Join Us on FACEBOOKVă invit să vă alăturaţi grupului Facebook Mişcarea DACIA, ce-şi propune un alt fel de a face politică!

Citiţi partea introductivă şi proiectul de Program, iar dacă vă place, veniţi cu noi !
O puteţi face clicând alături imaginea, sau acest link

Hyperian History Of The World (20th Century, Part 1)

Novembre 9th, 2019 No Comments   Posted in Dacia Iluministă

Hyperian History Of The World (20th Century, Part 1)

As the 20th century dawned, science had become the dominant worldview for humanity. Religion was still very much active, of course, but had now become less overt. People went to church to ‘keep up appearances’, they read the bible to their children and continued to brainwash and psychologically damage them with threats of eternal hellfire should they disobey. Yet now, these same children were being taught a contradictory worldview at school.

If anything, this simply led to more confusion and more psychological damage. Whereas religion had once been a powerful force which infiltrated every aspect of life, it was now a mostly private affair. Science had now risen to prominence. Whereas the academic world had once been driven by theology and philosophy, now scientists were the main power. The theories of science were stated as eternal laws, just as the commandments of religion had been, yet now there were legions of scientific academics conducting experiments which served to ‘prove’ their theories, or at the very least, to provide evidence to support them.

The shift that had occurred was that people no longer accepted ideas on authority alone. A priest had nothing but the bible to back up what he said. A scientist had all manner of experiments and research papers to back up what he said. Yet, of course, this was far from perfect. Ordinary people were not reading these papers, nor were they assessing the results of experiments. They were still mostly just accepting what their scientific experts were telling them, having ‘faith’ that these experts were being honest.

Yet science was providing something to the world which religion never had – technology. The industrial revolution at the end of the 18th century had provided the world with all manner of machines which had led to the rise of extreme capitalism. Now, new inventions were shifting the focus away from production and on to consumption. At the start of the 20th century, the world had acquired telegraphic communication, motor vehicles, the phonograph etc. These physical objects, which could be bought and enjoyed by ordinary people, represented the triumph of science. Greedy capitalists had no problem with a society moving away from religion, as it was leading to a society of consumers eagerly waiting to purchase new technological products.

Yet, at the same time, science was undergoing two major revolutions, almost simultaneously, which would shake it to its very core and reveal all of the contradictions which lay at its base.

Maxwell’s electromagnetism had already presented ideas which did not fit into the Newtonian worldview. Maxwell’s equations, ‘proven’ to be correct after many experiments, could not be reduced to Newton’s simple equations of physics. This was troubling for physicists, as it suggested that Newton hadn’t told the whole story. Eventually, Hendrik Lorentz managed to unify Newton’s equations with Maxwell’s into a new set of equations known as the ‘Lorentz Transformations’. Whilst there was nothing wrong with the mathematics of these equations, their implications were shocking to scientists. According to the equations, when objects move through space, as their speed increases they begin to physically contract and time begins to slow down for them. After centuries of Newtonian physics, this seemed absurd.

Albert Einstein was the scientist who took these new ideas and developed an entirely new theory of physics, known as the theory of Relativity. According to relativity, the contraction of space and the dilation of time predicted by the Lorentz transformations were different depending on the frame of reference of the observer. A stationary observer would observe space contraction and time dilation in a moving object, yet, from that object’s point of view, it is the other observer that is moving, with space contraction and time dilation, whilst the object remains still and unchanged. Einstein abolished any ‘absolute’ reference frame and the only absolute in his theory was the speed of light, which remains the same in any frame of reference even if everything else changes.

Einstein’s theories unified time and space, with time becoming a fourth dimension of spacetime. Einstein then had to make sense of Gravity. He suggested that the mass of physical objects in spacetime cause spacetime to ‘warp’ around that mass. Objects with greater mass will cause a greater degree of spacetime ‘warping’ leading to smaller objects falling into that warp if they got too close, thereby explaining gravity. The ‘warping’ or ‘curvature’ of spacetime could be described using non-Euclidean geometry newly discovered by mathematician Bernhard Riemann. Luckily for Einstein, mathematicians seemed always to be one step ahead of physicists, discovering new mathematical ideas just in time for physicists to use them in their new theories. As ever, science was making great use of mathematics, yet philosophy was nowhere to be seen.

Einstein’s theory, which caused a revolution in physics and is still considered true today by most scientists, simply doesn’t hold up to rational scrutiny. Einstein asserted that the speed of light was the only constant, yet never offered any reason why this should be. Also, without there being an ‘absolute’ reference frame, Einstein’s theory gives rise to a worldview in which all manner of contradictory things are happening simultaneously, again with no reason given as to why this should be the case. Of course, scientists weren’t interested in rational scrutiny, and many physical experiments seemed to provide evidence to support Einstein’s theory, leading to a whole new area of science for papers to be written about and legions of scientists could now, by subscribing to the new theory, have successful academic careers, truth be damned.

Yet Einstein’s relativity was not the only major revolution in physics in the early 20th century. Whereas relativity focused mainly on very large objects in spacetime across the universe, other physicists were looking into very small objects. After the discovery of radioactivity at the end of the 19th century, Max Planck, as early as 1900, discovered that energy was emitted from atoms only in certain discrete amounts. In 1913, Niels Bohr showed that electrons in atoms were arranged in shells around the nucleus of the atom, with specific, discrete numbers of electrons in each shell.

All of these ideas eventually led to a new physics called Quantum Mechanics, aimed at explaining these phenomena. The major new idea was that matter, traditionally viewed as particles, could also be viewed as waves. The famous ‘double-slit’ experiment shows this, with particles fired through two slits producing a wave on the other side.

As ever, physicists simply developed their theories to match the observed results of experiments, rather than utilising rational principles to logically determine the truth. To explain this wave-particle duality, Max Born suggested that the wave associated with a particle was a wave of probability, a range of possible states that the particle could exist in. This ‘wave function’ contains all possible states that the particle can have and, extraordinarily, the assertion was made that the particle actually exists in all of these possible states simultaneously, until an observation is made, at which point one of these states is selected randomly and the wave function collapses into a single, physical, observable state.

This idea turned physics on its head. With Newton’s laws, everything in the universe could be said to be deterministic. If one knew all of the starting conditions, one could, using the laws of physics, predict exactly how everything would turn out. Now, however, with quantum mechanics, determinism was gone. Randomness and probability had been introduced and there was now no way of predicting which state a particle would assume when an observation was made.

As ever, rational scrutiny shows all of this to be absurd. How does the act of observation cause the wave function to collapse? What constitutes an ‘observation’? What constitutes an ‘observer’? Erwin Schroedinger developed a famous thought experiment to show these absurdities, in which a cat is sealed inside a box containing a radioactive substance. Whilst inside the box the cat, according to the new theory, is both alive and dead simultaneously. Only when the box is opened and an observation is made does the wave function collapse and the cat is revealed to be either alive or dead. Although Schroedinger developed this thought experiment to show the absurdity of quantum mechanics, it is now used by scientists to demonstrate the truth of this theory!

Once again, science suffered from a lack of philosophy. Unfortunately, either no one noticed, or no one cared and, again, scientists embraced a new area of physics which they could write endless papers about and further their careers.

One of the biggest critics of quantum mechanics was actually Einstein himself, mainly because it contradicted his own relativity theory. To this day the theories are both accepted as true by the scientific establishment, despite totally contradicting each other. Science ought to have been revealed as being just as absurd and irrational as religion had been, yet instead, the scientific worldview became even more dominant, scientists became some of the most respected people in society and Einstein even became a celebrity, adored by the masses. Few noticed, or cared, that these theories could not possibly be true. Science continued on, relentlessly attempting to unify these new theories, a task which is still not complete. Yet, so long as research papers could be written and Nobel prizes won, no scientist really cared.

The power of religion may have greatly diminished, but the power of science was attaining to newer, greater heights, yet was just as, if not more, damaging than religion had ever been.

Brice Merci – hyperian

Hyperian Manifesto

Ottobre 31st, 2019 No Comments   Posted in Dacia Iluministă

Băi, voi nu v-ați săturat? Să fiți mințiți, prostiți, furați pe față și scuipați între ochi de un Sistem care de zeci de ani nu a realizat nimic? NIMIC?! Soluția EXISTĂ! V-o redau aici din nou și o voi tot face cât timp trăiesc. CITIȚI! Părerile neargumentate ale unora nu mă interesează.

SISTEMUL”… economic, educațional, religios. Există de fapt multe sisteme, dar le-ai observat măcar o clipă? Sau poate crezi că „așa e realitatea făcută să fie”. De „iluminare” ce zici? Sau „mântuire”, cum ar numi-o creștinii, neștiind măcar o clipă despre ce vorbesc.

Fără prea multe prezentări și introduceri, ofer aici traducerea adaptată a unui rezumat al unui curent străin, HYPERIANISM-ul, puțin cunoscut în Românica noastră nu-prea-cultivată, dar care își merită tot timpul acordat citirii lui. Succes și mulțumesc.

Hyperianism-ul e despre Rațiune, despre Logică, și despre mult mai mult de atât. E o Chemare la o Nouă Ordine Mondială (NWO), o Cale cu totul nouă despre cum pot fi lucrurile făcute. Cum a spus și Nietzsche, Trebuie Să Reevaluăm Toate Valorile și apoi să ne construim propriile Valori. Vechiul Sistem pur și simplu nu funcționează. Miliarde de oameni sunt înfometați, și mai multe miliarde cred în Superstiții expirate, iar cel mai bun lucru la care pot ei spera, e „să fie lăsați în pace”. Nu permit Transformarea, nu permit Schimbarea. Nicio Democrație de pe fața pământului nu a menționat măcar o dată care îi este Scopul. Ei bine, noi tocmai îl menționăm pe al nostru: să obținem cât mai multă Cunoaștere, să obținem Gnoza (gnosis), să devenim Zei! Să creăm o Comunitate De Zei. Să avem o societate dreaptă pentru prima dată în istorie, care îi ridică la înălțime pe toți membrii ei, nu doar Elitele Privilegiate.

Cum? Pai, e destul de simplu:

Credințele religioase (Creștinismul, Iudaismul și Islamul – care literar înseamnă „Supunere”) ne-au condus direct la Cruciade, Inchiziție și Arderea Filosofilor și Liber-Cugetătorilor („eretici”). Obediența lipsită de gândire nu e o Cale Spre Înainte.
Absurditățile misterioase ale Relativiștilor, Budiștilor și ale celor de teapa lui Alan Watts spun că nu există așa ceva numit Adevăr. Ei ne-au propăvăduit Meditația (curățarea mintii; practic, să nu gândești deloc!) și iluzia profundității. Nefolositor.
Materialismul Ştiințific a realizat cea mai mare parte din Progres și a creat Tehnologia pe care o folosim astăzi, pentru că și numai pentru că, s-a folosit de Matematică! Fără matematică și formule matematice, Ştiința nu ar fi fost în stare să prezică sau să explice nimic. E un fapt. Știința refuză să accepte că ceva neobservabil (punctul adimensional – monada – mintea – sufletul etern!) poate exista. Această ideologie anti-minte încearcă să ne transforme în mașini lipsite de Liberul Arbitru! Cât de bizar e asta?
Singura cale înainte e Matematica Ontologică. Suntem Cauze Necauzate (minți/monade) și avem Liberul Arbitru din plin. Universul este Rațional și Obiectiv, și putem soluționa absolut orice folosind numai Rațiunea și Matematica. Numerele sunt reale din punct de vedere ontologic. Nu există așa ceva ca „Materia” în sine – Materia este doar o expresie a Minții. Realitatea la bază nu este decât Matematică, Numere și Frecvențe.

Toate religiile vechi au eșuat și au ținut umanitatea pe loc, iar acest lucru e de neacceptat. Oamenii nu vor pregresa atât timp cât continuă să creadă în povești, să se închine la dumnezei tirani inexistenți sau să se supună orbește unor „sfinte cărți” false și contradictorii. Dacă pot fi considerate cumva, ele nu sunt decât cărți cât se poate de nesfinte! Acestea au condus omenirea pe o cale a distrugerii și la teroare de-a lungul istoriei lor. Privește de exemplu Islamul. Oameni sunt bătuți până la moarte din cauza a ceea ce a scris un analfabet care a trăit într-o peșteră acum câteva mii de ani. De ce tolerăm așa ceva?
Religia trebuie sa se bazeze pe Logos, pe Cunoaștere. Suntem Suflete Eterne, Matematice (altfel spus, Monade Leibniziane, Puncte Adimensionale sau Minți). „Nașterea” e conexiunea Minții din Sursă / Singularitate (domeniul zero-dimensional al frecvențelor) cu „Avatarul” sau Corpul, din Holos (domeniul 6-dimensional al Spațiu-Timpului). Vom accesa Cunoașterea și eventual vom deveni Zei. Un „Zeu” e pur și simplu o ființă cu Putere și Cunoaștere infinită. Reîncarnându-ne, vom continua să evoluăm mental până la punctul în care vom fi devenit cu toții Zei, de dată ce am devenit suficient de inteligenți și raționali. E inevitabil. Universul are un punct de terminare, un sfârșit de maximă actualizare și perfecțiune, și cu toții vom fi atrași neîncetat spre Îmbunătățire și Devenire, aprpiindu-ne de acea Perfecțiune.

Vechiul Sistem Economic a eșuat. „Democrația” capitalistă este de fapt o Plutocrație (condusă de cei bogați). Nicăieri în lume nu contează părerea oamenilor comuni. Precum în timpurile medievale când familiile regale conduceau, Stăpânii din Elita Financiară transmit Bogăția și Puterea lor dinastic, de la generație la generație la nesfârşit, asigurându-se că și le vor menține pentru totdeauna.
Dacă faci parte din Familia lor – dacă ești unul dintre „ei”, dacă ai cravata potrivită, descendența de sânge potrivită – ai totul de-a gata. Pur și simplu nu ai cum să pierzi! Cursa Vieţii (parabolă Iluministă) e măsluită, masa e înclinată și „casa” căștigă întotdeauna.
În timp ce majoritatea dintre noi ne începem viața cu aproape nimic, Elita Financiară aranjează Cursa Vieţii în favoarea ei prin Moșteniri masive și Fonduri Privilegiate. Aceștia sunt oportuniști, hoți și paraziți. Donald Trump a moștenit $400 milioane. Dacă n-ar fi moștenit nimic, am mai fi auzit noi vreodată de el? În termenii Cursei Vieţii, familiile ereditare ultra-bogate încep cursa cu 3 metri înaintea liniei de sosire, iar noi începem la 1000 km distanță. N-avem nicio șansă să-i prindem din urmă. Câștigul lor e garantat, și ei iau toate aplauzele – nu bazat pe Meritul lor, ci pe baza a cine au fost părinții lor. Nu ai fi tu un Fraier dacă ai accepta să fii un cetățean de clasa a 2-a, să iei parte la o Cursă care știi deja că a fost aranjată împotriva ta în toate felurile posibile?
Apelăm la schimbarea Capitalismului Globalist Prădător cu un capitalism moderat, social. Demolaţi Cultul Celebrităților și Clasa Elitei Financiare ce încearcă să se perpetueze drept Stăpânii noștri pentru Eternitate!
Oamenii și Ideile contează mai mult decât „Principiul Profitului” și materialista acumulare a bogăției. Implementați taxa de 100% pe moștenire morților, astfel încât toate resursele să fie returnate unui stat inteligent și binevoitor. Nimeni nu trebuie să acumuleze bani în exces, să zicem, 100 de milioane de dolari. Făcând asta ei sustrag din Resursele tuturor; iar tolerând acest lucru, accepţi indirect că miliardarii plutocrați precum Trump valorează de 100,000,000 de ori mai mult decât tine și merită de 100,000,000 de ori mai multe resurse. Numai un fraier desăvârșit ar accepta așa ceva în ultimă instanță.
Cu Taxa de Moştenire de 100% vom putea reinvesti toate aceste fonduri în beneficiul tuturor, nu doar a câtorva aleși. Vom putea investi miliarde de dolari într-o educație TRĂSNET și să construim sisteme și proiecte revoluţionare în beneficiul tuturor și vor ridica întreaga omenire pe o nouă Treaptă a Evoluţiei.

În primul rând, ce nu suntem noi: nu suntem anarhiști, libertarieni, conservatori liberali, socialiști sau comuniști. Suntem Iacobini și Radicali De Stânga. Noi pledăm pentru Meritocrație. Meritocrație reală, nu iluzia ei pe care o trăim astăzi.
Cu ce e ea diferită? Păi, în Capitalismul Prădător te alegi cu oportunități și recompense inegale. Nepotismul rulează agresiv. „Pe Cine Cunoști” reprezintă totul, iar „Ce Cunoști” (Meritul tău real) nu are loc în acest Sistem. Dacă ești destul de norocos încât să te naști în familia potrivită, începi cu milioane sau chiar miliarde de dolari. Alte familii încep cu nimic. Nu este o Cale sănătoasă pentru ca o societate normală să avanseze.
Apoi e Comunismul, care e opusul Capitalismului, și care e pur și simplu la fel de greșit – el conduce la recompense egale pentru absolut toată lumea și la corupție, eliminând astfel orice stimul pentru a o muncă remarcabilă și fapte mărețe – pentru că toată lumea va fi pur și simplu răsplătită la fel în orice caz. Ăsta e motivul pentru care a și căzut. Nu reprezintă deci o Soluţie.
Meritocrația e despre Oportunități Egale și Recompense Inegale! Meritocrația nivelează terenul de joc și le permite tuturor să concureze drept, dar unde vei ajunge din acel moment ține numai de tine și ești răsplătit în funcție de Meritul, Talentul și Contribuțiile pe care le aduci Societății.
Într-o Meritocrație, „pe cine cunoşti” devine irelevant și totul e despre „ceea ce știi”. Cei mai inteligenți, informați și capabili oameni în toate domeniile vor lua cele mai importante decizii. Nu e asta cea mai elegantă și rațională soluție? Dacă va fi necesar, liderii vor fi împiedicaţi să folosească poziția lor pentru a-și cultiva interesele private, exact ca în Republica lui Plato.
Meritocrația câștigă în fața Democrației din toate punctele de vedere. Democrația a eșuat! Pur și simplu întreabă-te: ar trebui să încredințăm soarta societății și progresul umanității Geniilor, Intelectualilor și Experților Ştiințifici, sau în mâna unor Oameni Mediocri? Dacă te-ai accidenta și ai avea nevoie de operație, ți-ai dori ca cei mai buni posibili, cei mai învățați doctori să fie acolo pentru a te trata, sau o persoană oarecare de pe strada? Consider că raspunsul e evident.
Meritocrația e singurul răspuns Rațional, cea mai bună Cale pentru optimizarea și înălțarea tuturor.
Succesul oricui, este şi Succesul nostru. Dacă vrei să aprofundezi mai mult viziunea noastră, caută pe google despre The Venus Project (Proiectul Venus) sau societatea descrisă în Star Treck: The Next Generation. E vorba de un Guvern Mondial! Celebritățile și Elitele Bogate şi Psihopate dispar din ecuație. Achiziția bunurilor materiale nu va mai reprezenta scopul vieții – totul va fi pentru dezvoltarea ta personală și contribuția adusă umanității în felul care te pasionează pe tine cel mai mult.
Aşa, sau ceva similar, va arăta Viitorul. Democrația capitalistă NU va mai exista în viitor, asta e sigur. Istoria avansează întotdeauna datorită dialecticii, iar dialectica ne îndreaptă spre un viitor meritocratic și iluminat! E vorba de cât de repede vom ajunge noi acolo. Dacă destui oameni ar dori schimbarea și ar acționa, lumea ar putea fi schimbată literar peste noapte. E atât de simplu.
– Thomas Foster – hyperian
Text adaptat după Traducerea lui Ştefan Gabi – hyperian

Hyperian Manifesto
(This is a long post but worth reading if you want a summary of what Hyperianism is.)
I’m seeing a lot of newcomers being confused about what Hyperianism represents, or asking whether/why we have political affiliations. Allow me to clarify.

Hyperianism is about reason and logic, but it’s about more than that. It’s a call for a New World Order, a completely new way of doing things. As Nietzsche said, we need to revalue all values and create our own values. The old system isn’t working. Billions are starving, billions more believe in outdated superstitions, and the best anyone can hope for is to ‘left alone’. There’s no transformation, no change. No democracy on Earth has ever stated what its purpose is. Well, we can state ours: to obtain knowledge, to obtain gnosis, to become Gods! To create a community of Gods. To have a fair and just society for the first time in history, that uplifts everyone rather than just the privileged elites.

How? Well, it’s quite simple:

Religious faith (Christianity, Judaism and Islam – which literally means “submission”) has led to the Crusades, inquisition and burning freethinkers and philosophers (‘heretics’) at the stake. Unthinking obedience is not the way forward.

Mystical fortune-cookie clap trap of the likes of the relativists, Buddhists and Alan Watts-types say there’s no such thing as truth! They have given us meditation (clearing your mind i.e. not thinking!) and the illusion of profundity. Useless.

Scientific materialism has made the most progress and created technology that we use today, because and only because it allied with mathematics! Without maths and mathematical formulae, science wouldn’t be able to predict or explain anything. That’s a fact. Science refuses to accept that something unobservable (such as a dimensionless point – monad – mind – eternal soul!) can indeed exist. It’s anti-mind ideology tries to turn us into machines with no free will! How bizarre is that?

The only way forward is ontological mathematics. We are uncaused causes (monads/minds) and we do have total free will. The universe is rational and objective, and we can work out everything using our reason and mathematics. Numbers are ontologically real. There is no ‘matter’ as such – matter is just an expression of mind. Reality at a base level is nothing but mathematics, numbers and frequency.

All the old religions have failed and held humanity back, and that is unacceptable. Humans will not progress as long as we believe in made up stories, bow to nonexistent tyrant gods and blindly obey outdated, contradictory and false “holy books”. If anything, they are unholy books! They have weaved a path of destruction and terror through human history. Just look at Islam. If you contradict the Koran in certain countries, you’ll get beheaded! Young couples are stoned to death because of what an illiterate guy in a cave wrote thousands of years ago. Why do we tolerate this?

Religion must be based on Logos, on knowledge. We are eternal, mathematical souls (alternatively Leibnizian monads, dimensionless points, or minds). “Birth” is the connection of the mind in the source (0-dimensional frequency domain) with the ‘avatar’, or body, in the holos (6-dimensional spacetime domain). We will acquire knowledge and eventually become Gods. A “God” is simply a being with infinite knowledge and power. Due to reincarnation, we will keep mentally evolving and we will all become a God, once we are intelligent and rational enough. It is inevitable. The universe has an endpoint of maximum actualisation and perfection, and all of us are being pulled relentlessly to improve and become closer to that perfection.

The old economics have failed. Capitalist “democracy” is actually plutocracy (rule by the rich). Nowhere in the world do the people have any genuine say. Just like in medieval times where royal families ruled, our financial elite masters transmit their wealth and power dynastically, from generation to generation indefinitely, making sure that they always maintain their wealth and power.

If you’re part of their family – if you’re one of “them”, if you have the right tie, the right bloodline – you’ve got it made. You literally can’t lose! The race is rigged, the table is tilted and the house always wins.

While most of us start with next to nothing, the financial elite rig the race in their favour via massive inheritances and trust funds. They are moochers, looters and parasites. Donald Trump inherited $400 million. If he inherited nothing, would we ever have heard of him? In terms of the race, the ultra-rich hereditary families start 3 meters from the finish line, and we start 1000 meters away. We can never catch up. They are guaranteed to win, and get all the applause – not based on their merit, but on who their parents were. Wouldn’t you have to be a loser to accept being a second-class citizen, to take part in a race that you knew was rigged against you in every conceivable way?

We call for the replacement of predatory, globalist capitalism with restrained, social capitalism. Down with celebrity culture and the permanent financial elite class that is trying to set themselves up as our masters in perpetuity!

People and ideas matter more than the “Profit Principle” and materialistic wealth acquisition. Implement 100% inheritance tax on the dead, so that all resources are returned to an intelligent and benevolent State. Nobody needs to hoard money in excess of, say, 100 million dollars. By doing that they are literally denying resources to everyone else; and by tolerating this we are saying that billionaire plutocrats like Trump are worth 100,000,000 more than you and deserve 100,000,000 more resources. Only a perpetual loser would ever accept this ultimatum.

With 100% inheritance tax we will be able to re-invest these funds in order to benefit everyone, not just a select few. We will be able to invest billions of dollars into top-notch education and create systems and transformative projects that benefit everyone and uplift humanity on a grand scale.

Firstly, what we are not: we are not anarchists, libertarians, Conservatives, liberals, socialists or communists. We are Jacobins and radical leftists.
We advocate meritocracy. Actual meritocracy, not the illusion of it like we have now.

How is it different? Well, in predatory capitalism, you’ve got inequal opportunities and inequal outcomes. Nepotism and cronyism run rampant. “Who you know” is everything, and “what you know” (i.e. your merit) doesn’t come into it. If you get lucky and you’re born into the right family, you start with millions or even billions of dollars. Other families start with nothing. That’s no way for a sane society to proceed.

Communism is the opposite and just as wrong – it leads to corruption and equal outcomes, thereby removing any incentive to do great work and perform great deeds – because everyone will simply be rewarded the same anyway. That’s why it collapsed. It’s not the answer either.

Meritocracy is about equal opportunities and inequal outcomes! Meritocracy levels the playing field and allows everyone to fairly compete, but where you go from there is up to you and you are rewarded in proportion to your merit, talent and contribution to society.

In a meritocracy, “who you know” becomes irrelevant and it’s all about “what you know”. The most intelligent, knowledgeable and capable people in each field lead and make the important decisions. Isn’t that the most elegant, rational solution? If necessary, the leaders are prevented from using their position to further their private interests, just as it was in Plato’s Republic.

Meritocracy beats democracy in every sense. Democracy has failed! Simply ask yourself this: shall we entrust the fate of our society and the progress of humanity to the geniuses and intellectuals, and scientific experts, or to average and mediocre people? If you were in an accident and needed surgery, would you want the best possible, most learned doctor there to help you, or some random person off the street? Surely the answer is obvious.

Meritocracy is the only rational answer, the best way to optimise and uplift everyone.

If everyone succeeds, we succeed. If you want to visualise our vision better, just think of the Venus Project or the society depicted in Star Trek: The Next Generation. It’s a one-world government! The celebrities and psychopathic rich elites are gone. The acquisition of material goods is no longer important – it’s all about improving yourself and contributing to humanity in the way that you’re most passionate about.

That, or something similar to that is what the future will be like. Capitalist democracy will NOT still exist in the year 10,000 CE, that’s for sure. History is always advancing thanks to the dialectic, and the dialectic points towards a meritocratic and enlightened future! It’s just about how quickly we reach it. If enough people wanted change and took action, the world could literally change overnight. It’s that simple.
– Thomas Foster – hyperian


Hyperian History Of The World (19th Century, Part 5)

Ottobre 31st, 2019 No Comments   Posted in Dacia Iluministă

Hyperian History Of The World (19th Century, Part 5)

Nietzsche’s radical philosophy signalled the end of an era for philosophy. Just as he had declared that ‘god is dead’, Nietzsche had attacked all manner of ‘idols’, including many greatly respected philosophers. Kant, Hegel and even Leibniz failed to escape Nietzsche’s scathing attacks. Perhaps Nietzsche was (understandably) frustrated by the fact that no religion, no philosophy, no science had succeeded in adequately explaining this reality in which he found himself, and so he felt the need to attack everything, to expose it all as empty and without true meaning.

Of course, Nietzsche’s biggest problem was that he was not a rationalist, and therefore lacked the means to distinguish between what was the real truth and what were empty falsehoods. Yet it was nonetheless true that even the greatest of rationalists, Leibniz, had not been able to truly express his philosophy in the purest rational terms because, as has been discussed, he lacked the mathematics with which to do so. Unfortunately, philosophy after Leibniz had actually seemed to move further and further away from mathematics (with science becoming more and more mathematical after Newton by contrast). Kant had started, in his earlier writings, with a more mathematical, almost scientific view of reality, which he had then rejected in his later, grander philosophy. Even Hegel, whose system was the most ‘complete’, had expressed it in metaphysical terms rather than mathematical, and mathematics was entirely absent in Schopenhauer and Nietzsche.

As philosophy became less mathematical and science more so, those seeking to understand reality were perhaps drawn more to science than to philosophy, as science would have seemed more rigorous, despite its basis in irrational empiricism. The problem was, of course, the sundering of academic disciplines. Mathematicians, those who held the keys to existence, were not sufficiently versed in philosophy and, as such, knew not how to use their keys. In the 18th century, Euler had actually discovered the equation which explained and defined all existence, yet had not realised that that is what is was. Unfortunately, no philosopher had made the connection either, yet mathematicians pressed on, making more and more discoveries, the significance of which they continued to fail to grasp.

In the early 19th century, another mathematician came along, Joseph Fourier, who, like Euler, made incredibly important mathematical discoveries, yet knew not their true significance. The biggest problem in philosophy was the mind/matter interaction problem which went back all the way to Descartes. Leibniz had partially solved the mind/matter interaction problem by showing that matter must be ultimately derived from mind, from the monads in his system, and that this must be done via some mathematical operations. Yet Leibniz had not discovered what those operations were.

It wasn’t until the work of Fourier that these mathematical operations were discovered. As he was a mathematician and not a philosopher, Fourier himself did not realise the implications of his own discoveries, but he can nonetheless be counted among humanity’s greatest geniuses by virtue of having made the mathematical discoveries necessary to solve the mind/matter problem.

Euler’s formula had shown that the exponential function could be expressed in terms of sine and cosine waves. Fourier built on this and discovered that every mathematical function can be expressed in terms of these simple waves, sine and cosine waves. From the analysis of these waves, Fourier realised that the same mathematical information can be presented in two completely different ways. Mathematical information can be presented in terms of a frequency domain as well as a space/time domain. Using a mathematical operation, known as the Fourier Transform, one can switch between the two domains.

These mathematical ideas provide the answer to Descartes’s problem. Leibniz had shown that each monad contains infinite energy, and energy is simply a collection of simple waves. The energy within the monads, within the realm of mind, is therefore represented by Fourier’s frequency domain and this same energy can be represented by Fourier’s space/time domain, via Fourier’s Transform, to form the realm of matter. Leibniz had shown that mind and matter were simply two forms of the same thing, and Fourier had (finally) provided the mathematics to show how it worked. Finally it could be shown how mind and matter can interact, by the fact that they are both presenting the same mathematical information in two different ways, related by Fourier’s Transform.

Of course, the true implications of Fourier’s discoveries were not recognised at the time, yet Fourier’s work was still hugely influential, particularly in science and engineering. By failing to utilise mathematics, philosophy was eclipsed by science in the 19th century, as science began to make progressions.

Religion had informed the worldview of the majority of people for so many centuries, yet now science was replacing religion, often offering completely alternative views of reality. In the 19th century this was shown most explicitly by the theories of Charles Darwin. The bible, which had been the source of knowledge for most ordinary people for centuries, simply stated that god had created the world and all the creatures in it. Darwin developed an alternative theory which proved devastating for religion.

Darwin asserted that the huge variety of species of life on Earth had all descended from common ancestors via a process which he called ‘natural selection’. Given that there were variations in the offspring of a species, those individuals which were better adapted to their environment were more likely to survive and reproduce. Therefore, over time, species would develop and evolve in various ways in response to changes in the environment. This theory of evolution was utterly in opposition to the religious ‘creationist’ view as, most significantly, Darwin’s theory required no creator at all.

Of course, there were flaws in the theory. Darwin failed to explain the origin of life itself (how did the first species appear?), he failed to explain exactly how variation occurs (his contemporary Gregor Mendel did explain this with his early genetic theory, but he was all but ignored while Darwin became a celebrity), and, of course, his theory was based solely on his empirical observations, and therefore had no rational basis at all. In fact, upon analysis, one realises that Darwin’s theory is ultimately based upon supposedly ‘random’ changes, some of which just happen to be suited to the environment.

Here the absurdity is revealed. If these changes are random, then every possible change has an equal chance of occurring. Given that only a narrow range of these changes would actually be suited to the environment of a species, the fact that such a variety of species has evolved, often with incredibly specific adaptations, and often over rather short spans of time, seems incredibly lucky. To go from single-celled organisms to the complexity of the human brain via a system of randomness just seems too good to be true.

In fact, a far less famous biologist had already developed a theory of evolution which addresses these problems, long before Darwin, yet these ideas are rarely discussed by scientists today. Jean-Baptiste Lamarck’s theory of evolution stated that there was some kind of complexifying force which drove evolution up a ladder of increasing complexity. To modern scientists this seems almost mystical and, of course, such a force could never be empirically observed, yet Lamarck’s theory at least accounts for the rapid increase in complexity which could never be achieved via randomness as Darwin later asserted.

The problem was, as ever, that these scientists were not philosophers and were not mathematicians. The three disciplines needed to be used together in order to truly understand reality, yet they had become far too separated.

Compared with the assertions of the bible, however, science certainly seemed to provide more rigorous explanations of reality and the power of religion was forever diminished with these scientific discoveries. Yet, later in the 19th century, even science would begin to show its fragility. Ever since Newton, physicists were happy with their deterministic view of the universe, based upon observable effects guided by simple mathematical laws. Yet it eventually became clear that things were not as simple as Newton had thought.

The most significant physicist of the late 19th century was James Clerk Maxwell, who delivered the first significant blow to the Newtonian view of physics. Maxwell studied both electricity and magnetism and eventually realised that they were simply two different expressions of the same phenomenon, namely light itself. Maxwell showed that both electric and magnetic fields travelled through space as waves moving at the speed of light. This unification of light, electricity and magnetism led to the idea of the electromagnetic spectrum, which Maxwell used to predict the existence of other forms of light such as radio waves.

This was very significant. Radio waves, and other types of light on the electromagnetic spectrum were not observable, yet their existence had been predicted mathematically, via the equations which Maxwell had developed. Whereas Newton had made his observations and then had developed equations to fit them, Maxwell had started with the mathematics and then declared that these waves must exist, without having observed them. This was a major shake-up to scientists who, once so certain of their view of reality, now began to realise that things were not as they had seemed. Physics was ripe for revolution, and in the next century chaos would certainly ensue.

Maxwell showed how science and mathematics were working together to improve their views of reality. Unfortunately they were still very much alienated from philosophy and, as such, there were still major flaws in their theories. Yet, nonetheless, 19th century science shows quite clearly that the reign of irrational religion was over once and for all, as Nietzsche said with his ‘god is dead’. Science would become the new power over the way in which people thought, yet, being based on empiricism, would be just as irrational as religion had been, yet in a far less easy to notice way.
– Brice Merci – hyperian

Hyperian History Of The World (19th Century, Part 3)

Ottobre 17th, 2019 No Comments   Posted in Dacia Iluministă

Hyperian History Of The World (19th Century, Part 3)

Beethoven and subsequent composers of the 19th century belong to what came to be known as the ‘Romantic’ era of music. This mirrors the ‘Romantic’ literary movement which had begun slightly earlier at the end of the 18th century and had flourished in England with great poets such as Wordsworth, Coleridge, Byron, Shelley and Keats.

Whilst these poets became famous and were celebrated at the time, there was another English poet who remained virtually unknown during his lifetime, yet was one of the most distinctive and visionary poets of all time. This was William Blake. Blake didn’t just write poetry but was also a painter and printmaker who tended to decorate his poetry with elaborate and highly original visual art. Blake was truly an oddity whose poetry and painting bore almost no relation to anything else which was being created at the time. Nonetheless, after his death and to the present day he has become one of the most influential artists of all time.

Considered to be mad in his time, Blake claimed to have had many religious visions which informed his work giving it a deeply mystical, spiritual quality, with several of his works being called ‘prophetic’. Blake was deeply critical of the establishment of his time, these criticisms often being stated quite clearly in his poetry. He despised all forms of organised religion and made his political feelings clear with his overt support for both the American and French revolutions and his friendship with Thomas Paine.

Although he opposed conventional religion, Blake was nonetheless deeply religious, and devised his own rich, complex mythology to express his religious ideas. The majority of his poetry consists of expressions of this complex mythology featuring a wide array of archetypal characters leading to some of the most original poetry ever written. Blake’s work reacts to every aspect of his society. He resists not only the religion and politics of the time, but also the newly developing scientific materialist worldview which Blake considered to be cutting people off from the religious and spiritual truths of the universe.

Blake can be considered a quintessential Hyperian artist, one who completely rejected all of the conventions of his time and developed a highly original, personal style to project the wonderfully creative contents of his mind. Blake wrote, “I must Create a System, or be enslav’d by another Man’s. I will not Reason & Compare; my business is to Create.”

Whilst Blake remained unknown in his lifetime, with the other English Romantic poets becoming far more famous, the real literary giant of the era was the german writer Johann Wolfgang von Goethe, one of the greatest writers of all time and perhaps the most influential figure in all of German culture.

Goethe excelled as a writer in almost every genre, writing four novels, hundreds of poems from short lyric poems to longer epic poems, several plays in prose and verse, works of literary criticism, scientific treatises on a range of subjects as well as his own memoirs and an autobiography. His first novel, ‘The Sorrows Of Young Werther’, became a sensation when it was published in 1774 and Goethe remained a celebrity for the remainder of his life. Several of his poems were even set to music by musical titans such as Beethoven and Schubert.

Goethe’s greatest work, completed just before his death in 1832, was his monumental drama, Faust, one of the most influential pieces of literature in history. Written as a play, the work is really a piece of poetry intended to be read rather than performed. However, it has been staged, albeit with a running time of about twenty one hours! In Faust, Goethe presents his version of the classic german legend of Faust, the scholar who sells his soul in exchange for knowledge. Whilst the traditional legend has Faust condemned for his desires, Goethe goes about the story in a different way.

Faust is split into two parts, the first of which was published earlier in 1808. This first part begins with the demon Mephistopheles making a bet with God that he can lure Faust away from righteous pursuits. Faust is striving to gain all possible knowledge and, although he has read everything, still he yearns for more. He turns then to magic, which causes Mephistopheles to appear, firstly in the form a stray dog who follows Faust home. Once the demon appears in human form, the pact is made. Mephistopheles agrees to give Faust everything he wants, whenever he wants it, so long as Faust promises to serve the Devil in hell after he dies. Faust agrees, stating that he is seeking for one moment so perfect that he would wish it to last an eternity, a moment which he hopes Mephistopheles will be able to provide.

The pact is signed with blood and the two begin their adventures, going out to see the world. Mephistopheles causes Faust to take on the appearance of a young, handsome man and Faust meets a girl, Gretchen, beautiful and pure, whom Faust is able to seduce with help from Mephistopheles. This, however, leads to tragedy. In order to meet with Faust, Gretchen drugs her own mother, who then dies from poisoning. Later, Gretchen discovers she is pregnant and her brother challenges Faust to a duel, leading to his death at the hands of Faust and Mephistopheles. Consumed by sorrow, when her child is born, Gretchen becomes mad and drowns the illegitimate child and is convicted of murder. Faust tries to free her from prison but she refuses to escape. Faust and Mephistopheles flee but voices from heaven announce that Gretchen will be saved.

After this first part of the drama was published, it had an immediate effect on German culture. Beethoven once supposedly said that an opera based on Faust would be the greatest work of art of all time. Sadly, Beethoven did not compose this work. Beethoven, however, only knew the first part of Faust, as the concluding, second part wasn’t published until after Beethoven’s death. If the first part of Faust had captured the german imagination, the second part went far further, containing far more elaborate adventures, deeper levels of mysticism and the powerful sense of a deep secret contained within.

The second part of Faust continues the adventures of Faust and Mephistopheles, seeing them first enter the service of the Holy Roman Emperor, where Mephistopheles solves the Emperor’s financial troubles by introducing paper money. Elaborate festivities result from this, culminating in Faust summoning the spirit of Helen of Troy, his ideal of beauty, from Hades. Once the vision of Helen appears, Faust falls in love with her, yet Mephistopheles whisks Faust away back to his old study. There, they discover that Faust’s attendant, Wagner, has created an artificial, miniature human being, called Homunculus. Homunculus goes with Faust and Mephistopheles on their next adventure, as he seeks to become fully human, although he is contained within a glass flask. This quest culminates with the glass smashing, causing the death of Homunculus.

Following this, Mephistopheles goes to the real Helen of Troy, whom he transports to Faust’s fortress, where she meets and falls in love with Faust. Together, they have a son, called Euphorion, a perfect, beautiful youth who eventually becomes overly bold and falls to his death in an attempt to fly. Overcome with sorrow, Helen disappears back to Hades.

Next, Faust begins a new, grand project to become a master of the land and the sea. He wishes to control the sea in order to bring forth a new land. Faust then dwells in this new land, becoming old and blind. Eventually, Faust wishes only to better the lives of those living in his land. In this moment, Faust realises that this is the moment of pure bliss which he would wish to last an eternity. With this final blissful realisation, Faust dies and Mephistopheles believes that he has won the wager and can now claim Faust’s soul. However, angels suddenly appear and take away Faust’s soul, carrying it upwards to heaven. The final scene shows the progression of Faust’s soul towards heaven, with numerous spiritual figures appearing, extolling spiritual matters concerning the soul of Faust, culminating in the final Chorus Mysticus which concludes the drama: “Everything transitory Is only an allegory; What cannot be achieved, Here it will come to pass; What cannot be described, Here it is accomplished; The eternal feminine Draws us aloft.”

Goethe’s Faust is one of the most imaginative works of literature ever written, overflowing with archetypal imagery, profound ideas and deep mystery, with a strong sense of hidden meanings and powerful secrets. The work is also a magnificent gnostic allegory. Whereas older, more christian versions of the legend of Faust end with Faust being condemned for his desire for the knowledge of god, Goethe ends his legend with Faust’s soul ascending to heaven, in a moment of apotheosis. Goethe celebrates the ambition of Faust to acquire knowledge leading to his becoming godlike himself. Yet, importantly, Faust only achieves this after making his deal with the devil, showing how we must embrace both the darkness and the light if we are to transcend them both. This idea echoes that of William Blake in his ‘The Marriage Of Heaven And Hell’, in which Blake states that progression in life is impossible without the unification of contraries, such as good and evil.

Both Blake and Goethe, therefore, present us with highly imaginative versions of the gnostic message, Blake with a completely original mythology, and Goethe with one which draws on old legends and pagan myths full of archetypal figures and imagery. Like Blake, we must all reject the old conventions of this world and create a vision of the future which we can actualise in the here and now. Like Goethe’s Faust, we must all strive for ultimate knowledge, even if that means embracing the darker aspects of life, and we must traverse this benighted world and all of its dark places, if we are to bathe it in the light of our own inner star.

Power Self

Ottobre 16th, 2019 No Comments   Posted in Dacia Iluministă