“SUYO” — Simple Undeniable Yank-proof Ownership

Accelerating our unavoidable evolution to a more rational world.

Content with an Intense Intent

Submitted by zClark on Wed, 11/Aug/2010 - 15:18

The Dutchman Cometh

In the following I found myself writing, “It is a grave error on my part to post anything here that distracts from, or obfuscates the blog's intent.” To best assure that this very post does not fall into this same dismal category, I'm starting this out with an explanation of said intentions.

My most intent objective here is to reek havoc on the single greatest enemy mankind has. The term that most accurately seems to encapsulate the quintessential essence of this adversary is “FANTASY”. For better delineation, lets call it id-fantasy to distinguish it from day-dreaming and other distractions – i.e. idle-fantasy (although such forms of recreation tend to revolve around id-fantasies). The meme realm (in its entirety) includes id-fantasy as a subset. A simplistic yet hopefully helpful take on the human condition lies with an inspection of our meme set. In the beginning, crude emotion –primarily fear– forges most memes (basic id-fantasy which is perpetuated by the ‘Loving Mommy More than Truth’ type of thing). Nevertheless, actuality and logic do make painstaking inroads and so a polarized continuum arises in the meme pool between id-fantasy and reason. As more ’n more memes gravitate toward raw reality and reason the human condition improves. Unlike the oscillating Yin-Yang that compliment each other, this meme pool shift is unavoidably headed to ever greater levels of veracity. Note: while this could be perceived as a beautiful procession, there is nothing at all whimsical nor mystical about it. We are talking about pure brute cause and effect. Electricity, for instance, has its own irrevocable intricate set of laws by which it is governed (which no sorcerer nor politician has any means at all of violating). The advantages of understanding, observing, and honoring these laws can hardly be overstated nor can they be denied. The enduring stubbornness and tenacity of cause & effect instills a stabilizing ratchet effect to the correction of erroneous memes. In other-words, after sufficient advancement a virtuous meme becomes locked in and the threat of loosing ground or going backwards is minimal (for example, wasting virgins to volcanoes is hopefully part of an unrepeatable past).

Now, after establishing my goal (an effective attack on fantasy), the next question is how does one most forcefully unleash such an assault? Well, maybe it would pay to evaluate some potential targets and then struggle at choosing which one best merits asserted action for destruction. So one considers: 1) what fantasy most effects/dominates human life; as opposed to 2) what is the most monstrous fantasy closest to toppling anyway; verses 3) what fantasy is easiest to battle without deadly repercussions; and finally, 4) the undoing of what key fantasy would result in the greatest downfall of various other bad/ill-founded memes?

And the good news is: no hard decisions are needed to select which candidate to pursue, as all four considerations point to the same lame thing.
And the bad news is: there ain't none – so I'm pretty much committed to pursuing this mission (like it or not) to the death. Anyway, given the name of our blog here, and the subject matter of most of my post (especially the earlier ones) it's rather anticlimactic to announce that (IMHO) various money-memes constitute the most stupefying and damaging fantasy that is currently crippling mankind's advancement. And for a (anti)crescendo, let me announce that today's monopolistic proprietary monetary system not only qualifies as top dog with regard to the four criteria listed above, but it also enjoys the extra bonus of being damn near pure fantasy … even more so than “Might makes Right”, etc.

SUYO-YeNom is not only the vehicle that I believe could dismantle the power of fiat proprietary money, but more importantly, it provides for individual empowerment and global economic expansion surpassing anything I might articulate. And both of these benefits most emphatically stem NOT from any corporeal forces, but are strictly grounded in individual awareness and peaceful action. Now the fun part is this: there is nothing substantial (except self-imposed meme boxes) to prevent immediate ramped implementation. No permissions to seek, no elections to win, to enemy to topple … just do it!

Along with the above, I feel there are some confessions to cite. First, the future I'm seeking is going to happen with or without me. It's inevitable, unstoppable, predestined. I simple want to weigh-in on the side my conscious demands, and at the very most help make things happen a bit sooner or smoother. Second, I have difficulty in finding virtue in being in the ‘middle of the road’ just for the sake of appearing sane or acceptable. Indeed, I'm quite adverse to roads heading in the wrong direction regardless of how comfortable the ride and slick the pavement. Such failures to compromise could make me a liability to the causes I most long to advance. Third, while substantial effort and thought has been extended to the mechanical and technical details of the SUYO platform, the lion share of my verbiage (this post being a perfect example) has been more psychological & philosophical in nature. I've defended this focus because it's where (I maintain) the real battle lies. Besides, barrages of logic loathing lunacy assault my delicate sensitivities and extort a comeback. But my rebuttals are assembled with too much trouble, too little talent, and a too prominent self. A satisfaction is felt however, when it seems that the text tendered well relates my bias. Albeit, an ugly gnawing persists – a repulsion with my rhetoric. Don't preach that the pen is mightier than the sword – instead: pioneer the printing press, birth wikipedia, engineer bitcoins, fulfill a real world need, act. Philosophy is fine, but mine is too much like an opinion, and opinions are too much like… err… ahh… well… I guess we really don't need to name what they're assholeciated with.

OK, so much for the rambling preamble for today's post. The impetus for all the above started back in mid July, when a Dutchman wrote in from my World1Tours WEB site. The good chap wanted to know our tour bus schedule for Central America. So I had to write back and explain that while the WEB site was up and active, the same could not be said for the bus. In his response, the Dutchman made the mistake of commenting favorably on my photography plus he included a photo of an Omo tribe in Ethiopia. This resulted in a deluge of hopefully helpful links an antidotes from me. My final link was introduced as such, "The URL to my most ignored yet most personally important web site follows:" And that of course pointed to our fabulous site here. So, I'm publishing his impressions of here where I can reply in public.

On Thursday, Jul 22 the Dutchman concluded his third email by writing:
1) Your Yenom blog:
Now that is a hard one. It takes a lot of thinking for me to really understand the scope of what you are saying. First of all you should realize that I -although not really stupid- am not at all familiar with anything from South America. That was the reason I was browsing the Internet for, to learn more. Now with your website I literally fall right in the middle of a debate that seems to be going on already for some time. I didn't even know who the old president was. I remember seeing the guy on television when they expulsed him with his cowboy hat and I also remember thinking that "one doesn't know who is who in this drama", and: “that guy has no class”... But I instinctively didn't trust the guy with the hat and the big mouth, despite that it was the military who threw him out. It is usually the military who are the bad guys, but in this case, I had doubts about everything I saw.

2) This latter remark needs some clarification. When -a long time ago- Ronald Reagan supported the "contras" in Nicaragua, we all thought: "What an odd act??!! Reagan in support of 'contra-revolutionaries'??"  Because the denomination "contras" has a left-wing sound to it. Soon we found out that these contras were the real bad-eggs, as was Reagan of course. The name or (re)presentation of something is everything if you want success or just a smokescreen. One of the former presidents of Algeria, Houari Boumedienne, called his state "El Joumhouria, etc. bla bla", The Socialist Democratic Republic of Algeria, whereas in fact it was just a plain old dictatorship with a horrible secret police, suppression of rights, power grabbing, and so on.

3) So from what I (with my limited means of getting knowledge of Honduras) can understand, is that the ousted president was screaming bloody murder about being unlawfully evicted, calling it a coup d'état, and more of these slogans, which were bought by the Americans and the Europeans as for real. The Dutch community in Honduras wrote a letter of protest to the Dutch Government who recognized this ousted presidents rights, explaining the bad things he’d done. All the time what he was saying was mere propaganda. The guy was in fact a nasty idiot, bad for the people, bad for Honduras? The question mark is here because I don't know exactly what was and is going on.

4) At this very moment in Suriname something similar is happening (google: Desi Bouterse wikipedia). Desi Bouterse is a murderer, a drug-trafficker, a dictator and a totally brainless moron. Desi Bouterse has ruled Suriname for the last 35 years from behind the screen and had effectively run this country into the ground. Through manipulation of the media he has now become president, but everybody is shit-scared to speak out. Now he seeks support from Chávez, another clown on the South American sky. Chávez, Pinochet, Castro, Meles Zenawi, Idi Amin, Jean-Bédel Bokassa, Mussolini, Hitler, el Caudillo Franco, the whole despicable lot should be strung up. But again, what do I know? It takes a lot more of studying and reading before I could have a sound opinion ... So far this IS my opinion, let’s call it a preliminary one, so I am open to any argumentation, should I be wrong.

5) The article you wrote in Yenom about intellectual property I didn't quite understand yet. It requires some thorough reading again.

6) Somewhere you wrote: "As plain as I've tried to explain the simple idea advanced at, I've pretty much failed at finding anyone who can relate to it (including my father and best friends). So I don't know why I'd expect anything positive from presenting it to yourself."
      I don't know either. Either you have some trust in me through my writing, or you are so desperate to find an understanding ear that you postulate Great Knowledge in just some unknown Dutchman???

7) I am sure you somehow smelled my anarchistic feelings! I am thoroughly against the exploitation of millions of poor hardworking people only for the enrichment of a happy few. (My idea of helping Africa would be to summarily execute all governmental leaders and replace them with the dullest bookkeepers from big international firms who just administrate, don’t rule, so that transport, food, housing and schooling works normally.)

8) These rich, the happy few, read: the so-called upper-classes, usually have an atrocious bad taste in things, buying superfluous shit to sit on in their exuberant silly much-too-big-houses and silly cars to ride in and silly wives to screw or just be a status-symbol. My brand of anarchism doesn't show through any political means. I mean, I am not at all involved or active in any movement. I celebrate my anarchism through my intense hate for all the hypocrism and mediocrity I see all around me. I more or less enjoy the hellish bad taste, like some one endures the piped-in music in an American Shopping Mall. I study them like weird insects and I prick them with needles on a board to collect them. This I do by describing them in full detail. Now this is my humble opinion...

9) I wonder what you'll make of this. Contrariwise to your situation, some of my best friends do understand me quite well and have a right laugh over my sometimes furious ramblings. I hope it is the humor that makes it palatable to them, not that they laugh at me....

With sympathy


‘the Dutchman’

OK, Hello Dutchman! and welcome. I added paragraph numbering above so that I can now reference said numbers as I remark on your input.

1) OK, this is a major eye opener for me. I've obviously been so close to my pet blog (despite the infrequently of my posts) that I'm completely out of touch with how it must naturally appear at first glance. It is a grave error on my part to post anything here that distracts from, or obfuscates the blog's intent. And now it is obvious, thanks to you, that my recent post are doing more to obscure the YeNom goal than to realize it. The whole "HONDURAS: 3 Open Letters to Rush Limbaugh" deal is probably the least excusable post I've made (while the Advogato post was too obscure to even merit a comment). The only relevant reason to talk about past or present political figures here would be in relation to how mass psychological patterns (i.e. the meme pool) operate to permit this sort of (counter-rational) power to exist and flourish in the first place. And how self-actualization via fraternization with YeNoms works as an antidote to such obscenities.

2) WOW, that's pretty nice to hear, since I haven't witnessed that type of rumination since my old friend Frank bowed-out of this realm. He was extremely well versed in U.S. foreign policy; and it mortified him. However, what he found yet more disturbing was how even the most atrocious immoralities were accepted with total apathy by most of his closest friends.

3) This paragraph makes me think about how difficult it can be to come by some semblance of the truth. The Mel Zelaya deal is a great example. I mean, everything that befell the gentleman was in accordance with the Honduran Constitution, the sentiments of the vast majority of both parties in the Congress, and finally an ultimatum from the Honduran Supreme Court. The military was merely called upon to effect his removal from office. Yet just about everyone was initially insisting on calling it a military coup d'état as if they had acted on their own accord. Indeed, the military's refusal to carry out an official Supreme Court order would have been the real act of insurrection. While a more balanced view evolved with time, it is pretty hard to believe that the initial world wide reactions could possibly be due to ineffectual intelligence (bad info). Instead it is better explained as an intentional agenda, and one that played into the hands of the executive branches of government. Then of course, even the Honduran people (who were the most direct witnesses) had some stark differences of opinion depending on preexisting dispositions.
    Benjamin Franklin's observation seems most pertinent here, “Would you persuade, speak of interest, not of reason.”

4) As a boy, I always wanted to understand how things worked. Electricity soon became my specialty and the main thing I identified with. This fascination, however, cultivate a perspective that the modern age clearly constituted the pinnacle of human development, and the past (history) held little to contribute to our continued development (I mean, those poor dorks from days gone by couldn't even dress themselves in tastefully!). Well, I now see that the time to put away childish things is an ongoing process (if we're courageous enough to do so). In particular, I'm simply reeling at the growing illiteracy and accompanying mindlessness that's engulfing the world today, and I can hardly imagine anything that could be more pertinent than history.

5) Ahhh, the intellectual property bug-a-boo! You'll probably notice that Alan reflexively blew-off my S & W saga. However, that was wholly inspired by his sentimental half arguments in support of IP (I just wanted to help him out on that and do it up to the hilt). Consequently, that may still be the most succinct digest that best captures the gist of my argument.

6) Touché! A very astute “either/or” I must admit. My best answer is “both”. I've always been most intrigued at how one (rightfully or wrongly) can sometimes pick up on various nuances and indications from a short bit of script. So yes there was a ‘trust’ that I could introduce you to this site without regrettable repercussions. Yet even more true was my desperation to find an understanding ear (not that any ‘Great Knowledge’ is at all required).

7) As noted in “The Problem With Anarchy”, there is a lot of divergence and games played with the concept of anarchy. Yet it seems like your take on the matter is copacetic with my own. However, (I'd argue that) your fantasized solution grants way too much importance/reverence to authoritarians, autocrats, dictators, czars, despots, oligarchs, oppressors, tyrants, and warlords. I'd propose that we already live in a perfect cause & effect world. No church, regime, bank, devil, or dictator regardless of how ruthless and blood-thirsty has ever exercised control over a population without the ‘consent of the victims’ (thank you dear Alissa Rosenbaum - a.k.a. Ayn Rand). The elimination of “all governmental leaders” would prove futile without eliminating the forces that suck such “clowns” into existence in the first place. My argument is that both the masses and their masters are merely two sides of the same delusional coin. In fact, the delusion/corruption is probably even more severe for those infected with power than their graveling subjects. The real problem lies in the mutual memes that we hold in common that preclude us from giving anarchy/love a chance.
    Besides, wouldn't a real anarchist subscribe to Adam Smith's “invisible hand” where transport, food, housing and schooling works normally even without the oversight of bookkeepers (regardless of how dull or ambitious they may be)? In any event, SUYO/YeNom is my suggest solution; were we simply walk away from the main elements of authoritarian control … letting the tower topple for lack of support (no messy executions and their horrendous logistics necessary).

8) Your writings here made me recall an interesting article I'd recently read. Yes, I just found it again, following is an excerpt from:
Social Inequality in America: Widening Income Disparities.

In the 70s, US economic global supremacy was waning, in large part, due to increasing competition from Europe and Japan as they recovered from the devastation of World War II. This made the "opulent minority" rethink the New Deal-bone they'd tossed to the majority of Americans, and they brought in Ronald Reagan to put in force a Raw Deal that began a cascade of deregulation, privatization and consolidation that put America back astride the global economy by putting America's wealth gap on the way back to the Gilded Age. Today the "opulent minority" appropriates everything it can get its hands on - "legally" - while the middle class holds on by its fingernails and the rest of us go over an economic Niagara Falls without a barrel into "Third" World-style poverty. Government is no longer the referee that promotes the general welfare. Government is the facilitator for the "opulent minority," ensuring that they can extract every last penny from the people they impoverish.

Since 1980, the richest Americans have seen their incomes quadruple, while for the "lowest" 90% of us, incomes fell. The average wage is lower today than it was in the 1970s, while productivity has risen almost 50%. In 1983 middle class debt held at 67% of income. In 2007, middle class debt had gone over the falls to 157% of income. In 1950 the ratio of the average executive's paycheck to the average worker's was about 30 to 1. Since 2000 that average has ranged from 300 to 500 to one.

"As of late 2009, the number of billionaires soared from 793 to 1,011, and their total fortunes from $2.4 trillion to $3.6 trillion. ...Despite the crisis, the list of billionaires has grown by 200 people and their aggregate capital has expanded by 50%. This may seem paradoxical but only at first glance. This result was predictable, if we recall how governments all over the world have dealt with the economic crisis."

Such is the perpetual nature of proprietary power systems and why money above all things must be solidly based in a free and open paradigm. SUYO/YeNom is postured to fulfill this role.

9) I believe that my problem largely lies with ideas that are so isolated from the memes people customarily entertained that it appears not to compute. Plus I'm probably a lousy marketer! :)

Conclusion: thanks to the fact that the good Dutchman never mentions anything about SUYO/YeNom — I've created yet another introduction to this theme (looks like we're headed for 38 flavors). This latest intro will be stuck at the top of our Drupal home page to help make sure that the blog's intended thrust is not too easily overlooked.