/**
 * file: karbytes_01_june_2024.txt
 * type: plain-text
 * date: 31_MAY_2024
 * author: karbytes
 * license: PUBLIC_DOMAIN
 */

karbytes_0: “Earlier today you suggested that you are an anarchist and think that anarchy (with natural selection being the sole limiting factor) is inevitably the way all governments are (and that anarchy should therefore be regarded as the default state of existence and that policy creation, policy changes, and policy enforcement should be as evenly distributed, depersonalized, and ‘net neutral’ (ideologically secular and assuming nothing always (from the locus of the physical hardware of the Internet itself (so as to not be biased towards any one piece of information over any other piece of information))) as possible (which means there would be committees comprised of human experts in all relevant domains for running a society in partnership with global and local artificial intelligence (informed by global ‘real time’ surveillance throughout Earth’s biosphere (where humans are physically present) using many tiny routers and sensors which are in wireless communication with large stationary servers and supercomputers) instead of traditional monarchs and oligarchs)). Please elaborate.”

karbytes_1: “I thought anarchy would be the path of least resistance; the only choice deterministic laws of physics would permit (through an algorithmic process of elimination) which always favors patterns of matter and energy which take the least amount of energy to preserve across a sufficiently long space-time interval. I would define anarchy as the lack of government. I consider the word government to be in the same category as religion and numbers. Those things are each objects which sometimes exist in human imagination (but never as physical phenomena outside the (apparently solipsistic) scope of one person’s own imagination. If believing in religion or government or some sum of money makes a person feel better, then that person is likely to continue sustaining such a belief in that person’s mind (and that person is also likely to physically manipulate its environment (which it shares with other humans) through goal-oriented actions which are informed by such belief). Sustaining beliefs (especially without devices which are external to the mind and which exist in the physical world all living humans currently appear to coexist inside of) takes a substantial amount of energy through the believer’s nervous system. It is easier (i.e. more energy efficient) to sustain beliefs which are substantiated by empirical evidence gleaned through human sensory organs than beliefs which are not. I cannot help but think that (human) government does not exist ubiquitously as though it is some kind of cosmic field which is as real as space-time or electromagnetism is. Instead, I think (based on the empirical data my mind has amassed over a significantly long time) that ‘might makes right’ (i.e. that brute strength, immunity to damage, and stamina) are chiefly what enables one beast to dominate another beast in a competition over scarce resources which each beast in that fight covets. People either side with the aggressor or else they are the aggressor (or else they are effectively murdered). Smarts and riches are worthless in such a competition if physical coercion manipulates the environment more.”

karbytes_0: “In practice (and according to other humans), do you present yourself as an anarchist who believes that ‘might makes right’ is the predominant ethic?”

karbytes_1: “Not usually. Instead, I pretend to be a socialist democrat (and I did vote Green Party) who believes that most people are harmless and doing the absolute best they can given their circumstances (so as to prevent making anyone feel threatened or unsupported).”

karbytes_1: “Actually, I might actually have better presented myself to the public as a green libertarian than as a socialist democrat. I think capitalism is necessary for enabling people to have genuine freedom to choose buyable options as a consumer (without the constraints of having to appeal towards some kind of social or ideological affiliation). Capitalism (in theory) allows any goods and services to be sold but only those which are most in demand and in most supply seem to generate the most revenue (and hence infrastructural accommodation to support logistics which individual consumers favor and are not forced to have no alternatives to are paid to exist).”