Ontology talk:9k/RD/Q14,80

Main entries

1480. 1480The class structure of the United States is monistic -> see below propositions for what this means.
1481. 1481Social darwinism and class society are a monistic process

Monistic chunk competition

1481. 1481

      Social darwinism and class society are a monistic process

      / Social darwinism and class society are one continuous thing without a sharp boundary for where each of them begins and ends -> this is related to but not the same as the hypothesis that once societies become capitalist all classes or class territories are all just different 'windings' of a single monistic substance. that one is the 'noun', this one is the 'verb'.
1484. 1484

      chunk competition

      (motif; meta-Marxism) / all-directional contradiction between individuals / chunk competition across the spatial slot hierarchy / (9k)
2194. 2194

      Chunk competition originates from commodities

      / (9k) -> ... "chunk competition" is a weird concept because I always know when it's happening but I have trouble describing what it is and I have probably given slightly different descriptions of what it is at different times. ... today what I think I'm referring to is the way that population growth is shaped by relativity, how everything in the universe has its own little timeline of what it's doing and then they collide, and this happens with population growth, such that when two populations grow into and over each other it leads to a spatial slot hierarchy — a situation of populational slots where people are forced to compete over particular unique slots in space or in structures to exist. when I've said "chunk competition across the spatial slot hierarchy" it means that the original collision of separate large populations or tiny clustered subpopulations of people inside populations hasn't gone away and various populations still smash into each other daily regenerating the spatial slot hierarchy. the spatial slot hierarchy is mistaken by Liberal-republicans to be a necessary reality that they just call "economics". to Marxists, the spatial slot hierarchy is undesirable and they want to relax the competition for houses and jobs so that if subpopulations clash over the right to live in a city it at least will be for some cultural reason and won't have come from the spatial slot hierarchy; if Marxists succeed people gain the ability to plan out the broad shapes civilization will form into in advance and allow individuals to choose where they want to live and where they want to contribute for money within certain limits. ... Marxists work with the reality that populations have no space to expand into and try to basically expand the surface area of society by using its space more efficiently, like the shape of a brain or a walnut. ... chunk competition isn't a trivial thing to solve but the more you can stop individuals from running into each other through knowing what shapes are available to prevent that the closer you get to making it totally irrelevant and going back to the tiny amount of populational conflict seen in tribal societies. ...

Monistic classes

1481. 1481

      Class is a single substrate

      / The substance dualism advanced by early Marxism is not fully accurate because its dual substances operate under substance monism internally -> it's easy to go around saying that Marxism talking about the proletariat and the bourgeoisie is wrong, and be totally wrong about it. I am claiming something much more sophisticated here. I am claiming the proletariat and the bourgeoisie do exist but that there is a layer of structure between them that is what differentiates them into dual substances, like quantum numbers appear to be able to twist energy into matter, or a single layer of fundamental particles makes up the heterogeneous realm of atoms. I have not fully figured out how this works, though I've been ranting about scattered thoughts on it for more than a year. to keep from rambling on too long, here's the short version.
      

      people who would be proletarians can 'level up' into Careerists, although they don't always do it. they do it more often in First World countries and less in Third World countries. Careerists and workers combined as a single substance compete over the totality of slots in a business territory. the smaller bourgeoisie that exist are actually Careerists that are being the bourgeoisie, and are specifically made that way in the process of being part of a structure. sometimes but not always they lose their structure and cease to be bourgeoisie; sometimes they store up wealth and become permanent capitalists, only because that wealth provides structure. the genesis of a usable business territory is what truly makes the bourgeoisie the bourgeoisie, not even the act of exploiting workers — because, and everyone already accepts this part, one territory full of one bourgeois without employees still contains the bourgeoisie.
      in one really weird sense, all stacks of capital are already state businesses. except in the case of businesses formed out of exactly one Careerist, businesses only exist at all because they consist of multiple people. I know that sounds like a tautology or a deepity but I'm getting somewhere. every business consisting of at least two people gets bigger on the basis of capital adding more people. the owner doesn't truly do that, capital itself truly does that. capital adds people and capital creates growth by absorbing people. owners then falsely believe the purpose of capital is to make them money, and exploit workers. but that isn't true; the purpose of capital is simply to order people into groups and compete over area. capital doesn't come from nowhere either, it absorbs the underlying all-vs-all contradiction between all individuals as an alternative way of doing the same thing. people invented markets to theoretically alleviate chunk competition between individuals and because this wasn't stable it produced the terrible result of producers clumping together and chunk-competing over the market instead. anarchists falsely believe at times that either owners created the entire thing or competing chunks can sort of just decide not to chunk-compete. but this ultimately comes from raw individuals at the scale of their own bodies before they are really workers, Careerists, or owners, who experience a constant impulse to protect their bodies, which is equivalent to the impulse to seek Freedom, which is equivalent to Free Will. our false belief across the United States that Freedom is a matter of reason or "democracy" or even ethics and not just the sheer desire to survive is really sinking us, because at the end of the day, a great pile of philosophies are just competing chunks trying to justify their sheer desire to survive on their own based on their suspicion that others will block their survival or what would make them happy. chunk competition is capitalism is imperialism is anarchism is Trotskyism. chunks kill. post-structuralism kills.

Monism and calculations

618. All life is semiotic and all semiosis is alive (Eduardo Kohn) / (9k) -> ... I think the first part is wrong and the second part is right.
618. All life is semiotic (Eduardo Kohn) / (9k) -> ... this is so frustrating, because it's like the relationship between Marx and Hegel. ... they are convinced that the universe and nature evolve through language and arbitrary linguistic assignments of things to other things. when that just isn't how it works, things have physical structure that is contained in them as unique separable identifiable countable objects or repetitions of the same identifiable countable object, and the contents of that repeated pattern evolve through the interaction of two or more repeated patterns to produce one or two further repeated patterns. naïve dialectical materialism; one-step dialectical materialism; wave-machine logic.
     ... the position of each die and the side it's currently on changes in response to the current position, velocity, and rotation of the other die about to hit it. for any given state vector of each die "x" and "y", f(x,y) = z. that's it. two objects, the dice or state vectors, are separate, and then you put them together, and you calculate what happens. ... it's all about countably separate objects being able to interact because they are separate. you don't even really have to make reference to the content of the objects. it's there, it interacts by default, but sometimes it doesn't produce anything interesting. ...
     the Existentialist-Structuralist tradition. where causation is described by structuralist linguistics, a.k.a. the existence of two opposed words that "mean" different evolving things, and causality inside causation is described by existentialism.

Ideologies or fields

• (none)