Recent posts by Ungeziefer on Kongregate

Topic: Serious Discussion / Sex and you.

Is sex just a meaningless thing that can be had with anyone and its only purpose is to bring us pleasure? Or is it meant to be shared with one person in a way to connect with them unlike any other way can?

Either or? I don’t really see the two notions as mutually incompatible.

What would a debate between swingers and nuns be like?

Hehe, there’s a documentary on Plato’s Retreat which included a snippet of just that.

Back in high school this was exactly how I thought. My age of watching porn, talking to my friends about how badly I wanted to bang [insert nearly any girl from my grade’s name], and how I thought I would be celebrated by my peers if and when I should ever have sex. I do not believe that today I would be able to have any form of meaningful conversation regarding sex with my high school self. Do I value myself? Yes, therefore I try to conduct myself in a way I can be proud of and not in one where I would look at years from now with shame. Do I value the person I am with? If no, then why am I with them? If yes then I want to show them the respect that I believe they deserve.

I chuckled a little at that, as personally I was just the opposite. I had sex up on a pedestal, something to be reverent and respectful of. A degree of fear of the unknown mingled up with utopian optimism. Since then, I feel I’ve let go of a lot of emotional hangups more concerned with societal trappings or personal illusions. I would also suggest that I respect myself, and by and large value and respect my partners; but I get the sneaking suspicion we have different ideas of exactly what that entails. I’ve run the gamut of various tawdry predilections and alternative lifestyles. Earlier you mentioned exploitation and I agree that regardless of means, that is something to be avoided. But beyond that, what do you see as a source of potential sexual ‘shame’?

Family Life (what we called Sex Ed) in Middle School definitely changed my views on sexual activity. I will most likely not have sex until I am married, and the only reason for that would be to have children. I’m not the guy who has sex to prove my love to my girlfriend.

Could I press you as to what they presented that changed your views? I would suggest that a healthy, active, responsible sexual life is a boon to anyone, and that I feel sorry for those who would deny themselves that. Nevertheless, to each their own.

+1

Janto you crud, weigh in. :P Sexual persuasions and approaches have dovetailed with a lot of posters over the while, I think this is the first time anyone has been prompted to weigh in directly and personally.

-

Now as for me. I see sex as something to be enjoyed between people. No more, no less. It can be a big deal, it can be a small deal. It’s no gilded idol to be feared and worshipped, not inherently at least, and by and large making an honest to goodness transcendent spiritual experience out of it can be a lot of work. I think many individuals, and as a society, we have a lot of puritanical social mores robbing us out of a richer, fuller experience and sincerely encourage everyone to try many new things. That it is healthy and ennobling to explore the breadth of sexual experience. Personally, I have a penchant for the unusual, if sometimes only for its own sake, and have not left many stones unturned as it were.

Now of the flip side. I do think as much as some are guilty of putting too much gravitas on sex, there are other parties guilty of rendering it superficial. It is a powerful thing, and therefor a powerful tool. It’s sad to see sex used as a tool to manipulate people, and only perpetuates associations with sex not in the service to sex as a concept, or the individual in question, but to whatever ideological concerns the party is pushing. Whether this is The Nuclear Family, or Selling Cars, or what have you.

Topic: Serious Discussion / Transgender Pro Fighter

Issen,

Yes, Semenya. So I looked into it, and it turns out to be a little complicated and super relevant. Now due to her privacy concerns, not quite everything is on the table. She is to some degree intersexed. She has no ovaries, no womb, and internal testes. Her testosterone levels are about triple her compeition; which is still far below your average man, which runs about x20.

Which I would say serves to establish that the gender divide in our sports is far from a perfect binary. Further, it shows that there are some pretty significant differences in the hormonal brews between the staple averages of genders.

Vika,

Gender division in brain development is in the natal phase? I’m no neurologist, but that struck me as very surprising. So much of our brain growth is developmental I really thought it was a long term, puberty related thing. That’s really turned some of my preconceptions on their head, I’m going to have to look into that a little bit more.

Topic: Serious Discussion / Transgender Pro Fighter

bq.Maybe technically, but the female with a male physique is far more egregious than someone having prosthetic legs, in my opinion. Essentially, the story the OP linked is the equivalent to a woman who hadn’t undergone a sex change using steroids/HGH against women. It’s a blatant, unknown, competitive advantage. At least with the prosthetic legs, you can see them and judging by how he did in the Olympics, I wonder how much of an advantage they really were.

I should have specified I believe there was a transgender runner, I’ll have to look up the details.

Topic: Serious Discussion / Transgender Pro Fighter

And if you cannot understand why someone would find such a act so offensive then discussing it with you would be pointless.

Now, I’ll admit it is somewhat derailing to your original post; on that ground, sure. I know lots of reasons why someone would find the act offensive. Although, personally, I do not. I was interested in seeing your view on the matter.

A male body produces much more testosterone during intense exertion such as what he is currently doing. Simply having his package removed, fake breasts implanted, and some routine female hormones injected does not counter this.

Quite right. Beyond the competitive factor this is also something that colours my appraisal of gender alteration. There is a history in the meat. Bone density, muscle tissue, brain development and so on. There are corporeal facets of our developmental gender that took the better part of a life time to enact. A sudden shift in hormonal cocktails does not suddenly erase this.

I would see no problem with Fallon Fox competing against men. I would actually respect the decision greatly. Realizing that even though he now thinks of and refers to himself in the feminine sense he is still masculine in the physical sense. I would have no problem competing against him.

Do you feel that would be a common response? Do you feel that would be carried to the more influential circuits?

Topic: Serious Discussion / Transgender Pro Fighter

I have no qualms about someone deciding their gender at any point. But as OP and Issendorf points out having a history of a male biology provides a benefit unavailable to the other competitors. The fact that it was never disclosed until much later I also find a little surprising. Ultimately though isn’t this redundant of that one Olympic runner?

Looking at it though, it seems ultimately unsportsmanlike, and on that ground I don’t bemoan giving them the boot. As Karma suggests she has now trapped herself between two polarities truly belonging to neither, and may have neither avenue of competition open. I suppose the question could be posited to the league itself as some sort of vote.

But I do notice a lot of hostility(?) to the notion of Gender Trans Dojo, and I’ve rather enjoyed your posts, so with my interest piqued can I invite you to expound upon your view of gender trans?

Topic: Serious Discussion / The "fat acceptance" movement and why people are so apt to defend an unhealthy lifestyle

The more we encourage kids to track calories and learn about specific ingredients, the better off we’ll be. Though I’m sure teaching kids not to completely obsess over calorie counting would be needed too, or else we may face increasing issues on the other end of things.

I was fortunate enough to have a parent pretty interested in food and nutrition. But, beyond fat and skinny, and ultimately far more important, is the complete lack of nutritional education for youth. Calories are the tip of the iceberg. Reestablishing what we need in our diet and why should be paramount to any healthy, modern society. Our food represents the most basic building block of our people and society. Nutrition is infrastructure to health and education and it is time the powers that be start addressing it as something important as opposed to just panicking over fat people.

I think fast food joints should be required to provide food labels to some extent. For instance, as one user posted earlier with that Baskin Robins Oreo Milkshake thing, if you’re getting more than a day’s calories and fat requirements, I think you should be told beforehand. Not prohibited, mind you; if you’re okay with eating 2600+ calories in one sitting then I legally can’t stop you; I just think you should know.

In my neck of the woods they are.

As with food, sugar-coating words isn’t going to be the key to weight loss.

I laughed :)

Topic: Serious Discussion / The world and our perception

Well as you may know emotions are not unique to humans, animals also experience the same emotions. If you own a dog you may notice that they can sometimes become jealous when attention is not given to it. Therefore if the emotion still exists through evolution then I believe that it is beneficial.

Ooh, a very apt direction to take things. I think jealousy has very strong instinctual/evolutionary roots. Especially in sexual concerns. But, from an evolutionary standpoint the only measure of benefit and value is producing offspring. Is that still the ultimate goal? I have no interest in producing children, nevertheless the reflex towards jealousy and sexual dominion in me is pretty strong. Which, I have to regard it as silly. It’s an inherent emotional/instinctual valuation over something that as a person I have no preference to. Same could be said of intra male alpha competing.

Does knowing that you are eventually going to die influence your decisions and thoughts on life?

Yup. I feel it adds a personal stake in remaining happy, productive, relatively adventurous. Although, I’m far more afraid of the idea of aging, of perpetual degradation, then death itself.

do you believe your emotions affect what decision you make? and does that make you feel more in or out of control?

Of course they do. Personally more in control. Although I’ve spent a lot of time trying to influence my emotional responses to thing. It’s a long way from perfect control, but I’ve willed a great deal of change and very rarely find lapses.

Topic: Serious Discussion / The government can now take your DNA without a warrant!

Well well well, it’s the greatest lie of the century when people think that they have free will, liberty, choices, democracy, rule of law, fair judicial systems etc. No, we are not having any of them since Alexander the Great’s time.
We are like pet dogs. If we behave well and listen to our master, we will have good food and clothes. If we do not, we will be punished and caged in some animal protection facilities and then “humanely slaughtered”. The point is, you will enjoy safety when you are a pet. r else, just look at those stray dogs — they settle arguments by paws.

Pah. Sounding a little like an armchair cynic. You’ll be surprised at what you can get away with. I don’t have much faith in the rule of law, but I’ve managed to find no shortage of liberty and free will around it. As much as the principle of my nation’s legalese sincerely frustrates me, I’ve never found it an actual obstacle.

They leech off us, but They need us, so it’s actually a symbiotic situation.

Sounds like parasitism from that.

Topic: Serious Discussion / The "fat acceptance" movement and why people are so apt to defend an unhealthy lifestyle

that would be very conveniant for you, because nobody likes you. and if we did, and did as you command us to, we’d probably never telling you to shut the fuck up.

For the record, I like Jan, along with the rest of the Old Guard. Even though the lot of you tend not to get along well with one another. Nevertheless I have no desire to unholster the scolding finger. You all know when you’re being snarky, and certainly dont need old Grandpa Ung lumbering down from his ivory tower. You miserable lot deserve each other.

Topic: Serious Discussion / The government can now take your DNA without a warrant!

The CIA and NIS are not Norwegian. You won’t haqve to worry about them. Whilst in your country they have to operate by your country’s rules or they can be taken to task by your court system.

The CIA are not exactly known for their enduring respect for international sovereignty.

Topic: Serious Discussion / Was Anne Frank's diary a fake? And how does this affect those who believe in the holocaust?

Kay, first off, neo-atheism isn’t a fringe term. it’s been around for at least a decade in the mainstream.

Yeah it’s all about Post-Neo-Atheism now. Hehe, couldn’t resist. Although sometimes these terms do start to sound a little absurd. Historical Futurism? Contemporary Post Modernism? Or, the dreaded PoPoMo, PostPostModernism. Heh.

Critical thinking/ questioning authority HAS to go in all directions in order to be effective.

Quite well put. I think one of the things important to note in defense of conspiracy theories, as well as stuff in general, is the idea of a balance of powers. That supposing the truth is buried there, one is going to have to dig. Mass communal effort as fundamental in inquiry, to combat the greater power and influence the opposing party has in media, communications, record keeping and so on. Which, fosters a kind of cultishness and desperation which undermines any and all examples. Which, makes it easier to dismiss and further reinforces the status quo as valid by default. Which, gets into some pretty circular dynamics.

It may not make the tropes and narrow vision of ‘question everything’ inquiries justifiable, but I’d suggest sympathetic. When resisting what amounts to active deception, an open mind will only get you as far as your pillaging of protected information.

Topic: Serious Discussion / Excessive cursing

I dunno Issen, I have to vouch for Vika in that it does sound a little sexist.

Now, I’m guilty of the same behavior. But, I’d excuse it on culture, not some innate biological mandate. As addressed by others, I treat different people differently. Mostly, to avoid disrespect, simply being polite. Typically this behavior is going to be around strangers, part of knowing someone well is being able to treat them honestly. At least as I see it.

So, trying not to offend and superficially please different unknown people, I have to make some broad generalizations about their expectations and preferences. Do I draw a distinction between men and women in such matters? Yeah, of course. There are of course, other factors, but civility is based around presumption.

Topic: Serious Discussion / The world and our perception

1. Intelligence to a certain degree is inherited, does this restrict the less fortunate individuals from achieving the same as the fortunate individuals or do you believe it is purely environmentally driven?

My understanding is that intelligence tends to be inherited, certainly not infallibly so, but across the big picture they tend to correlate. As for whether this prevents ‘achievement’ we would have to hash out a definition of such. As far as my yard stick goes, I would see an absence of intelligence as an obstacle.

2. Is jealousy a healthy emotion?

Ooh, tough. But, ultimately I must conclude no. Jealousy is too centered upon others, too dependent upon hypothetical’s.

3. Are you as unique as you think you are? (think of a new emotion or colour)

But of course. Mutually shackled as we are by colour and emotions. For the most part.

4. Do you think money controls the majority of emotions in your society?

In my society? At large, certainly yes. My personal circles, no. But that’s something I try to foster in the company I keep.

5. What is your overall aim in life?

Sustainable pleasure, peppered with novel experiences.

Topic: Serious Discussion / How Far Should We Be Pushing Our Ideals?

that’s free market, not capitalism. also, i think you’re confusing amoral with immoral.

In so far as my comment, I don’t see the difference. What do you see as the principle concerns morally between the free market and Capitalism? Also, yes I was, whoops :D

Topic: Serious Discussion / Was Anne Frank's diary a fake? And how does this affect those who believe in the holocaust?

Originally posted by issendorf:

Should we question the moon landing too?

Not even in the same ballpark. You can ‘plausibly’ deny the moon landing about 100x better than you can the holocaust. Denying the holocaust is in the same realm as arguing the Earth is flat.

I would agree, they are not quite in the same realm. But let’s not let ‘questioning’ become ‘denying’.
But it is a good example. Why are both events questioned? Well, for one thing, they fall into the realm of convenient truths. The stories we tell ourselves of our success and heroism, and our enemies mean badness, those should always be those that we most closely watch.

Since you can’t Godwin’s law this thread. Remember that Nazi PsychOps at the invasion of Poland told the populace that the Polish were rounding up and ethnically cleansing the Germans.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Himmler

Topic: Serious Discussion / AX: Guns never existed.

That makes me wonder… how would suicide work in ancient times? No pills, no guns. Cliffs would just be too scary for me and bashing yourself with your own sword would probably just be too painful.

Usually poison, especially for anyone who could afford it. Alternatively, the dramatic and poor generally slit a wrist or throat.

Famously (sort of) the Gauls would evade capture by the Romans through suicide. They would place the point of their sword behind their collar bone, and drive it straight down through the cavity into their heart. Or such is how the story goes.

Topic: Serious Discussion / The "fat acceptance" movement and why people are so apt to defend an unhealthy lifestyle

If you body build so that you can have a six pack and muscles, you’re as much a piece of trash as someone who doesn’t do shit, because you’re fake. Now, if you’re working out because you want to be healthy, that’s perfectly okay.

What’s fake about it? I see someone determining an aesthetic, a notion of beauty, and achieving it. Good on them. You seem rather contemptuous of the pursuit of beauty. Tsk, tsk.

Topic: Serious Discussion / International Media And Gezi Protests

Oh, I agree he is an Islamist. I’m also not in favour of Islamism. Nevertheless I think Turkey is due a little rebalancing. But it is something I see going badly, that these are the opening moves of deeper revision. Something the alcohol laws seem to suggest.

I also agree with your worries that complicating his agenda may be his desire for a personal dictatorship in it’s own right. There has certainly been ample spin and media hostility. My fear is not so much that he is not the man the Turks voted for, but precisely the kind they want. I still see Turkey as a deeply split nation.

Nevertheless, this has remained a very first world riot and government response. Force has been kept to pretty minimum levels, apologies have been issued for breaches of conduct. Although really worth watching to my mind, is the absence of military involvement. Erdogan may have the police at his behest, but I think he is terrified still of his own armed forces. Which, rightfully so. They are changed, and identify, with the preservation of secular Turkey against forces foreign and domestic. Considering the plotted coups and purges, it seems the real powers are remaining distant.

Topic: Serious Discussion / International Media And Gezi Protests

Now Rolby, by your numbers, that’s still a pretty sizable percentage who did not vote for their government. Erdogan is an interesting character. A very effective statesman, but one that I feel is ultimately an authoritarian cultural monodominant. Erdogan’s liberal reforms have all been to the inclusion of traditional/islamic culture previously excluded (fair enough), but as suggested by Beuaval he is incredibly anti media. Youtube and Twitter are prohibited in Turkey, amongst thousands of other websites.

Nevertheless these riots are a schism that is held pretty deeply in the Turkish identity. Draco, I’d much rather less see Islamic Intellectuals so much as (potentially, likely, Muslim) Secular Republicans curb the Theocratic trend in their democracy. I feel this is going to be the tip of the iceberg however. I see two cultural strata developing ( or rather, entrenching. ) that will not remain reconcilable.

Topic: Serious Discussion / Was Anne Frank's diary a fake? And how does this affect those who believe in the holocaust?

bq.The response was stuff like the Stern Gang and Irgun – terrorism. They blew up civilian buildings until the British decided to wash their hands of the whole mess.

Which was a response I thought seemed pretty atypical of the British. Do you think it was born of post-war sympathies? Insider influence? Post-war military weakening? Seems they slept off the leash with all the rest of the colonies, but for someone who pushed they never quite got pushed back. You do address that a little further later in the paragraph, but I"d love to have you expound.

I mean, I get it. You look at Balfour and the partition plan and you think man, they just let the jews steamroll over the arabs. Except that the UN back then was as useful as it is now – so practically insignificant. They could make all the fancy deals they wanted, but unless they contributed actual war materiel or military aid, it didn’t add up to nothing. Just about the only favor the allies gave them was the reparation payments, and it took years to get all that sorted out, particularly because – I think Finkelstein mentions this too – Germany was initially disinclined to make Israel the collective recipient. They thought they would just make individual payoffs, but what ended up happening, of course, was that they shelled out for both.

I grant that a united military front by a resisting UN would be lake, fairy tale make believe, but I don’t recall the whining, rhetoric and sanctions which seem to be the sword of the agency of late. Did the U.N. ideologically resist this?

Germany was initially disinclined to make Israel the collective recipient. They thought they would just make individual payoffs, but what ended up happening, of course, was that they shelled out for both.

The first great swindle of Israel hijacking the jewish identity.

i mean, the scope of people that would have to’ve been involved in this is just mind-blowing. from former SS and such officers’ and employees’ confessions, to spies, to nazi-hunters, litterally hordes of Jewish people and children…and not one leakage. i mean…

Well those Nuremburg confessions are already problematic. It’s pretty on the table they were coerced and revised – doesn’t make them, or the holocaust, inherently false, but I’d have a hard time legitimizing it was objective reporting. Also, the difference between a work camp short of supplies and full of angry people and a death camp is largely one of intent – very little actual materials or circumstances would be required to change.

Topic: Serious Discussion / What is the current quality of this forum to you?

Topic: Serious Discussion / Was Anne Frank's diary a fake? And how does this affect those who believe in the holocaust?

I think the strongest evidence that it’s mostly accurate is that – via Finkelstein – American Jews actually tried to distance themselves from it in the decades post-war. It wasn’t till the six-day war that it grabbed a lot of attention because Jews realized they could capitalize on it for political points. But that makes it a hindsight decision to make something out of an otherwise horrific event.

I have to cede that it is mostly accurate. Really I feel the only questions that are not, to my satisfaction, fully answered are questions of (that old horse) agency. Who knew what, who wanted what, ect. Ultimately the most friendly version of events is still wholly morally repugnant, but details are details. Beyond the Jewish angle, there is also the Soviet motive in demonizing a defeated enemy to valorize yourself and to distract from your own problems, which to a lesser extent applies to the rest of the Allies too.

Also, I’ve personally found that Israelis will get really ticked off if you suggest the Holocaust was the reason Israel got created…they HATE the idea that Europe felt so guilty they handed them their own country. And to be fair, a look at the ’48 war will quickly cure you of that notion.

I daresay it is the reason it was collectively allowed to the extent that it was, they were given a pretty broad carte blanche.

oh and Ung: you know holocaust denial is illegal in our country, right?

Yes indeed, which is amongst the long list of our eerie and absurd thought policing. I mean, there’s a truly frightening precedent in mandating accepted history. It’s not even a point of contention either.

Q: What did the prole say about the party?
A: [censored] [censored] [censored]

and your quarterly list of accepted titles that don’t make the Governor General and Holy Queen cry. How am I going to get my hands on “Hitler’s Harlot: Nazi Love Island” now?
http://www.gomorrahy.com/cbsa-piu-q3-11.pdf

Although less tongue in cheek, worth noting the infamous neo nazi “Turner Diaries” are on the Prohibited List.

Topic: Serious Discussion / Was Anne Frank's diary a fake? And how does this affect those who believe in the holocaust?

Like what, Jews did it to make people feel sorry for them and Jews could do that too because they control the world and stuff?

Never, waste, a, disaster. Any politician worth his salt knows that. If you think the Holocaust is somehow a politically neutral event with zero ability to influence future policy, cultures, attitudes, economic climates ect. Well, then I think you’re wrong. … But I have to imagine that you don’t, as that would be crazy.

So, post-holocaust, then what? You spin it. Hell, the Soviets did it too. So effectively, it isn’t completely insane to wear a mustache resembling Stalin’s or hammer and sickle imagery.

Holocaust skepticism is a rational response to a major historical event shaping global zeitgeist for the next century and likely many more afterwards. It doesn’t have many legitimate adherents, most of them tend to be closet nazi’s working more socially acceptable angles, but I’m not one to disparage skepticism to the official story of important things.

Nevertheless, whether or not Anne Frank’s diary is or is not real has well, no real impact on anything to my mind. I suppose it could be a case example of fraudulent holocaust memorabilia used for either psych ops or financing.

Topic: Serious Discussion / Observing Changes in Culture, Society, Entertainment, etc.

Janto,

I love comic books but except for Nolan’s Batman and a few others (Hulk, anyone?) I hate all the comic book movies getting churned out.

Hehe, so strange. I really don’t mind the big marvel stream lately. I agree they are pretty generic, but that is something I really like about them. They are remarkably golden age, which is especially wild when contrasted to the gritty post modernism that has consumed those same titles in print. and although I enjoy Nolan’s trilogy, they make me furious as spiritually batman movies. Except the second, for Joker, it’s cliche – but that performance did more to justify the joker then any comic book has touched save Killing Joke, it also rebirthed the idea of fantastic villains as legitimately frightening.

I think what I like is how fucked up Dexter is. I was reading something about how people enjoy mystery novels because on some level they like to see justice prevail. No criminal, no matter how devious, is the guy the audience roots for. Well, not anymore!

Whoah neat! I didn’t know about this Twitchell character. One of my problems is that I find the writing staff creates a very inconsistent picture of Dexter and his derangement. He seems to whiplash through emotionless automaton and so full of feelings depending on the writing staff. Do you feel he hasn’t been watered down out of being a villain? There has been a lot of moral redemption arcs. I suppose by definition he is a criminal nevertheless. I think his popularization shows an interesting perspective on public opinion in regards to the spirit or success of our justice system.

Anyway, the older gen will always piss down the backs of the younger for their taste in culture.

I try really hard not to be that guy. It’s sometimes difficult to keep things, in perspective. But what about that crazy Dub Step eh guys!?

No way the current stuff could be as good as that.

Not until the legitimate fear of total spontaneous annihilation puts Western Civilization back into it’s creative prime. The eighties, ohh the eighties.

Topic: Serious Discussion / How Far Should We Be Pushing Our Ideals?

To expand on this point: Shit like this is already happening, dude. Coca Cola, or the company behind them, is known to have hired far-right militias to kill people who were organizing unions in Colombia. They killed 9 people in the name of profit and, if the cost-benefit adds up, they’ll likely kill more when the opportunity presents itself. That’s why regulation is necessary, because Capitalism, at its core, is amoral. It doesn’t care for people, it is purely a numbers game. If the numbers add up, then it will crush and destroy to achieve its aims. Regulation makes capitalism accountable, not very accountable, but more accountable than pure Laissez Faire markets.

Oh I agree that stuff of that nature is already happening. But it is in theory not allowed and actively resisted by competent powers. Although as for the ‘Coca Cola’ thing in particular, my understanding is that was the local bottling plant, not Coca Cola, which does not actually run it’s own bottling plants (part of the reason Coca Cola has ‘local flavour’).

Now I personally don’t agree that Capitalism by it’s nature is amoral, ultimately it is an exchange of goods between two parties. I do agree that it requires a degree of regulation. Whether that regulation comes from above (say, an elected body of ministers overseeing stuff) or from below (the prejudices and expectations of the customer public) I feel is more of a cultural question that an innate state.

At least, answer me: Who watches the watchmen? What kind of entity can regulate countries? Aliens?

Quite right. Is there a fundamental answer to the problems of economics and governance? That transactions and manipulations of power between men and their organizations? No, I don’t see such. I would suggest an aware, wary populace is the surest safeguard. But breeding such things is quite the trick.