Egregoros · Phoenix Framework

Post

Remote status

Context

Wanderer atop the sea of clouds or whatever

just something unrelated to the specifics in the autism threads I started, but still relevant to me:

I think it is extremely important and good if people who do not like a thing are not forced to participate in the thing. The fact that this makes good economic/darwinian sense also, and selects for the best of the best to prevail, is very central to my thinking on this.
If I didn't think I was right, I wouldn't want to exit, would I?

Even to my opposite position this SHOULD make sense but I've come as far as to just assume maliciousness from an ideology for which it is not so.
>The baker does not want us to pay him money to bake the gay cake? WE MUST SUE HIM AND FORCE HIM TO PARTICIPATE
>The atheist does not want to go to church? We must force him to either lie or be killed
Both of these are kind of stupid. You can switch the roles around both ways and it stays stupid. Why does a fag want to pay money to someone who hates him? It doesn't make sense.
Why should Christians want atheists to go underground and stay in their community? It doesn't make sense.

I think you can see that this is correct, and that I am not just naive about things by looking at the consequences. The new ideologies forced upon people have basically completely annihilated sympathy or loyalty to the system, even amongst those that agree. You have a HUGE percentage of people who just "have to go along with" a whole catalogue of complete nonsense, and therefore are unwilling to expend energy to defend or improve the system in any way. Therefore, everything is going to bits.

In essence, you want your enemy to exit, at virtually any cost, instead of remaining within as an infiltrator.

March 16th, The Hatkeshiator

@HatkeshiatorTND@annihilation.social remote

@WandererUber if you lower the cost of apostasy, you will get more apostates. basic economics. not everything is a matter of innate nature, and a lot of things (eapecially like partisan politics, aberrant sexuality, and religiosity) are about social context, performance, and incentives before they are ever about your natural inclinations as a person.

Wanderer atop the sea of clouds or whatever

@WandererUber@poa.st remote

@HatkeshiatorTND no that's incorrect
you get more open apostates which you can then exclude

March 16th, The Hatkeshiator

@HatkeshiatorTND@annihilation.social remote

@WandererUber atheists by definition don't make earnest spiritual commitments of any kind (save the actual autists who are unironically rationalist or something) so nothing stops them from pretending to be christian to maintain good favor with your society.
if your punishment for atheism is "go away," you're still creating disincentives for apostasy and will, on the margin, be keeping atheists within your ranks. at that point your only hope is purges. unless you can flawlessly divine earnest faith (bold claim) this becomes a risky thing to propose.

Wanderer atop the sea of clouds or whatever

@WandererUber@poa.st remote

@HatkeshiatorTND talking about people who didn't think it though is a goalpost move, this was about actually ideologically serious people.

If your goal is a herd of niggercattle, then go ahead.
White society is so successful because the niggercattle factor is lower. There's room for improvement

Wanderer atop the sea of clouds or whatever

@WandererUber@poa.st remote

@HatkeshiatorTND the point was that there is no punishment but rather that participation is optional. If you think that the Church saves good people and participating is good, then you want evil people out and be sad and go to hell. I don't understand why you think giving them a community (the church) which you think is helpful and also access to the benefits it provides (welfare, events, connections) is good.

If someone says "I don't like this" then let him leave. That doesn't mean exile. that means he is free to make a bad decision, which is good. You want people who are bad at deciding to make bad decisions because then you end up with people who are good at making decisions.
It's really not rocket science

Replying to @WandererUber@poa.st

March 16th, The Hatkeshiator

@HatkeshiatorTND@annihilation.social remote

@WandererUber "i don't like this" is a spectrum, and more importantly the alternative matters. you correctly said that if you punish refusal to go to church with death, you're actively growing a resentful fifth column in your own ranks. now apply that to your own scenario. if stopping going to church means none of my friends will talk to me, i won't get to be part of a guild, i'll be disfavored as a laborer, i'll be less marriageable, etc... each of these is like a mini-death-sentence. there's still a threshhold of discomfort only past which i'll accept formal excommunication from the church for my principles' sake, it's just a much lower threshhold than if i were to be hanged instead.

Replies

Replying to @HatkeshiatorTND@annihilation.social

Wanderer atop the sea of clouds or whatever

@WandererUber@poa.st remote

@HatkeshiatorTND yeah that's how everything works though that's good

Replying to @WandererUber@poa.st

March 16th, The Hatkeshiator

@HatkeshiatorTND@annihilation.social remote

@WandererUber >if you hang people for not going to church, this makes them stay in church despite not wanting to. this weakens the church and is thus irrational
good, discerning point.
>we should ensure that social support networks are withdrawn from people who don't go to church. this is good because this is how everything works.
discernment evaporates.

maybe i'm being uncharitable. can you elaborate?

Replying to @HatkeshiatorTND@annihilation.social

Wanderer atop the sea of clouds or whatever

@WandererUber@poa.st remote

@HatkeshiatorTND >we should ensure that
this is what I never said, there's the error
If you leave your running club, you will lose contact with the runners and you might gain weight. these are the consequences of your decision. If you leave church you might not see your neighbors on sunday, but it's significantly less of a drawback if you are not excluded from society at large WHILE being prevented from leaving it, as it was.
This was never just about the church either I guess people just latch onto that, my main point was that people in power always think this is what they ought to do and this is a mistake. The one that always leads to their downfall, in fact.
The free marketplace of ideas is a phrase oft-maligned, and for good reason considering who uses it, but iterating and competing DOES move people forward in the right direction. It's a shame it so rarely happens.
"your health insurance forces you to pay for homeopathic medicine" might be a more clear example of the benefit of allowing dissent