Personalism: The Politics of the Internet

An open letter to the Prime Minister of Canada and the President of the United States.

You came into power by having a platform the public could relate to.

You can win by having a new platform the public can relate to.

Forget about attacking the opposition directly. It is a waste of time and resources.

It was Eisenhower who said, “The plan is useless, the planning essential.”

Planning is about knowing yourself and your competitor. The actual battle is about adaptation and destruction of the competitor’s tools. WE MUST DOCUMENT THE COMPETITION TO GUIDE OUR ATTACK STRATEGY.

Napoleon’s first strike was at night and in the rain.

Martin Luther’s attack was with German and Satirical Cartoons instead of Latin and Religious Debate.

Canada conquered Vimy Ridge, by knowing how to hunt game in Canadian forests.

Germany invaded France by taking a country road around the Maginot Line.

D-Day was preceded by a massive night attack on front line communication, infrastructure and airborne troop drops behind enemy lines.

The Iraq invasion was founded on destroying the enemies’ will to fight.

We have no intent of ever executing a frontal assault against the enemy.  It is romantic incompetence.

Our competitive strategey: “Don’t fight like a Gentleman, fight like a Noble Savage.”

We are not seeking the approval of the professionals.

We are developing a language and tools to make the ordinary person extraordinary.

It is called the RECOVERY PLATFORM.

Create a phenomena called the “Personal Corporation.”

Make every Canadian capable of governing every aspect of their own life via the internet.

Abandon Marxism, Communism, Socialism, Capitalism, Liberalism, Conservatism, Racism, Fascism, Nazism.

Create the Manifesto of “PERSONALISM” the politics of the internet.

Sincerely,

Grant Czerepak

Advertisements

Netular Technology versus Psuedo-Netular Technology

fishingnet

I have been having a very interesting discussion on Linkedin.com having expressed my opinion about current information technology and the netular  information technology I would like to see.

The people who have been exchanging their views with me cannot see the forest for the trees.  One is offended that I do not rave about all the social transitions the technologies are offering.  Another spews buzzwords like a chainsaw.  Another assumes my opinion is a product of my impatience for the convergence of the existing technologies.

Einstein once said he would spend a majority of his time defining a problem and a fraction of his time solving it.  A majority of the time on information technology is spent solving and a fraction actually taken to understand.  The consequence is most of the solutions out there are not designed, they are hastily assembled patchworks that because of the inertia of being first on the field are only replaced by further patches.

Our entire system of networks is built upon a foundation of linear and tabular architecture that is present in our CPUs, memory, storage, data structures, programming languages, organization, locations, events and goals.  In reality we are only dabbling in networks and doing an abysmal job of using them to their full effect.  We don’t understand them.

Marshall McLuhan said that when a new media is created the first thing we do is pump old media through it.  That is what we are doing now.  We are taking every form of old media we have and pushing it through the internet.  There is not a single case where we have successfully departed from linear and tabular old media.  I have looked at all the current technology, I have used it, I understand its internals and I stand by what I say.

We need a fundamental change in the way information technology works otherwise we are going to continue with an undesigned brute force attempt to solve our problems without ever understanding them.  The outcome will not be progress, but the perpetuation of flat earth thinking.

Linear and tabular thought are responsible for many of the problems we have in the world.  The biggest is the inability to fully appreciate the uniqueness of everything and everyone in this world.  The supreme example of this has been the long history of Religion, Genocide, Slavery, Nationalism, Imperialism, Racism, Eugenics, Fascism, Nazism, Communism, Marxism, Capitalism and Socialism.  All of them fail us because they depended on linear and tabular models of thought that denied the respect of the individuality of all experience.  True netular thought has the potential to challenge all of these misconceptions.  I think it is appropriate that this transition is on the horizon with the rise of globalism.  I doubt it will be a peaceful transition.

Actually, the insights into the underlying order in networks has made quite a bit of progress. One of the leaders in this area is Albert-Beszlos Barabasi who authored the book “Linked” http://www.nd.edu/~networks/Linked/index.html . Another researcher Kwabena Boahen made a fascinating presentation at TED http://tinyurl.com/6nnkb7 . There is also the work of Simon Williams that has come up with a new associative database architecture http://www.lazysoft.com as well as a commercial product, Sentences.

It is time for everyone to fundamentally change the way they think.

Linear, Tabular and Netular Thought

ltn

Gutenberg’s creation of the western version of the printing press is regarded as a revolution and in a sense it was.  Printing led to the transition of western thought from a theocratic 1300 year deductive flat world dark age to a 500 year inductive round world renaissance.  However, printing only lead to the presentation of greater amounts of information.  The real revolutions were the discoveries of Copernicus, Galileo, Newton and Einstein culminating in the General Theory of Relativity.  With the advent of Marxism the world slipped into the polarization of the Communist/Capitalist blocks and threw the world into another deductive flat world dark age that lasted into the 1990s.  The advent of the Internet and Tim Berner Lee’s World Wide Web has led to another renaissance back into inductive thought.  Worldviews are collapsing, however we are still to see a new worldview created by the new presentation of increasing amounts of information.  In fact, the Internet age is still trapped in the models of the age of the printing press, the most prevalent being linear (scribal literacy) data and tabular (press literacy) data.  Tabulation dominates information technology architecture and until it is abandoned we are still slaves to print.  The Turing Machine was a migration of existing printing press information technology architecture not an innovation in information technology architecture.  We have yet to implement fundamental change at the foundation of our technologies.  Until we are able to rethink, reengineer, mechanize, represent, store, process and present information as netular (internet literacy) data successfully, which has yet to happen, there will be no revolutions in human thought.

Flags: The World Orders of the 20th Century

Philosophy: Kitsch

After expressing my opinion in the last post, it was interesting to reflect on this novel, The Unbearable Lightness of Being, by Milan Kundera.

In the novel, this Czech veteran of Communist oppression talks about what he calls, “kitsch”

Kitsch has its source in the categorical agreement with being.

But what is the basis of being? God? Mankind? Struggle? Love? Man? Woman?

Since opinions vary, there are various kitsches: Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Communist, Fascist, democratic, feminist, European, American, national, international.

Since the days of the French Revolution, one half of Europe has been referred to as the left, and the other half as the right. Yet to define one or the other by means of the theoretical principles it professes is all but impossible. And no wonder: political movements rest not so much on rational attitudes as on the fantasies, images, words, and archetypes that come together to make up this or that political kitsch.

The fantasy of the Grand March that Franz was so intoxicated by is the political kitsch joining leftists of all times and tendencies. The Grand March is the splendid march on the road to brotherhood, equality, justice, happiness; it goes on and on, obstacles not withstanding, for obstacles there must be if the march is to be the Grand March.

The dictatorship of the proletariat or democracy? Rejection of the consumer society or demands for increased productivity? The guillotine or an end to the death penalty? It is all beside the point. What makes a leftist a leftist is not this or that theory but his ability to integrate any theory into the kitsch called the Grand March.

What we are facing now is the kitsch of Global Warming and the kitsch of Climate Change. One adopted by the leftist Grand March and one adopted by the rightists. The only real difference between the two is the vocabulary of the particular kitsch. The real issue, what is happening to the environment, is irrelevant to both sides. All that is important is which kitsch generates the greatest emotional appeal.

All religions are philosophies and science is also a philosophy. If we apply the Pareto principle to science only 20% of science uses valid hypothesis, oberservation, method, data, apparatus and events. 80% of science is suspect. And a bunch of priests of science will not persuade me that they are somehow superior morally or intellectually to me or anyone else. When I think about eugenics, lobotomies, unnecessary medical procedures, chemical, biological and nuclear toxins and weaponry, non-biodegradable waste and the plethora of other gifts of science, why can’t I say that scientists in the last century have done more damage to the planet than all of history’s religions combined?

So a bunch of climatologists are saying that science has destroyed the environment in less than a century? Big news. Einstein said, “No problem can be solved from the same level of consciousness that created it.” Maybe it is time for Scientists to wake the hell up to what they have created. Perhaps, like Prometheus, scientists should have their livers eaten every day. Because, it appears to me that there is no difference whether a person has many, one or zero gods, Mr. Dawkins. It’s just another vocabulary for another form of kitsch. What we need is a new level of consciousness, higher than the philosophy of science.

And that is how Milan concludes his novel. We have to recognize that everything natural has its own level of consciousness. Nothing living is a machina animata. Nothing dead is machina intertia. Man is not as Descartes claimed, “maître et propriétaire de la nature.” Nature is not a universe of unconscious machines over which humanity is master and proprietor. And that, science cannot accept.

Green Hat: It’s Best to Brainstorm Alone

I came across this quote on brainstorming today and find I agree with it.

“The result, it turned out, is not an anomaly. In a [1987 study, researchers] concluded that brainstorming groups have never outperformed virtual groups. Of the 25 reported experiments by psychologists all over the world, real groups have never once been shown to be more productive than virtual groups. In fact, real groups that engage in brainstorming consistently generate about half the number of ideas they would have produced if the group’s individuals had [worked] alone.

In my experience the added demands to coexist in harmony while in a group implements more self-editing of ideas than when you are alone. Maslow would conclude that esteem (relativity), belonging (optimivity) and safety (pessimivity) would actually limit self-actualization (creativity) . (Forgive me for creating two new terms, I’m virtual brainstorming.)

Traditional brainstorming falls under the social and social-psychological domain of Yellow Hat, White Hat and Black Hat in the Six Hats, Six Coats Framework. More people automatically implies, more relationships, meaning more difficult generalization; more attributes, meaning more difficult normalization; and more constraints, meaning more difficult exceptionalization. It flies in the face of the assumptions behind the concepts of synergy and of socialist and communist thought. It also gives Ayn Rand’s philosophy of Objectivism a great boost.

Green Hat (creativity), is a state of mind where one rises above Yellow Hat (relativity), White Hat (optimivity) , Black Hat (pessimivity), Red Hat (anthropivity) and Blue Hat (chronivity). The state of leadership as opposed to citizenship, apprenticeship, studentship, humanship and existence.

If you want to think great thoughts, you must first think them alone.

It's Best to Brainstorm Alonereddit