Open Borders and Open Internet are Incompatible

So my thoughts on politics have led me towards this theory.

basically, at the core:


thus the ideal way to ensure that access to BigData technology remains pure is NatSoc.

So Singularity-Nazism i guess?

pic related. i tried writing it out as a topic but then thought that it might work better as visuals (era of memes after all). i think is illustrative of the idea? open to interpretation and evolutions of course. this political theory have weight to it or am i larping too hard?

Not sure I get your reasoning. Is the ability to spy on everyone a downside? If everyone can spy on everyone doesn't that create a MAD type situation where parties have to assume their enemies knowledge of themselves is as much as their own. Alot of evils in this world occur because of information asymmetry where a group or individuals will exploit something they do know against others for benefit.

Here's the thing: in order for Globalism to work, global rulers have to convince the general populace that everything everywhere is the same. Don't move from the US to Canada, because nowadays they are the same. Don't stop the Somalis from coming to Denmark, because these days, Somalia and Denmark are the same. Stay home, work, and don't question, goy, no matter where you go, things are the same.

In order to accomplish this, global rulers must accomplish 3 things:

1. Tear down 1st world countries
2. Build up 3rd world countries
3. Interrupt communication between the citizens of differing countries before people find out they aren't the same

You see the first two being done at a rapid pace in Europe right now. The third thing, the interruption of communication, is going a little more slowly, but they'll never give up on the idea because it's essential to globalism that citizens truly believe that they're all the same and also being treated the same.

AUTISM
U
T
I
S
M

Ah, sorry if it wasn't clear.

Everyone is spying on everyone is just a given. That's the world.

The downside is that when that is the case, the "elite" can form a monopoly on access to that spy date.


yeah. fuck globalism. first world countries deserve to be first world countries.

globalism requires internet to be blocked between countries for it to work.

nations with strong borders on the other hand can trust their citizens to see the truth and not revolt.

so the irony is that nationalism and globalism can co-exist, but it requires strong borders between nations in the physical realm so globalism can flourish in the cyber realm.

unfortunately globalists don't get it and try to impose their will upon the physical world by deception, economic manipulation, false flags, communism, war, etc

(also leads to an interpretation of the power of this this meme: nationalism on the ground (green circle) and globalism in the cyber-realm (blue infinity-ring))


fuck yeah autism. this shit's fun as hell to think about. meme with me brother

Thoughtful bump post.

...

I'm voting for the jew lover just because I don't want Shillary to become president.

why are attachments 404? are we brigade?

refresh newfag

nope, still 404

Half right.

We need distinct nations so we can have a system where one nation stepping over the boundaries can be checked by other nations.

Problem we have today though is the gap created by the jurisdictional issues of international and domestic law.

International law impedes on the function of domestic and vice versa.
Conflicts of interest can be exploited by large corporations. They bribe a country that has a conflict with another country.

What this means is that corporations, not just nations, are using proxies too in wars.

Shell possibly is a big one for that. They control alot of Oman and the Philippines.

Adversaries aren't equivalent.

Everything you're suggesting is terrible.

This. Total freedom of information would actually solve many of our current political and economic problems. It would restore the functionality of both capitalism and democracy.

It's also inevitable, but it will take time. Those who currently benefit from asymmetrical information access will try to keep it that way. But they will be undone by a combo of infighting and natural progression. It's worth remembering that the average man already has no privacy, his leaders should be next.

I think the globalists are kidding themselves if they think this is something that can be controlled or contained. Curiosity is the fundamental evolved characteristic of man. Anywhere the light can't shine, THAT'S where he wants to look. The chans are an excellent example.


China spends literal billions on an army trying to tame their internet with limited success. And if they can't succeed entirely, no one can.


Open access to information allows people to make better decisions about their local governments and engage in volunteerism. Volunteerism can take many forms, including holding leaders accountable for their actions via audit and investigation.


Ultimately this strengthens nationalism as it reunites people with their governments and restores their place in them. Whereas globalist progress has relied heavily on a lack of transparency and non-participation. If people don't know, they don't care, and if they don't care, they lose control. The TPP/NAFTA are examples of this. So is Obamacare, or any bill where "we'll have to pass it to see what's in it."

Anyway, I think you're getting pretty close OP. All these globalists don't even know what age this is. It might take some chaotic "disruption" for them to get the message.

And would deprive us of privacy.
A psychological need for humans. We tend to become fairly inactive when stressed. Removing privacy increases that stress.

Though governments need full transparency unless there are real recognised threats to a nations sovereignty.
The US was overly protective in the 80's 90's.

Nowadays it's protective against the interests of citizens though. A truly unique scenario in the modern world. A truly tyrannic government.

We went from "the good old 80's" to complete madness in 2 decades.

We already don't have privacy. You're living in the past, a fantasyland that no longer exists.

That's one of the points of the idea: privacy is already gone. World's already changed. My argument is that we gotta adapt to it instead of denying it or fighting against it.

Data monitoring is an inevitable consequence of the existence of that data.
How to we ensure that the people monitoring our data are doing so for the right reasons?

My thesis is that the best way would be by making sure that their best interests are the same as our best interests.

...

...

Internet will be destroyed under the natsoc Aryan imperium. It is too degenerate.

Yes that is what they are doing, but they won't build up third world countries much.

Nah, the internet isn't degenerate, it's just being shat upon by…. (((Certain))) people.

My ideal world would be one where all people live in their own countries and anonymously shitpost together on the internet. I think it could bring forth world peace and an actually democratic UN kind of thingie. Everyone would share a global internet culture of bants, memes and shitposting alongside their own native culture. The first prototype of global consciousness and actual freedom.

...

You know, the Nazis burned books they didn't like, they didn't ban books and discouraged reading, you myopic dope.