to pass a regulation and get a news channel to talk about it, such that it makes a bunch of people lose faith in that stock and sell it ... while, at the time this is going on,- because the hedge fund knows for a fact the stock is going down, since they helped to make it go down artificially,- the hedge fund can short the stock for more than the actual thing the stock represents is worth: for example, they were shorting gamestop 140 percent more than gamestop itself was worth. That would be insane to do, unless you knew for certain that stock was going down. Well a bunch of people on reddit figured this out and realized that if they all bought this stock, because the funds were shorting it more than 100 percent of its value, the funds could not meet their commitments to their investors as long as this mob was holding on to their share, (because their stock shares were worth more than 100 percent) and the longer they held on, the more money these hedge funds would lose.

A friend was watching his American stocks going down right in front of his eyes, on Friday, so I saw this happening first hand. He said he couldn’t understand why it would/should be doing that.

Haven’t people been imprisoned with very long sentences in the past, for doing such things? I guess it depends on who is manipulating the market and can therefore get away with it.

[Parodites]

A philosopher who sees his equal in another, isn't a philosopher. As in the Timaeus; Philosophy demands one World, one Soul, one Universe, one KOSMOS.

"As long as no-one here continues to try to undermine me, I’m good.. had enough of everyone tryin that shit tho.. that’s not the Way! or as they say.. if you don’t know, you don’t know (shit). There are no shortcuts! " -Magsj

Ah, but that is the reason I say that a philosopher who sees his equal in another, is not a philosopher. As long as one doesn't see their equal in another, there is no need to undermine another either. The Archimedean pride of the philosopher, that he should move the entire World with a big enough stick and a big enough fulcrum, prevents him from ever needing to use cheaper tricks in defending his ego on a psychological basis. Philosophic pride, philosophic ego, is beyond mere psychology, like the ego spoken of by Rilke: he said that to expunge the Ego entirely was not the goal, but to transform it, to purify it, to turn the ego into light, into an omnipresent, "transparent eye" in the words of Emerson,- to make one's ego porous,- and to learn to apprehend, through it, its very object, and therefor also, the entire World through it, inasmuch as the ego's object is properly- the World. Hence my recent fury against Fixed, who has taken to intimating my being a traitor to my political ideals (for insane reasoning by the way: I explained a few posts ago, very clearly, why his reasoning is insane) as a way of curbing my intimidating nature for himself. (If he's not doing that for that reason, out of psychological projection, and he actually believes the insane reasoning he has ventured for it- well then I guess I give too much credit.) Up until that moment, our entire history was amenable, agreeable; we endured, like all philosophers, one another's pride without any issue. I have an aphorism from one of my books that sums up this entire line of thought concerning philosophic pride:

"It is not our modesty, but only our arrogance, that takes offense at the arrogance of another. Prassicius, in the Naugeri Poetica Dialogus of Fracastorus, gives us to understand that great poets are not troubled by each other's arrogance, and that only mediocre men take offense to the vaunted display of another's laurels, as it was similarly confirmed of Syncerus by Lilius Giraldus: (in the Epistola ad Antonium Thebaldeum, progymn. item quaedam Caelius Calcagninus) cecinit qui primus in acta, non prius auditum carmen. This were the poet's Petrarchan declaration of a more glorious Fama, and thus the rebuttal of a lesser worldly Fortune, "vitae hominum raro est invidia"; for it were but few men who deserve to be envied, whose pride were beneath the pride of an Augustus. [See Christianus Hartigius and Anton Ignatius Franciscus, in the Annus Politicus; per Duodecim Discursus tum Critico-Politicos tum Politico-Historicos Evolutus: Virtutem cole dum vivis famam invenies in sepulchro. Nominis tui memoria Phoenix erit cinerum tuorum, vives que diutius, & gloriosius, collapso in pulverem cadavere sparsa per orbem famam, quam, hac tacente, inter tuos vixeris. Vitae hominum raro super istes est invidia. Note also, the remarks of Peter Stacey, in "Roman Monarchy and the Renaissance Prince; Royal Humanism in the Regnum Siciliae", P. 123. "The Petrarchan injunction is always 'to cultivate virtue while you are alive and you will find fame after your death'. (Virtutem cole dum vivis famam invenies in sepulchro.) Virgil had disdained in a manly fashion the words of his detractors, relying instead upon the faith and judgement that Augustus had for his talent. Petrarch's own fama, so roundly honoured in this world by Dionigi's royal master, was valid because it was the verdict of a new Augustus. ... In Petrarch's disparagement of worldly fame in favour of an immortal reputation guaranteed by the recognition of a few virtuous men- true arbiters undeflected by the ebb and flow of vulgar evaluation- his argument is that those who think otherwise about fama become hostages to fortuna."] "
-- LIBER ENDUMIASKIA: THE TEARS OF SYSYNPHREUS, Being a Selection of Proverbs and Sententia Drawn Up from the "Book of Pleasure"; Proverb V.

[MagsJ]

A philosopher who sees his equal in another, isn't a philosopher. As in the Timaeus; Philosophy demands one World, one Soul, one Universe, one KOSMOS.

"As long as no-one here continues to try to undermine me, I’m good.. had enough of everyone tryin that shit tho.. that’s not the Way! or as they say.. if you don’t know, you don’t know (shit). There are no shortcuts! " -Magsj

Ah, but that is the reason I say that a philosopher who sees his equal in another, is not a philosopher. As long as one doesn't see their equal in another, there is no need to undermine another either. The Archimedean pride of the philosopher, that he should move the entire World with a big enough stick and a big enough fulcrum, prevents him from ever needing to use cheaper tricks in defending his ego on a psychological basis. Philosophic pride, philosophic ego, is beyond mere psychology, like the ego spoken of by Rilke: he said that to expunge the Ego entirely was not the goal, but to transform it, to purify it, to turn the ego into light, into an omnipresent, "transparent eye" in the words of Emerson,- to make one's ego porous,- and to learn to apprehend, through it, its very object, and therefor also, the entire World through it, inasmuch as the ego's object is properly- the World. Hence my recent fury against Fixed, who has taken to intimating my being a traitor to my political ideals (for insane reasoning by the way: I explained a few posts ago, very clearly, why his reasoning is insane) as a way of curbing my intimidating nature for himself. (If he's not doing that for that reason, out of psychological projection, and he actually believes the insane reasoning he has ventured for it- well then I guess I give too much credit.) Up until that moment, our entire history was amenable, agreeable; we endured, like all philosophers, one another's pride without any issue. I have an aphorism from one of my books that sums up this entire line of thought concerning philosophic pride:

Hmmm! People, huh? I don’t mean that in relation to you and Fixed, but just in general.

"It is not our modesty, but only our arrogance, that takes offense at the arrogance of another. Prassicius, in the Naugeri Poetica Dialogus of Fracastorus, gives us to understand that great poets are not troubled by each other's arrogance, and that only mediocre men take offense to the vaunted display of another's laurels, as it was similarly confirmed of Syncerus by Lilius Giraldus: (in the Epistola ad Antonium Thebaldeum, progymn. item quaedam Caelius Calcagninus) cecinit qui primus in acta, non prius auditum carmen. This were the poet's Petrarchan declaration of a more glorious Fama, and thus the rebuttal of a lesser worldly Fortune, "vitae hominum raro est invidia"; for it were but few men who deserve to be envied, whose pride were beneath the pride of an Augustus. [See Christianus Hartigius and Anton Ignatius Franciscus, in the Annus Politicus; per Duodecim Discursus tum Critico-Politicos tum Politico-Historicos Evolutus: Virtutem cole dum vivis famam invenies in sepulchro. Nominis tui memoria Phoenix erit cinerum tuorum, vives que diutius, & gloriosius, collapso in pulverem cadavere sparsa per orbem famam, quam, hac tacente, inter tuos vixeris. Vitae hominum raro super istes est invidia. Note also, the remarks of Peter Stacey, in "Roman Monarchy and the Renaissance Prince; Royal Humanism in the Regnum Siciliae", P. 123. "The Petrarchan injunction is always 'to cultivate virtue while you are alive and you will find fame after your death'. (Virtutem cole dum vivis famam invenies in sepulchro.) Virgil had disdained in a manly fashion the words of his detractors, relying instead upon the faith and judgement that Augustus had for his talent. Petrarch's own fama, so roundly honoured in this world by Dionigi's royal master, was valid because it was the verdict of a new Augustus. ... In Petrarch's disparagement of worldly fame in favour of an immortal reputation guaranteed by the recognition of a few virtuous men- true arbiters undeflected by the ebb and flow of vulgar evaluation- his argument is that those who think otherwise about fama become hostages to fortuna."] "
-- LIBER ENDUMIASKIA: THE TEARS OF SYSYNPHREUS, Being a Selection of Proverbs and Sententia Drawn Up from the "Book of Pleasure"; Proverb V.

Austin Osman Spare.. the dark version of Oscar Wilde. The occult unsettles me greatly, but I’ve downloaded a copy of that book, to read.. I’ve only skim-read so far, it seems interesting enough to carry on.. bearing in mind that I haven’t read a book, in years.