enur72
Rune Østgård

www.libertus.no/fraudcoin

Author of Fraudcoin: 1000 Years with Inflation as a Policy (http://a.co/d/5L4HV8j)

Public Key

npub1sv4zk080fvt4f3982u5kffzdkex3nm0kylky29um2xws5h4wsxvswtsrw4

NIP-05 Address

npub1sv4zk080fvt4f3982u5kffzdkex3nm0kylky29um2xws5h4wsxvswtsrw4

NIP-57 Address

[email protected]

Profile Code

nprofile1qqsgx23t8nh5k965cjn4w2ty53xmvngeahmz0mz9z7d4r8g2t6hgrxgpp4mhxue69uhkummn9ekx7mqpr9mhxue69uhkymmnw3ezumr9vd682unfveujumn9wsxjl6jw

Publishing to

nos.lol

bostr.lecturify.net

relay.noswhere.com

Author Public Key

npub1sv4zk080fvt4f3982u5kffzdkex3nm0kylky29um2xws5h4wsxvswtsrw4

Show more details

Last Notes

2024-09-16 20:36:40

Polticians are a large number of people with high time preference controlled by a small number of people with low time preference.
Few.

2024-09-16 08:16:19

We can to a great extent blame this mess we're in on the corruption of the word "freedom."

2024-09-15 15:06:47

Statement of 12 September 2024 from Florida state health authorities on the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines:
https://image.nostr.build/f459481ec1bbce664081459fdca3cb6b6e037e8e8ea9d79e430a0a5a1088bf8c.jpg
"Additionally, the federal government has failed to provide sufficient data to support the safety and efficacy of COVID-19 boosters, or acknowledge previously demonstrated safety concerns associated with COVID-19 vaccines and boosters...
Based on the high rate of global immunity and currently available data, the State Surgeon General advises against the use of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines."

2024-09-13 15:44:48

Why should you support monetary freedom, the right to use the money you like best?
Answer:
While evil ideas are the root of evil actions, it's monetary monopoly that makes the most evil ideas actionable.

2024-09-09 08:06:51

Today we celebrate Arminius, the rebel.
https://image.nostr.build/f0c6c8470dcc9552ef8ff69d7868f50e5bc53fbc6a4d8e1247b8b0f388f0b8c1.jpg
On the 9th of September in 9 AD, he led a coalition of Germanic tribes in the Battle of the Teutoburg ForestTeutoburg Forest against three Roman legions.
It was David's fight against Goliath, and in just three or four days, Arminius and his men dealt the Romans such a blow that the empire was forced to give up its ambitions to rule the Germanic people.
Arminius was born around 18 BC into the Cherusci tribe.
The Cherusci were an early Germanic tribe inhabiting northwestern Germany during the first centuries BC and AD.
They are noted for their strong inclination towards peace, which, as described by Roman sources, sometimes led to their downfall.
This was viewed as self-deception in a region populated by more aggressive neighbors, resulting in the Cherusci being labeled as cowards by their adversaries, like the Chatti, who were more martial in nature.
Arminius' family was part of the tribal nobility.
At this time, it was common that the Roman empire held young nobles from conquered or allied territories hostage to serve as leverage against their home tribes.
Arminius was therefore sent to Rome to serve as a hostage during his youth.
He received a thorough education.
This was part of the empire's strategy to integrate and assimilate elites from conquered regions.
Arminius was granted Roman citizenship, a significant honor.
He was also given the equestrian rank, which was a social class just below the senatorial order, indicating his high status within the Roman system.
Upon reaching adulthood, Arminius received a thorough military training and became an officer in the auxiliary forces.
Auxiliaries were non-citizen troops from the provinces who served alongside Roman legions.
These units were often used for frontier defense and were crucial in Roman military strategy due to their local knowledge and combat skills.
Arminius's service likely included campaigns against other Germanic tribes or other threats to the Roman Empire's northern borders.
His role would have given him firsthand experience with Roman military tactics, organization, and discipline.
Around 7 AD, Arminius returned to Germania, serving under Publius Quinctilius Varus, the Roman governor of Germania.
His position allowed him to gain Varus's trust.
While serving Rome, Arminius secretly began to organize a coalition of Germanic tribes.
His skills in organizing and leading the Germanic tribes were remarkable.
They were often at odds with each other, but Arminius, who was a charismatic leader, managed to forge a coalition.
He had to handle the egos and ambitions of various tribal leaders, and his diplomatic skills were essential in maintaining unity among tribes like the Cherusci, Marsi, Chatti, and Bructeri.
His own background as a Cheruscan noble who had served in the Roman military gave him credibility both among his own people and with other tribes.
Arminus effectively communicated the common threat posed by Roman expansion, rallying the tribes under the banner of freedom from Roman rule.
This shared goal was crucial in overcoming tribal rivalries.
Organizing a large-scale attack on the Romans required foresight and patience.
Arminius spent time building alliances and planning the logistics, ensuring that the tribes could strike when the Romans were least prepared.
He chose the battlefield wisely.
The Romans typically fought in organized formations like the testudo (tortoise) or in legionary lines.
The dense forest and marshy terrain of the Teutoburg Forest negated the Roman advantages in open battle formations and heavy infantry.
Under the pretense of leading Varus to quell a local uprising, Arminius lured Varus and his three legions (Legio XVII, Legio XVIII, and Legio XIX) into the Teutoburg Forest.
The route was narrow, with dense woods and marshes.
The weather was awful, with rain and storms.
The Romans were totally unprepared for battle, when the attacks started around September 9.
The first assault came suddenly, with Germanic warriors attacking from all directions.
The combination of terrain and terrible weather conditions made it almost impossible for the them to maintain anything resembling their preferred formations.
Over the next few days, the Romans attempted to march through the forest, but they were continuously harassed by Germanic warriors.
The Germans used hit-and-run tactics, attacking, then retreating into the forest.
They attacked from cover, using javelins, arrows, and engaged in close combat when advantageous.
As the Romans tried to push through, they were funneled into even narrower paths where they were easier targets.
The Germans also blocked paths with felled trees.
The continuous attacks, combined with the depressing weather conditions, led to exhaustion and demoralization among the Romans.
Constant harassment and the inability of the Romans to form effective battle lines, wore down the Roman's morale.
On what is believed to be the third or fourth day, on the September 11 or 12, the Romans attempted to fortify a position, but they were overwhelmed.
Varus, seeing the inevitable defeat, took his own life.
Around 15,000 to 20,000 Roman legionaries were killed.
Additionally, there were significant losses among auxiliaries and camp followers, possibly bringing the total Roman and allied casualties to around 25,000 to 30,000.
It's generally believed that the Germanic losses only were in the range of a few thousand.
The legions' eagles, symbols of Roman military honor, were captured.
The defeat shocked Rome.
Emperor Augustus is said to have wandered around his palace, banging his head against the walls, crying "Quintilius Varus, give me back my legions!"
The loss was not just military but also a significant blow to Roman morale and expansionist ambitions in Germania.
Rome abandoned its plans to conquer and directly administer the Germanic territories east of the Rhine.
The frontier was stabilized along the Rhine and Danube rivers, marking a significant shift in Roman imperial policy.
The victory boosted the morale and unity among various Germanic tribes.
Arminius's success in organizing the tribes wasn't just about military strategy; it was a blend of political acumen, cultural understanding, and personal charisma.
His ability to turn a collection of often-warring tribes into a cohesive force against a formidable enemy like Rome makes his achievement particularly noteworthy.
But it was Arminius' rebellion against a state that held him as hostage from he was a young boy and which tried to brainwash him and turn him against his own people, that should impress us the most.

2024-09-08 09:49:13

https://image.nostr.build/67ef9e57da0df16614dfc61d899cf74e73bef98f3d0b0543097f3262edd1e716.jpg
Most people believe it's lack of information and understanding of the situation that is why things get worse in society.
I think this isn't correct.
First, history demonstrates that you don't need many people to change society for the better.
Second, most of those who are able to change society already know why it's necessary, they are on the other hand sick and tired of the constant whining.
And third, it's all about believing in the best actionable ideas, and making sure that these ideas are put into action by enough people.
I'll write a note today or next week where I present some of my thoughts.
The note first targets the freerider problem, why it corresponds directly with corruption and how deep this corruption runs in modern day's civilization.
These are issues that are extremely unpopular with people, because they see that these ideas force them to confront themselves with their own weaknesses.
Therefore, whenever I mention for instance freeriding in my posts, readers ignore them, don't hit the like or share buttons, and do what they can to avoid being seen as someone who contribute to distributing bad news.
So, how to deal with this challenge?
The answer is to becoming adept at communicating a superior idea.
An idea that strengthens people and motivates them to take positive action.
This has to be an idea which convinces them to connect with likeminded individuals who are prepared to cooperate and disseminate tried and tested methods that promote positive social change.
I call the idea "Sound Rebellion," which also will be the headline of most of my talks in the near future.
Stay tuned - and enjoy your Sunday.

2024-09-07 10:47:49

- reply

No, the state spends enormous amounts on gaslighting the people

2024-09-07 08:21:31

The laws of economics dictate that
- what you tax, you get less of
- what you subsidize, you get more of
Experience and logics tell us that people get fewer children in urban areas than in the countryside.
Furthermore, families are the only institutions that produce children.
Do you agree with me so far?
Grok estimates that the EU's average fertility rate in 1960 was approximately 2.59 births per woman.
The EU’s average fertility rate is now 1.46
https://image.nostr.build/2ebd5d7d2cd690fd0d38618e9fda9a9dc54fb6425f2166b603bce6c7ac441315.jpg
This is a reduction of 77 per cent.
Grok estimates that the public sector's spending as a share of GDP for the five major EU economies between 1960 and 2022 likely has grown by at least 50% to 100%.
By other words, in this period we have seen a shift of economic wealth from the private sector to the public sector comparable to the average reduction in the birth rates.
My best guess is that it's here we find the main explanation.
Shifting of wealth from the private to the public sector is shifting of wealth from those who produce kids to institutions which produce bureaucracies.
What you tax (people), you get less of.
What you subsidize (public sector), you get more of.
And bureaucracies typically grow the most in urban areas, where people traditionally prefer to have fewer children than in the countryside.
In conclusion, less production of kids is a result of the growth of the public sector, which mainly consists of institutions in urban areas that produce bureaucracies instead of kids.
A socialist society is parasitic of nature, and the parasite in the end always runs out of hosts.

2024-09-06 11:59:11

Can someone pls cancel out this https://image.nostr.build/df8ca43740ed86b13f746dfe9ed0815dc92dd97d3454c07ee5c936624e5b4520.jpg bot?

2024-09-06 07:14:01

- reply

Hell yeah!!!
(And GM!)

2024-09-05 20:13:48

The development of new ideas and more knowledge is the biggest growth accelator, for society and individuals alike.
Therefore, please tell me, if your objective was economic growth, should you rather spend time with and talk to someone who was totally different from you, or with someone who was almost identical to you?

2024-09-05 19:21:15

- reply

Ideas about money is one example.
People don't learn about it in schools or at home etc,, but they depend on it and are therefore very interested in it.
If everyone else talks about the environment, corruption and high taxes, that represents a massive form of noise.
And if I then come out and say:
"The monetary system is the most beautiful social network ever"
or
"Inflation is and has always been a conscious policy by rulers"
people almost automatically tune into it, because it sticks out so much against the noise.
Same with Bitcoin, which represents many ideas, and which actually comes true much stromger as a signal the more economic noise that is produced in the form of for bad economic policies.
And it's the same with a bitcoiner, who may very well always transmit the same based/low time preference signal, but it becomes easier to receive the signal, the more society is burdened with fiat, bad economic policies and the impact these things have on non-bitcoiners.
On the other hand, if the communication channels were overcrowded with high quality ideas, adding another idea would be difficult for you to propaget from your transmitter to a high number of receivers.

2024-09-04 17:31:14

- reply

Good point.
But people struggle to understand what Bitcoin is and how it works, partially due to programming caused by "this is incredibly hard to understand and therefore you need to study it for hundreds of hours"
If the facts are:
"Bitcoin is at its core a simple concept, but it's challenging to safely store your bitcoin"
then why not say so?

2024-09-04 08:29:37

I turn 52 today 🥳
As a gift to myself I want to share the following with you:
We are smack in the middle of a war of ideas, and I'll tell you why this is good.
https://image.nostr.build/e2eb02f0fc71d9f5cf9455800890e8879844938c0430ff2d1b61b9415af6c278.jpg
The battle is between us - the people - and the political class.
And winning requires that we constantly learn new, actionable ideas.
However, this isn't just an imperative.
Once we throw ourselves into the battle, we develop a passion for it.
You may have experienced it yourself:
Meeting new people and sharing and developing new ideas together with them is wonderful.
You discover that when positive, creative people get together, 1 + 1 is never 2.
When we meet, physically or digitally or we just read each others' writings, we often identify ideas that the other person didn't have before, enabling us to create new knowledge and more understanding together.
And sometimes, when you and I combine our ideas, we develop things that the world hasn't seen or heard before.
It might not be a gigantic innovation, and normally it's just a very, very small thing.
But it's our joint appreciation of the process itself that is so immensely rewarding.
Because we realize that 1 + 1 in the social and intellectual domain more often than not is 3, 10, 1000 a million or more.
Magical is the only way to describe this process, which is reserved to us alone, the humankind.
When this happens, you also realize that there isn't any limit to what we can achieve with more knowledge and understanding.
Immersing me in this form of social interaction gives me a constant dopamin rush.
I'm addicted.
Don't you ever force me into rehab.
Have a nice day ❤️

2024-09-04 07:31:50

Many interesting comments in this thread on what made people "wake up" - something which obviously means different things for different individuals:
#nevent1q…ka5j

2024-09-03 07:28:12

GM!
I woke up at the age of 30, when I finally started reading non-fiction books of my own choice, instead of the books that the school and university obliged me to read.
When did you wake up and why?
https://image.nostr.build/2aca1a473a0f72c582fc83dec6c2ef4b78456d68ca48509c412a9676f7560ef6.jpg

2024-09-02 20:48:13

95% prefer ideas to constant whining. Makes me optimistic on behalf of humanity.
https://image.nostr.build/43b47bf559e99abb8ed8b8275274f38a6357653e603e109550d0ce3192e79967.jpg

2024-09-01 20:55:06

- reply

I read most of her books and was on my way to becone an objectivist.
And 20 years later I conclude that both logics and experience dictate that she had this one wrong.
John Steinbeck got it right, IMO, in East of Eden.
And he was just as much as a thinker as Ayn was.
In fact I think he understood human nature way better than her.
Ayn also lacked a proper understanding of money.
She adored the gold standard, if I remember correctly, but should have embraced monetary freedom.
This is what John wrote:
Steinbeck monster evil
"I believe there are monsters born in the world to human parents. Some you can see, misshapen and horrible, with huge heads or tiny bodies; some are born with no arms, no legs, some with three arms, some with tails or mouths in odd places. They are accidents and no one's fault, as used to be thought. Once they were considered the visible punishment for concealed sins.
And just as there are physical monsters, can there not be mental or psychic monsters born? The face and body may be perfect, but if a twisted gene or a malformed egg can produce physical monsters, may not the same process produce a malformed soul?"
These poor souls are IMO the exceptions.

2024-09-01 13:12:48

Freedom = Absence of coercion
If you define it as something else then you constantly run into contraditctions. With this definition, it becomes possible to unite in many types of freedom fights.
How to become free = Play it, it's a game!
One can only learn the rules of the game by playing it. Fuck around and find out (FAFO).
Winning = Becoming a better player
The fact that it's a indefinite game and that you win by becoming a better player means that you can win more often than you lose, and that you can win without me having to lose.
Summary:
Freedom is an indefinite plus sum game where every player can win without anyone having to lose.

2024-09-01 06:32:24

- reply

Welcome!

2024-08-31 13:25:21

The family is the link between corruption of the whole society and the freerider mentality where people leave it to a minority to fight for freedom.
It goes like this:
"I know what my employer does is wrong, but I do what I'm being told because I have an obligation to feed my family.
"I cannot join the freedom fight, because I risk losing my job, which would be a violation of my duties to my family.
"Besides, I know other people fight even if I don't.
"Yes, I know it makes me a freerider...
"I don't want to talk about it...."
***A few months later***
"Why does the world come crashing down around me?"
***
"Why did I lose everything?"
***
"Have you seen my family?" https://image.nostr.build/08f366e42e6103ac2678eb843d02e6746e0a1aa190481685598a7b8e43ea10d6.jpg

2024-08-31 12:25:08

We have a part of the population called THE YOUTH who I suspect in the future will hate journalists, editors and politicians for what they did:
Stealing the kids' future.

2024-08-31 09:55:19

Action needed.
Watch this video about what and who is behind Brazil's criminalization of the X users (the US government and their NGO puppets, no surprise there.)
https://x.com/MikeBenzCyber/status/1829630737911595453?t=qgbWuRJd6HZRBUIPbc0qbw&s=19
The globalist political "elite" blob seems desperate.
Therefore, make sure to promote Nostr on X, so that people have an information and communication escape hatch, for instance when the EU ramps up its efforts to stop Elon.

2024-08-30 16:48:33

Norway's fertility rate dropped from 2,0 in 2009 to 1.4 children per woman by 2022, and the same in 2023.

2024-08-30 11:55:46

A note on taxation.
Historically, how much were slaves allowed to keep of the fruits of their labour?
https://image.nostr.build/e763f4309c88e17a7fa904b37ec3edd69cccdbdfaf838df3d4e3dee2cda4f99e.jpg
News came yesterday of an analysis of the average tax burden in Norway, including tax on income, wealth, VAT and more.
Excluding a few other taxes that we must pay, the answer was 67%.
I figure, if you include all of the special taxes and the 19 months of military conscription (which effectively is almost 100% tax), the result should be closer to 80%.
I'll link to it in a comment (it's in Norwegian).
To get a feeling of how that compares to traditional slavery I asked Grok a question and the answer was illuminating:
My question:
Approximately how big a share of the fruits of their labour have masters let slaves keep throughout history. Give 10 examples, beginning with ancient egypt and ending with something from the united states in the 19th century
Grok's answer
"Determining the exact share of the fruits of labor that slaves retained throughout history is challenging due to the variability in slave systems, the nature of records, and the differences in what was considered "fruits of labor" across different cultures and eras. However, based on historical practices and the information available up to 2024, here are approximate insights into how much slaves might have retained from their labor, focusing on examples from Ancient Egypt through to the 19th century United States:
Ancient Egypt: While slaves existed in Ancient Egypt, the concept of "wages" or retained labor fruits was not as straightforward as in later societies. Slaves could be given land, food, or other forms of compensation, but this was more about sustenance than profit-sharing. Some slaves, especially those with skills or in high demand, might have been allowed to keep a small portion of their earnings or goods, but this was likely minimal, perhaps around 5-10% in modern terms if we were to quantify it.
Classical Greece (Athens): Skilled slaves, like those in the Laurion silver mines or domestic slaves, could earn money through their skills. Some were allowed to keep a portion of their earnings, which might have been around 10-20% of their labor's value, especially if they were involved in commerce or skilled crafts.
Roman Empire: Roman slaves could buy their freedom or were sometimes granted freedom with a portion of their earnings retained. This might equate to around 15-25% of their labor's value, especially for those in urban settings or skilled trades.
Medieval Europe: Serfs, while not slaves in the classical sense, were bound to the land. They might retain around 30-40% of their produce or labor value, but this was more about survival than profit.
Islamic Golden Age (Abbasid Caliphate): Slaves, particularly those with skills or administrative roles, could sometimes retain a portion of their earnings, possibly around 20-30%, especially if they were involved in trade or crafts.
Medieval Islamic World (Mamluks in Egypt): Mamluk slaves, who were military slaves, were not typical in that they could rise to significant power. While not directly applicable to economic fruits, their eventual control over resources might be seen as retaining a significant share, though not in the initial stages of their service.
Renaissance Italy (Venice): Slaves in Venice, often domestic or involved in maritime activities, might retain very little, perhaps 5-10% of their labor's value, as their primary function was service rather than production for profit.
Colonial Latin America: In places like Brazil or the Caribbean, slaves might have been allowed to cultivate their plots or engage in petty trade. This could mean retaining around 10-20% of their labor's value, though this was often more about survival than wealth accumulation.
British Caribbean: Slaves in sugar plantations had harsh conditions with little to no share in the fruits of their labor. However, some could engage in small-scale farming or trade on Sundays, potentially retaining around 5-10% of their labor's value.
19th Century United States: In the U.S., slaves might have been allowed to keep small gardens or engage in minor trade, but their share of the actual labor fruits was minimal, often less than 5%. However, some slaves, especially in urban areas or those with skills like blacksmithing, could earn money on the side, which might be considered as retaining up to 10-15% of their labor's value if we include such earnings.
These percentages are highly speculative and based on general historical practices rather than precise data. The concept of "retaining fruits of labor" varies widely by the type of slavery, the economic system of the time, and the specific roles slaves performed. Moreover, these figures do not account for the inherent exploitation and the fact that slaves were not legally entitled to their labor's value in most systems."
End note from me:
It's not much that separates an average Norwegian tax payer and a slave in terms of how much we are allowed to keep.
Arguing about the difference is IMO largely arguing about semantics.
You may counter that it's more precise to call us serfs.
Whatever floats your boat, I say.
But it still begs the question?
When do the riots start?

2024-08-30 07:15:18

GM!
https://image.nostr.build/d075eb793850e8b25c74b670e4f077602dd4b12a1938ef312e46738e392e5132.jpg

2024-08-29 20:39:11

"Explanatory creativity."
I kinda like that expression.

2024-08-29 17:11:58

- reply

😁

2024-08-29 15:41:44

Meme me an answer:
What's a fair treatment of people who gaslight and smear?

2024-08-29 09:05:48

"Hate crime" is meaningless, ineffective and counterproductive, the "elite" doesn't use the reverse gear, so they'll move to "thought crime" which will have the same issues, and then in the end comes "clown crime" when people are jailed for making jokes about corrupt, stupid politicians.

2024-08-29 08:46:03

More good journalism from an actual journalist https://video.nostr.build/1e89822d5648c24b1ed1f42b9a44a1d29bf03e60698685b02cfe1c9a03c13fb1.mp4

2024-08-29 08:16:38

Wouldn't it be wonderful if we saw riots in the most lazy cantina in the world: LinkedIn?
Yeah, I know, I'm dreaming.
https://www.linkedin.com/posts/rune-%C3%B8stg%C3%A5rd-324b3010_gm-folks-isnt-now-the-perfect-time-to-activity-7234802936558551040-URy3?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_android

2024-08-29 07:49:02

"PANIC CONSPIRATION"
You read it first here.
It's what we see around us these days.
"Full gas, rip out the break pedal, nothing else matters than doubling down on what we do best"
What a fakin clown show.

2024-08-29 07:37:41

- reply

Not me

2024-08-29 06:37:18

"I asked the police if they are investigating the incitement written on the church wall “kill white people” as a hate crime, this is what they replied."
Rebecca Mistereggen, journalist at Document, posted yesterday on X.
https://video.nostr.build/495c821096e76989129b75ff01872c5364b8f4eefefeb17d78744e58fb8e656f.mp4
Finally some good journalism coming out of my country.

2024-08-29 05:43:28

- reply

Yup

2024-08-28 17:30:40

- reply

😁

2024-08-28 17:22:34

Topic: Bitcoin price discovery
More and more #bitcoin is taken off exchanges, but nonetheless the crab market continues to keep poking bitcoiners in the eye.
I asked Grok:
"If we ignore bitcoin futures trading, is it possible that trading of "paper bitcoin" on crypto exchanges has such volume that it affects the bitcoin spot price?"
Grok's conclusive remarks were:
"The sentiment from posts on X and broader market analysis suggests that while spot ETFs and direct ownership of Bitcoin are significant, the derivatives market's volume and its impact on price cannot be understated. This indicates that even without considering futures, the trading volume of what might be colloquially termed "paper Bitcoin" on crypto exchanges could indeed affect the Bitcoin spot price through mechanisms like sentiment, arbitrage, and leveraged trading. However, the exact extent of this influence would require detailed market data analysis beyond what's typically available in public discussions or general insights from X posts."
Comments?
Excluding futures, can trading of "paper bitcoin" negatively affect bitcoin price discovery in theory or practice?

2024-08-28 16:26:59

- reply

To my point about No 2:
Watch this
https://youtu.be/hO8MwBZl-Vc?si=2tNG5DNxlwPA5S-s

2024-08-28 12:06:38

No 1 is very brave when he stands up.
However...
https://image.nostr.build/666a0e1df9083fefc9e757a4b9dccfa0009ab53b768e4c831ce31a333b207663.jpg
It's No 2, "the copycat" - who by opting for action instead of passivity forces everyone else in the crowd to think that there are two options, action or passivity, and that each individual must take a stand - who is the deciding facto and in my eyes the real hero.
Don't let No 1 stand alone.
Salute him by copying him, and force everyone to think hard about their choice.

2024-08-27 21:22:23

- reply

Gleder meg til det!

2024-08-27 20:57:31

Foreløpig info om foredragsturné på Vestlandet:
Tirsdag 10.9: Bergen (LouLou)
Onsdag 11.9: Haugesund (Biblioteket)
Torsdag 12.9: Stavanger (Irishman)
Det skal handle om pengesystem, politikk og frihetskamp.
Kommer med mer detaljer etter hvert.
https://image.nostr.build/cd282759ac7fdf4199d9e4947d71ddd61d94aaa53dcdf34fd51fc4c47fd49a45.jpg

2024-08-27 11:29:36

- reply

Hayek 🧡

2024-08-27 09:29:58

I won't be surprised if massive Nostr growth triggers the next #Bitcoin #bullrun

2024-08-27 08:24:57

- reply

Definitely. Was on my way to work, but it was too beautiful now to leave. Sun, coffee, uplifting music in my ears, hacking the Matrix, just perfect.

2024-08-27 08:19:22

GM to all Nostrians!
https://image.nostr.build/57f746ad3f248e00cb4c7b25bd2e3fa91b058267e185918b8b4b11fd70dfd3c8.jpg

2024-08-27 07:31:45

Dear psychopats, sCiencE blew us
#Bitcoin
https://image.nostr.build/1c573f5938ab9fdb8144e725547258f5b840bd36be8c5a52e0269a2559c18871.jpg

2024-08-26 20:50:32

YUVAL HARARI'S FLAWED PRESENTATION OF THE HISTORY OF HUMANKIND
https://image.nostr.build/c91434b521fa2e4da3e17affade02542c163e94f3d4ff1821633a38d3a14418d.jpg
1. Introduction
In December 2023, Tucker Carlson and Dan Bongino discussed why Professor Yuval Harari and the World Economic Forum (WEF) pose a threat to our lives.
Klaus Schwab, who is the founder of WEF, seems to rely on some of Harari’s teaching when he formulates his policy recommendations to leaders around the world.
Harari knows a lot of historical facts, is good at storytelling and masters the art of rhetoric.
Commentators and academics therefore find it difficult to show exactly where Harari goes wrong in his analysis.
What I want to bring to everyone’s’ attention, is that Harari and Schwab base their policy recommendation on a narrative about the history of our civilization that simply isn’t correct.
It’s probably the repetition of this narrative that makes Schwab’s communication so effective when he talks to intellectuals, policymakers, journalists and leaders of giant corporations who firmly believe in “leadership” and the idea of technocratic global governance.
However, when we point out the flaws in Harari’s analysis of humankind and our history, it becomes a lot easier to shoot down his and Schwab’s ideas.
Therefore, I hope you will join me in this thread, as it in about ten minutes enables you to understand where Harari went so terribly wrong.
2. Harari’s background and some of his ideas:
Wikipedia gives us the following introduction to him:
«Yuval Noah Harari, born 1976 is an Israeli author, public intellectual, historian and professor in the Department of History at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. He is the author of the popular science bestsellers Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind (2014), Homo Deus: A Brief History of Tomorrow (2016), and 21 Lessons for the 21st Century (2018). His writings examine free will, consciousness, intelligence, happiness, and suffering.»
Harari, who is married to a man and describes himself as an atheist and a vegan, promotes such ideas as:
- people don’t have free will, and human rights are a fiction,
- we are witnessing a natural development of a technocratic two-tier society where a «useless class» of consumers is guided or ruled by an elite class of «human gods. »
In short, Harari suggests that what we use to refer to as the foundation of liberal society is imagination, while the development of an apartheid-like dystopia is natural.
3. Harari’s understanding of the history of civilization
Harari’s analysis of the history is affected by his lack of understanding of the service that money renders to humankind and how different monetary systems dictate the development of very different forms of society.
He writes in Sapiens that:
«Money is the most universal and most efficient system of mutual trust ever devised.»
This and other statements he has made about money tell us that he has understood that money is a cornerstone of our civilization, something which definitely is true.
From there on, it unfortunately goes all south for him.
Harari’s problem is that he doesn’t seem to understand that we get a very different society when people have monetary freedom (the right to use which money they like best, also sometimes inadequately referred to as «currency competition») compared to when a group of people has a monopoly in money production.
In the former, everyone must work to get money.
In the latter, a small elite can extract wealth from everyone else because they can produce money instead of working for it.
Harari, for his part, doesn’t make any such distinction at all.
4. Monetary freedom in a historical context
Monetary freedom has most likely been the dominant system throughout the more than 5000 years that we have had civilizations.
It’s the monopoly in money production that is the anomaly.
Here are some examples:
We had monetary freedom in Norway until 1050 AD.
The Dutch reintroduced it in the Netherlands after the rebellion in 1566 and they had it for about 150 years.
The Irish in practice held on to monetary freedom much longer, unclear how long, but it was all gone when the British crown finally managed to put Ireland under its thumb in the early 17th century.
The Americans established de facto monetary freedom in the US after the revolution in 1783, and it lasted until 1857.
And, finally, Argentina followed the same path as the US from the revolution in 1816 and kept it at least to 1880.
(It’s this system, that the new president of Argentina, Javier Milei, now wants to reestablish.)
5. Institutions in a society with monetary freedom
Societies with monetary freedom typically have no or very weak central governments.
Instead, families, relatives and clans have strong bonds.
Furthermore, private property is almost sacred, and one rarely sees large scale wars in this type of societies.
The reason is that without a monopoly in money creation it becomes difficult to set up an apparatus that can extract wealth from the people to finance this type of aggression.
However, the decentralized structure and a strong will to defend against intruders mean that they can be very capable of defending their freedom, as was the case in the region of Norway, where I live, until 1050 AD.
You can say that a society that has monetary freedom and little or no state primarily is rigged for defense and production, while a society with a monopoly in monetary production is rigged for expansionary war and destruction.
6. Why compound interest is of paramount importance
In order to understand why civilizations develop so differently with different monetary systems, one needs to understand the effect of compound interest.
A typical rate of monetary inflation (expansion of the money supply) in societies with monopolies in money production, has been 7-8% per year.
In a society where money makes up half of all economic transactions, an annual expansion of 7% means that the ones who control the monopoly can extract and take control of 7% of the society’s production each year.
Due to the effect of positive compound interest, constantly increasing the money supply by 7% each year can theoretically result in an accumulated wealth extraction that has doubled in as little as 10 years, tripled within 16 years and quadrupled in 20 years.
The rest of the society experiences the exact opposite, as people see that their money loses value at a negative compounding rate of 7% each year.
Therefore, those who are far away from the money spigot may have to double their productivity in 10 years, triple it in 16 years and quadruple it in 20 years if they want to preserve their share of wealth, their standard of living and keep their means of production, compared to a situation with no manipulation of the money supply.
This is of course nigh on impossible.
Therefore, establishing a monopoly in money production can easily transform a society from being fundamentally decentralized into becoming a two tier system in less than a generation.
It typically ends up with a small wealthy class of creditors with a lot of political power on one hand, and a large poor and indebted class of people with no or little political power on the other hand.
It all sounds so familiar, doesn’t it?
The combined effect of the compound positive interest rates for the «elite» and the compound negative interest rates for the rest explains how enormous effect a monopoly in money production has on society.
The gargantuan redistribution of wealth that takes place in such a society should be compared with what happens in a society without this system, where the distribution of wealth (and power) will be much more evenly spread.
This also helps explaining why families and kinship can remain a lot stronger in societies with monetary freedom.
Once a group of powerful men begins to fuel its influence with a monopoly in money production, the emerging state apparatus basically outcompetes the family and the clan as social institutions.
7. Why countries with monetary freedom become powerful magnets
When you set up a system with monetary freedom in one country, it quickly attracts talent and capital from countries with monopolies in money production.
It’s almost as if monetary freedom is a nuclear-powered magnet.
The explanation for this effect is that it’s much more profitable to work and invest in a country with money that doesn’t steal from you.
Therefore, people “vote” with their feet and their savings.
Harari doesn’t seem to be sufficiently aware of these mechanisms.
For instance, in Sapiens, he explains the Golden Age of the Netherlands with a boom in bank credit.
The reality, however, is that it was monetary freedom, sound money and full reserve banking that served as the foundation for the fantastic growth that the Dutch experienced in the 16th and 17th Century.
Because the other countries had kings and emperors who extracted wealth from their citizens via aggressive monetary policies, the very opposite system in the Netherlands caused it to attract capital and talent from the other countries at an extreme pace.
Harari also fails to recognize that it was the same mechanisms that played out after the American and Argentinian revolutions.
European rulers stuck with their monopolies in money production and continued to pillage their underlings.
As a result, Europe literally became drained of talent and capital that fled to America.
8. Conclusion
Harari’s Sapiens is supposed to be an exposition of the history of humankind.
However, due to the defects that I have shed light on above, the book cannot at all serve this purpose.
Perhaps Harari doesn’t understand it himself, but his narrative of humankind and the history of civilization draws squarely on the type of society we get when a ruling class is allowed to have a monopoly in money creation.
But as you now realize, this version of civilization is neither natural, nor has it been the dominant way of how we organize our activities.
On the contrary, the normal and, above all, much more human situation has been a civilization with monetary freedom, a significantly smaller state apparatus and a decentralized society where strong institutions such as family, kinship and respect of private property keep it all together.
People should therefore be very skeptical to Harari’s and Schwab’s visions for humankind and how we should organize us in the future.
***
Thank you for reading.
If you want to join forces in the battle of ideas, I would appreciate it if you follow me, like and share this note.
You may also want to go to our web page at UNDOQO dot com and check out UNBAR, where I discuss Harari's understanding of money in more detail, with a focus on the relationship between the monetary system and globalization.
UNBAR is amazingly illustrated by designer viz Mattis Storhaug, and it aims to open up the eyes of people from all walks of life, especially those who are critical to globalization but don't understand the importance of monetary policy.

2024-08-26 19:11:28

Short note on intellectual property (IP) policy:
Up until the 20th century, the U.S. government had lax enforcement of IP, particularly concerning foreign creators.
The legal framework allowed for the widespread piracy of foreign works, as the 1790 Copyright Act explicitly excluded protections for non-US authors.
This led to rampant appropriation of foreign designs and publications, with little consequence for infringers, as the government prioritized domestic interests over foreign IP rights.
Officials believed that strong IP protections would mainly benefit foreign creators, raising costs for domestic consumers and hindering local innovation.
The prevailing view was that the U.S. economy needed to develop its own capabilities through imitation before it could afford to protect foreign IP rights.
This perspective was influenced by a "frontier culture" that prioritized individualism and innovation over strict adherence to IP laws.
Calls for better protection from figures like Charles Dickens largely went unheeded, reflecting a broader culture of IP violation during this period.
The US changed its position dramatically in the 20th century, when itself became the strongest economic nation in the world.
While many developing nations, including India, Brazil, Argentina, and Mexico, resisted stringent IP standards, and argued IP favored developed countries at the expense developing countries, Uncle Sam, the former pirate protector, became the world's most aggressive enforcer of IP, pressuring developing countries with the use of trade sanctions.

2024-08-26 12:36:43

Whether official or unofficial, political motives don't matter, only results matter.
The short version of the results of politics:
1. The one percent wealthiest own almost half of the global wealth
2. Most of the rest the state takes
3. In return they make people's lives miserable
#RebelUp
https://image.nostr.build/6aa8f0c877cc962cb67e2fe84aa065eef31d4b7f888b7d8e155d709ddb4e982e.jpg

2024-08-26 09:28:45

In view of the French police arresting Telegram CEO Pavel Durov, I thought it might be interesting for you to read this part of my conversation with Perplexity AI on cencorship and monopolization attempts after the invention of the printing press.
Me
I guess it didn't take much time after Gutenberg launched the printing press in 1440 before rulers understood that they had to censor, monopolize or give privileges related to the use of the printing press and distribution of printed texts.
Answer
The introduction of the printing press by Johannes Gutenberg around 1440 indeed led to significant reactions from rulers and authorities across Europe and beyond, primarily due to its potential to disseminate information widely, which could challenge established powers, religious doctrines, and societal norms.
Here's how rulers and authorities responded:
Censorship:
One of the immediate responses was censorship.
Authorities, particularly religious ones, were concerned about the spread of heretical or subversive ideas.
For instance, the Catholic Church, during the Counter-Reformation, established the Index Librorum Prohibitorum (Index of Prohibited Books) in 1559, which listed books that Catholics were forbidden to read or possess due to their content being deemed heretical or contrary to Church doctrine.
This was an attempt to control the spread of Protestant ideas and other unwanted knowledge.
Monopolization and Privileges:
Rulers also sought to control the printing press through monopolies or by granting privileges.
In Venice, for example, the government issued printing privileges to specific printers, giving them exclusive rights to print certain texts.
This not only controlled what was printed but also who could print, effectively creating a form of monopoly.
These privileges were often granted in exchange for loyalty or financial benefits to the state.
Regulation and Licensing:
Beyond outright censorship, many states implemented systems of licensing where printers had to obtain permission to operate or to print specific works.
This allowed authorities to keep tabs on what was being produced and distributed.
In England, for instance, the Crown established the Stationers' Company in 1557, which had the power to regulate printing, including the right to search for and seize illicit presses.
Ottoman Empire's Response: Interestingly, the Ottoman Empire initially resisted the adoption of the printing press, fearing it would lead to the spread of ideas that could challenge Islamic orthodoxy or Ottoman rule.
Printing in Turkish with movable type was only allowed in 1727, significantly later than in Europe, which some historians argue contributed to the Empire's relative decline in intellectual and technological advancements.
Public Burning of Books:
In some instances, particularly during periods of religious fervor or political upheaval, books deemed heretical or seditious were publicly burned.
This was not just censorship but also a public spectacle meant to deter others from similar activities.
Control Over Content:
Beyond outright banning, there was a push to control content through pre-publication censorship.
Manuscripts had to be reviewed by ecclesiastical or secular authorities before they could be printed, ensuring that only approved ideas reached the public.
The response to the printing press was multifaceted, reflecting a broader anxiety about the loss of control over information.
While some rulers saw the economic and cultural benefits of printing, leading to a more nuanced approach of regulation rather than outright suppression, others viewed it as a direct threat to their authority.
This tension between control and the free flow of information has been a recurring theme throughout history, with the printing press as one of the earliest technologies to bring this conflict to the forefront.

2024-08-25 22:37:55

Macron's wet dream:
Arresting Poseidon for not stopping smugglers.
https://image.nostr.build/1108e30d666e056a3e59a14dc9dd4ccb7f971389d658e2fe19655e278518241d.jpg

2024-08-25 21:59:40

- reply

Elon enables deamplifying of accounts without explaining or being public about it. I can't verify his intentions, motives, game plan, etc, and don't trust him. The game itself is hard to understand.

2024-08-25 21:42:59

Check or charade?
https://image.nostr.build/c90ab03d8fdf562608292c47cac297007ee38bed7a8e6269493a02c4f87d3622.jpg

2024-08-25 16:51:37

Is it possible that Elon's algos try to NPCize us on X?
Has he given in to political pressure?
I'm being heavily deamped at the moment, no doubt about it.
Nostr seems to be the future

2024-08-22 22:07:18

Bitcoiners, check this out:
https://image.nostr.build/50878191845d120dccb9b17c07ecb978e8b702ab5f56ca1350d028ed46f050fb.jpg
***
INT stands for "introvert," "intuitive," and "thinking."
Only 5.4% of the general population belong to these two types, but they make up over half of bitcoiners.
Architects, strategists, and inventors with an insatiable thirst for knowledge.
SFJ stands for "sensing," "feeling," and "judging."
These two types make up 25% of the general population, and almost none of them are bitcoiners.
They are helpful, self-sacrificing protectors with great care.
Probably a bit of pseudoscience, but fun nonetheless.
***
(Machine translation of Lektor Thaulow's post below, h/t to you, hope you join us here on Nostr soon)
#Bitcoin

2024-08-21 21:51:41

- reply

Thx for the feedback (I mean it)

2024-08-20 19:48:17

- reply

Great, thx for sharing!

2024-08-20 19:47:04

- reply

No wonder why our political class fears it

2024-08-20 19:30:04

- reply

If you ask for instance Perplexity.ai - which I used - pls share it with us.

2024-08-20 19:08:48

Do you know Niccolo Machiavelli?
You've probably heard about his book "The Prince."
https://image.nostr.build/a94f185978f1eba31935c7b4bd39d36485c191b1ad5c214e1b0bcd30b04a7b77.jpg
But you likely didn't read it.
Because you were discusted by the idea of him writing a manual for tyrants, am I not correct?
That's at least why I didn't read it.
Today I learned that there is "strong evidence" indicating that Niccolo wrote it to get his old job back.
Well, that makes exactly zero sense to me.
When the Medicis reclaimed their power in 1512 he had been a long-time civil servant of the City of Florence.
The Medicis suspected him of conspiracy, imprisoned and tortured him, before they sent him into exile.
In Il Principe he wrote a value-free description of how a wise prince rules his people.
It was based on first-hand observations of the rulers of Florence and other states as well as on indepth inspection of historical accounts.
IMO the book puts at full display the way rulers treat us underlings, for everyone to see.
Niccolo initially dedicated the book to Giuliano de' Medici, Lorenzo's uncle.
After Giuliano's death in 1516, he rededicated it to Lorenzo di Piero de' Medici.
He supposedly wrote "The Prince" as a "token of devotion" to the Medici family.
Niccolo made efforts to have the Medici family see and read "The Prince," but there's no clear evidence that they did so during his lifetime.
If he did this to receive employment at the House of Medicis he must have been a complete moron.
But his writings don't indicate that he was.
Far from it.
If the Medicis did read Il Principe they probably hated him even more than they had done before.
Because publishing it could have been a disaster for them.
The book first became available five years after Niccolo passed away.
I gave AI two tasks today, to tell me about his teaching of using 1) deception and 2) religion as political instruments.
Below you can read the answers.
After you have read them you may ask yourself if Machiavelli's recipes makes sense when you try to wrap your head around today's politics in your beloved representative democracies.
Enjoy!
1) Give me a brief summary about what Machiavelli says about why and how a ruler should deceive his people.
AI says:
Machiavelli argues that a ruler should be willing to deceive his people when necessary to maintain power and achieve his goals.
He believes it is better for a prince to be feared than loved, as fear is more reliable.
Machiavelli advises rulers to cultivate an appearance of virtue and morality, while being prepared to act against those virtues when required.
He states that "people are so simple, and so subject to present necessities, that anyone who seeks to deceive will always find someone who will allow himself to be deceived".
According to Machiavelli, rulers should use deception strategically to:
• Maintain their authority and power
• Manipulate public perception
• Outmaneuver rivals and enemies
• Achieve political objectives
However, he cautions that a ruler must be careful not to be hated, as this could lead to rebellion.
The key is to use deception judiciously while maintaining an outward appearance of virtue and strength
2) Give me a brief summary about what Machiavelli says about why and how a ruler should use religion in his politics.
AI says:
Machiavelli viewed religion primarily as a practical tool for rulers to maintain power and control over their subjects.
Here's a brief summary of his key points:
• Religion as a unifying force: Machiavelli believed religion could be used to unite people and garner support for the ruler.
• Maintaining stability: Religious traditions provide a sense of predictability and control, helping to keep society stable.
• Controlling the populace: By respecting and protecting religious practices, rulers can instill fear of disobedience and promise rewards in the afterlife for compliance.
• Appearance of piety: Machiavelli advised rulers to appear religious and virtuous outwardly, even if they weren't genuinely devout.
• Legitimizing authority: Religion could be used to make a ruler's actions seem divinely sanctioned, even if they were harsh or unjust.
• Spectacle and ritual: Religious ceremonies and displays could be used to reinforce the ruler's power and intimidate potential dissenters.
• Instilling virtues: Machiavelli saw religion as a means to cultivate desirable qualities in citizens.
In essence, Machiavelli advocated for a pragmatic approach to religion in politics, viewing it as a powerful tool for maintaining authority rather than a moral imperative.
If you want to join my quest for answers, feel free to hit the like, share and follow buttons.

2024-08-17 18:31:00

- reply

Well put.
What can reignite the people's interest in ideas?

2024-08-17 18:19:35

- reply

It's a battle of ideas, and people seem to have forgot what ideas are and how valuable the best ideas are.

2024-08-15 21:10:24

It's impossible for me to comprehend how people who read Marxist litterature end up being Marxists.

2024-08-15 12:49:06

Most underrated book
https://image.nostr.build/e9ceeb99298f2f4b7683cf28e860eb5f8c2218e8e16fab1a584e04b63735df45.jpg

2024-08-15 10:01:44

- reply

Thx
I like it when you now begin to focus more on ideas, and when you urge people to engage.
Too many believe it's enough to stack sats, they think it makes them "freedom fighters"

2024-08-14 12:07:55

Dear friends,
If you concentrate more on fighting the Battle of Ideas, and less on fighting the Battle of Complaints,
victory comes closer.
❤️

2024-08-13 15:25:35

The best vaccine
against understanding
Bitcoin
is going
all in on a
Shitcoin

2024-08-11 09:57:38

https://image.nostr.build/65a8a86f946c5b7ed8e0f848401e6ac726a2a75b46865b55a7f498657fd30627.jpg

2024-08-02 10:26:05

- reply

And Trump/Kennedy understanding better the Bitcoin / dollar relationship

2024-08-02 10:24:46

- reply

Yes, having lost the Ukraine war

2024-08-02 09:03:57

- reply

I don't think the US wants wars that it has to finance itself

2024-08-02 08:45:14

US debt has come a major break on further aggession:
- US economics sanction war
- US financed military war
may trigger USD hyperinflation, which is a much too chaotic situation for the ruling elite, I don't think they will risk it.
Their option is to make other countries fight military and economic wars, as this will push capital and talent towards the US, especilly if the US embraces #Bitcoin while other nation's leaders continue to hate Bitcoin.
That's the play, dear friends.
The US is still the most important tool in the tool box that the super wealthy have.
"Conspiracy theorist!" you shout?
Well, if so, explain to me how the heck one per cent of the population ended up owning half of the world's wealth, and how the American one-percenters increased their wealth by 40% in just two years, 2020-2022, while the rest were slayed economically during and immediately after?
Not an accident, that's my view.
Planned?
Unsure.
More likely a natural outcome of modern history's worshiping of the God known as centralization.

2024-07-31 13:38:38

- reply

🙋‍♂️

2024-07-30 22:17:49

- reply

Nei, gjør ikke det

2024-07-30 18:35:14

Jeg holder foredrag i Haugesund onsdag 11. september. Hvis noen i Bergen- og Stavanger-området ønsker å gjøre noe sammen med meg før eller etter det så ta gjerne kontakt.

2024-07-29 08:31:41

- reply

Reflecting over the fact that this ☝️ also applies to my time on earth made me restless and anxious.
I'll soon turn fifty-fucking-two years, and high time preference has been my middle name.
Fuck.

2024-07-29 08:03:40

The fiat mind desperately looks for an effective vaccine against the idea of absolute scarcity.
#Bitcoin

2024-07-28 22:13:47

- reply

The government secures the banks' income via taxation and socializes banks' losses. Nice marriage.

2024-07-28 21:03:18

- reply

Answer:
The question is wrong. The government is just a facilitator. The major banks are the ones printing money, backed by the central bank acting as cartel coordinator.

2024-07-27 12:36:33

- reply

Thx. She can come back when she wants ❤️

2024-07-27 11:58:42

https://image.nostr.build/51d6eb9bf9748ccb9d6489312b6bab9239a625ba6fbfd6a73877b7dff5ca8ccd.jpg
The remnants’ revenge
- A pamphlet fuelled by hope
Trust
Scandinavia and in particular Norway is known as having a people that place a lot of trust in each other.
Many call this a valuable social capital.
Today I call it a liability.
Few ask where the trust come from and to whom trust was awarded.
Trust doesn’t appear by itself and it’s not something you own.
On the contrary, trust is something you have to earn and which you are bound to lose if you do the wrong thing.
It has been suggested that our harsh Nordic climate forced us to trust each other as this was necessary in order to survive.
This is in my opinion a crude and unsatisfactory explanation.
We know for sure that our tradition of trust predates the formation of the state.
And when we study history we see that the people, for good reason, had a fundamental distrust in people with power.
I’ve many times written about my ancestors in Trøndelag, the middle part of Norway, who had a legal obligation to kill any king who placed himself above the law.
This is the perfect example of distrusting the politicians as a matter of principle.
The Trønders probably knew that they would lose their freedom if they gave an ambitious king as much as an inch.
Instead these «resistance provisions,» as they were called, meant that the people built trust in each other, because those who abstained from hunting down the tyrant king would lose their friends and with that their security too.
“Join the fight against the state and we trust you. Be a free rider and we distrust you and despise you.”
I don’t know who came up with the idea that we ought to trust institutions such as the state or individuals such as politicians.
Those who succeeded with sowing the seeds of this idea in my culture must have had a hell of a marketing budget.
But the reality seems to be that someone where able to pull off this incredible feat – to make people start distrusting each other and instead trusting, or more precisely worshiping the state.
A Jens we better listen to
One of the best authors we’ve had in Norway, Jens Bjørnebo (1920 -1976), once said in a TV interview that:
“Power should be accompanied by chronic distrust.”
Bjørneboe was deeply sceptical to the Norwegian state’s accumulation of and use of power.
He was highly cherished by the people.
This included the gay community, which included Jens himself.
Sadly, no Norwegian author has been able to climb up on the throne that he sat on, being the uncontested Norwegian champion of anarchism.
Finally, some good news
All hope isn’t lost though.
We are still some remnants who are vocal about the ideas of individual liberty in this country.
And there are signs that gives us reason to cling on to our optimism.
The OECD recently published a survey on trust in government.
Reading that the share of Norwegian citizens who greatly trust the government dropped by 16 percentage points (64 to 48%) from 2021 to 2023 was highly satisfactory.
It might indicate that we see an awakening in my country.
When you read below what has been going on in Norway since World War II, you see my point about trust being a liability more clearly.
And the rapid decline in the trust in the government probably means that people begin to understand that the politicians gravely have abused what the people have given them.
FDR
Franklin D. Roosevelt, famous for his New Deal program, is probably the most socialist president that the US has ever had.
In the middle of WWII, on 16 September 1942, he gave a famous speech as he handed over the Royal Navy ship HNoMS King Haakon VII at the Washington Navy Yard.
Roosevelt said:
"If there is anyone who still wonders why this war is being fought, let him look to Norway. If there is anyone who has any delusions that this war could have been averted, let him look to Norway; and if there is anyone who doubts the democratic will to win, again I say, let him look to Norway."
Considering how ill prepared the Norwegian government was when Germany invaded us on 9 April 1940 as well as the widespread treason among highly ranked Norwegian officers, it can be discussed how honest the final part of the citation above was.
But Roosevelt was a trained liar, like most politicians, so what can you expect?
However, the problem with his speech was something else entirely, as «Look to Norway» would become a symbol that power-hungry Norwegians embraced as their own.
Egos on a cocktail of steroids and meth
Roosevelt’s punchy proclamation was turned into a slogan that to this day continues to fuel the hubris of Norwegian bureaucrats, politicians and hare-brained citizens.
This has since long become their mentality:
"Look to Norway. We have the best 'model'. We are a small nation, but learn from us and let us save the world."
Foreigners of course laugh at our pretentious Norwegian government f***ups who travel the world and meet with people with real power.
Study what such creepy career politicians as our former prime minister Jens Stoltenberg (current gen sec of Nato, lapdog of the American deep state) and today’s foreign minister Espen Barth Eide have said and done over the years, and you soon see my point.
Postwar politics in Norway
Let’s take a look at what has happened in Norway since Roosewelt gave his speech:
In 1945 the allies won the war.
The Norwegian people, on the other hand, lost the peace.
With the support from the US, our new government kept many of the intrusive measures that the Nazis had installed during their five years of occupation of Norway.
Price controls, rationing, real estate zoning, central planning of medicine and education, harassment of the Sami people, sterilization of the Romanis, government appointed statisticians running the economy - you name it.
It was the whole shebang of socialist policies.
The government didn't just keep the Nazis’ road map, they perfected it.
A crazy health tsar
It's noteworthy that they installed Karl Evang as director of the national directorate of health.
He was deep into eugenics, promoted the use of contraceptives heavily and became one of the founders of the World Health Organization.
Evang once wrote:
"The idea of limiting the number of people with weak genes is a perfectly rational thought that always has been in accordance with socialism. In the socialist planned community, this will be a natural part of preventive health work."
He kept his position until 1972, the year I was born.
If Evang had known back then what I was about to become, he would probably have given my parents the Romani treatment.
For good measure, our government appointed his brother, Vilhelm, as head of the intelligence service.
I guess they were both cut out to do the work necessary to make the dream of a socialist Norway come true.
When the schools and media still to this day refer to the socialist policies of the post-war period as «the rebuilding of Norway» you begin to see the level of gaslighting we’ve been exposed to.
Oil riches
The new ruling class set out to capitalize as much as possible on their power grab, and when oil reserves were discovered in the North Sea, the state's revenue and influence on people's lives grew enormously.
Most of the oil revenue is being pumped into what has become the world’s largest sovereign wealth fund.
As with our culture of high trust, everyone sees this fund, which is supposed to finance the government’s future pension obligations, as an important stock of public capital.
I, on the other hand, see the fund squarely as a liability.
Not only does it create perverse incentives for our politicians, see comments below.
In addition, it’s managed by billionaire Nicolai Tangen, who publicly has supported 100% inheritance tax.
More importantly, it makes the Norwegian state a perpetually growing attack vector.
The parasitic elite in Russia, the EU and the US probably lick their lips when they hear people speak about this fund.
I’ve since long argued that it should be divvied up and handed over to the citizens of Norway.
The result
Today we pay the highest taxes and have the highest debt to household income ratio in the whole world.
Due to the fatal EEA agreement of 1992, championed by “the mother of our nation” Gro Harlem Brundtland, former prime minister of Norway and director general of WHO, as well as her protégé Jens Stoltenberg, Norway is bound by a steady stream of EU clown world legislation, but we don't have any voting rights in Brussels and Strasbourg.
As NATO member we bomb cities with dark-skinned people in the Middle East and Africa whenever the US military-industrial complex wants us to.
We still have our own currency, the Norwegian krone, but its value has tanked.
We now pay about 100% more for the dollar and 50% more for the euro compared to 2008.
Once again, we see public capital being transformed into a liability.
Even economics professor Espen Gaarder Haug, a former golden boy on Wall Street, has joined our rank of rebels and calls the krone a shitcoin.
The "experts” – read; rent seeking bank economists – are already whispering about adopting the euro.
Apart from the NOK that our politicians don't give AF about, my country has in practice totally lost its sovereignty.
How to corrupt a whole nation
Our parasitic class has introduced a complex scheme of redistribution of economic resources, based on taxation, oil revenues, bread and circus.
It's called «the welfare system.»
In reality it's a corruption system that doles out confiscated shitcoins to citizens and syndicates.
This corruption system has moulded the people into becoming selfish subjects who fight tooth and nail to be the government’s darling rent seekers, while they fear and loath change and independent thinking.
The politicians happily corrupt themselves with throwing a non-stop party financed by a combination of taxes and income from the oil-pumped national pension fund.
The so-called “budgetary rule” says they can spend 3% of the pension fund every year.
Because the fund is obliged to invest all of its capital abroad, the rule means that the politicians have an even stronger incentive to debase our currency, as this gives them more to spend.
As a result, the government spends about two-thirds of mainland GDP.
Our private sector has become a playground for stupid masochists like myself.
What we see is a bunch of rats who plunder the sinking ship.
Emigration spike
Rich Norwegians say they are sick and tired of watching Norway’s downfall.
Therefore they pack the proceeds of their successful rent seeking activity in the rucksack, jump in the life rafts and set course for Switzerland.
Even Polish expats have begun returning to their homeland.
Young Norwegians increasingly see no future here, and the most talented flee to wherever they can find freedom.
Immigration floodwave
I am not against immigration.
From 1836 to 1915, some 750,000 Norwegians fled to the escape hatch called North America.
Without this option, they would have been trapped here in Norway, with much fewer options to seek happiness.
They relocated from a continent that rewarded corruption and nepotism to a continent that rewarded meritocracy.
Today this script has almost flipped on its head.
We have a grave problem with immigration in Norway now, as hundreds of thousands of immigrants from countries that has been destroyed by NATO bombs come here to suck milk from our generous welfare program.
Many of them turn into passive robots who just vote for more benefits.
Meaning, they integrate extremely well.
A minority of our new compatriots struggle with adapting, as they instead resort to pushing up our rape, armed robbery and murder statistics.
Sweden paved the way, by creating war zones dominated by criminal gangs from foreign countries.
But look to Norway, because soon we will outperform our neighbours.
How would Karl Evang have evaluated the outcome of his gang’s project?
In just 15 years, our birth rates have dropped like a stone, from 2.0 to 1.4 per woman.
The Norwegian version of Anthony Fauci would probably have seen this as a tremendous feat and punched his chest while he said with pride – “Look to Norway.”
The question is how he would have perceived the massive import of non-Aryan people.
Because immigration significantly outstrips emigration and outweighs the declining baby production, our public bureau of statistics estimates that the population grows from 5.4 million today to 6 million in 2050.
Considering that birth rates drop like a stone, the bureau’s numbers indicate a complete transformation of our society.
Being “Norwegian” soon becomes a nonsensical term.
Was this part of Karl Evang’s dream?
Or did he perhaps envision to on-board himself, Vilhelm and their friends on “Karl’s arch” and paddle to Atlantis?
The transformation
In my 51 years of having walked this earth, Norway has been transformed from being a relatively free society when I grew up in the 1970s and 1980s into becoming a dreadful socialist experiment, dressed up in drag queen costumes as some sort of “a modern democracy that embraces diversity”
In essence, a globalist form of woke socialism has taken over.
The proper description of this transformation is “frighteningly rapid and abhorrently ugly.”
The belief system
Yet, the biggest tragedy is that so many of my compatriots believe they are free.
Imagine that!
They still believe they are free men and women!
Or whatever they define themselves as, I can’t keep up with the multitude of pronounces they oblige us to use.
Without a doubt, they have become slaves to three masters, the state, the bank and their own brainwashed ego.
I don't accept it
The political class is 100% responsible for our tragedy.
But we, the people, are to blame for letting them do this to us.
We slept while the busy bees worked overtime to tear down our society.
We must repent, update our software, reject any attempt at creating new divides, find common ground, rediscover the value of cooperation against power-mongers and fight this evil before it’s too late.
Our kids should leave
I've told my daughter to go abroad.
She doesn’t have any responsibility for what we have let the ruling class do to our country.
Our kids should hand over to my generation the task of cleaning up this mess.
She understands how serious the situation is, and that picking up the bill the older generations try to send to her isn’t an option.
Therefore, next year she leaves, 19 years old.
I hope she finds happiness.
And I hope her generation has at least twice as many babies as my generation had.
That would be the most beautiful revenge imaginable.
I see hope
The OECD survey on trust in the government is a catastrophe for the political class, but welcome news for the rest of us.
Who knows, with this speedy drop in trust the people of Norway might soon embrace my #RebelUp slogan and wave goodbye to experimenting with the social fabric.
Returning to our roots, where we despise ambitious people who seek power, is a much better option.
I solemnly pledge
In recognition of the fact that it is my daughter's generation who owns the future and that all of them have a fundamental right to freedom - I'll make the following vow:
I will continue to fight this battle of ideas against the parasitic class.
I will do what I can to cure my people of the socialist/globalist/woke brain virus which they unleashed upon us.
I will do everything in my power to restore among my people the spirit our ancestors used to have a long time ago.
And if many fight for the same cause and we succeed, I hope our kids and grandkids come back some day in the future and visit us.
Because Norway is a fantastically beautiful country.
And it belongs to us – the Norwegians.
Outro
Let me finish by recycling some of Roosevelt's own words:
If there is anyone who still wonders why this war is being fought, let him look to Norway.
If there is anyone who has any delusions that this war could have been averted, let him look to Norway.
And if there is anyone who doubts the remnants' will to win this battle of ideas, let him look to Norway.
---
If you liked this pamphlet, both the algorithms and I appreciate that you hit the like and follow buttons and redistribute it in any way you wish.
Make sure to include the whole text and credit the rebel who wrote it, so that we can avoid any misunderstanding about my intentions or who’s to blame for the ensuing rage it might provoke.
All the best,
Rune Østgård

2024-07-26 16:55:10

The state is a religion who's time has expired.

2024-07-26 05:32:40

- reply

I don't understand your position. Creating negative events and news that make ordinary people abstain from buying bitcoin reduces the demand and therefore alse hampers the price increase compared to if ordinary people continued to buy. That other goverments/institutions become buyers isn't imo relevant. They will become buyers anyway, and they would probably also buy more was it not for negative events

2024-07-25 15:42:32

- reply

Crisis would cause less demand, lower price

2024-07-25 11:32:27

- reply

They look at the big picture. Reducing demand reduces price increases reduces price spikes reduces signal to people that they should buy more

2024-07-24 14:22:31

- reply

Many options. Force someone to sell (Germany), financial market crash, war, virus, emergency measures, cause fair and uncertainty, gaslighting

2024-07-24 07:45:20

https://image.nostr.build/0a26b723108aee36eb85c95a9314cd3ea2e5c10eb83498a1d76c32e39394e32a.jpg

2024-07-24 07:16:33

Theory:
Priority No. 1 for the parasitical class is now to control as much #bitcoin as possible.
They will do a lot of harmful things to suppress the bitcoin price while they are still in control, especially before Trump becomes president again, in order to be able to buy at the lowest possible price.
If I'm right, the bitcoin price continues to develop more sideways than upwards in the coming months.
What do you think?

2024-07-23 14:57:37

If Trump goes all-out with his tariff scheme, he kicks off a trade war that takes the dollar into its terminal phase faster than he can say "I took a bullet for democracy."

2024-07-22 14:24:35

Finally, a Norwegian professor in economics has accepted to debate me on monetary policy, half a year after I posted an open challenge on X. We will do it in Oslo this autumn, and it will be broadcasted on a podcast afterwards. I'll get back to you with more info later. https://image.nostr.build/763aa3e6a381475d333b715838f7fcdb07fe80ad2e5f96234185ae23a5233118.jpg

2024-07-21 16:23:23

- reply

❤️

2024-07-21 09:02:32

Because there are no constants in the field of human action, the equation of mathematical catallactics [the analysis of actions which are conducted on the basis of monetary calculation] cannot be made to serve practical problems [in the social sciences] in the same way the equations of mechanics solve problems through the use of data and constants that have ascertained empirically [in the natural sciences].
Ludwig von Mieses, Notes and Recollections, p. 58 [my insertions]
https://image.nostr.build/78ea07b4ad2f425cb86914ca3d635c8296de75fd899ccfa070420a30cb914aec.jpg

2024-07-21 08:52:26

- reply

Just out of curiousity, and for clarification - I haven't spent 20 years working on enlightening the public, as I had a break of about 11 years (2010-2021,) when did you become aware of my writings?

2024-07-21 07:34:58

How important is the book Socialism by
Ludwig von Mises?
Ever since he published it in 1922, proponents of socialism solely had to rely on nurturing the masses' resent, envy and hate, as his masterpiece obliterated any hope of making a scientific argument in favor of the socialist way of organizing civil society.
https://image.nostr.build/b6a62687e6873fed848cee4cfd43b597e662dfb9b94c08b22ee32fd26b39f3d0.jpg

2024-07-20 23:14:14

- reply

Great, thx!

2024-07-20 22:52:21

Monetary policy and its effect on distribution of wealth and power.
If you want to understand the policy of inflation, which only can result from someone having a monopoly on production of money, you must understand compound interest, both negative and positive compound interest.
Below I give you an example that makes you realize in no time how pronounced the effect is for the ruling class that understands and enjoys the monopoly vs. the rest of the society, us mere subjects, who are largely ignorant to the effect of the policy, but who pay the price for it.
Here we go:
Imagine that we have a nation called Clownesia, and that Mr. Pennywise has succeeded in becoming the nation's tyrannical ruler.
He has monopolized the production of money and declared the following:
1. Everyone must accept Clown Dollars (CDs) as payment (legal tender)
2. All taxes must be paid with CD
3. The total stock of CD shall increase at an average rate of 7% per year
4. Only Pennywise is allowed to own gold
5. Pennywise has the right to be the first user of the newly issued money
Rule No. 1 and 2 are in effect in almost all nation states today.
Rule No. 3 is the same as a typical rate of expansion of the stock of money in a western country today, for instance in Norway and USA in the 20 year period 2002-2022.
Rule No. 4 is the same as Executive Order 6102, signed on April 5, 1933, by US President Franklin D. Roosevelt, which forbid private ownership of gold.
Rule No. 5 is different from traditional monetary policy, where our governments in their wisdom have let private banks have the privilege of being the producers and first users of money.
In practical terms the difference is small, because banks and governments have probably been bedmates since long before the governments awarded them this profitable monopoly.
Now let's say that Pennywise today shares the title "richest man in Clownesia" with one of his subjects, let's call him Blow Jiden.
Both of them own a fortune estimated at 1 trillion CD, which coincidentally equals the total money supply today in Clownesia.
Pennywise hates Jiden, especially because the latter earned much of his fortune when he was president of Clownesia (before Pennywise came to power) due to selling top secret information to foreign governments.
Jiden unfortunately for him now suffers from dementia, and has forgotten how inflation works.
As a consequence, he has parked all of his wealth in a checking account that yields zero interest.
Pennywise, who's only shortcoming is being extremely evil and who doesn't at all suffer from cognitive issues, keeps all of his wealth, as well as the proceeds he gets from issuing more CD, in solid gold.
(He has read economic history, and knows that gold for thousands of years has kept a stable value.)
Now, here comes the question I want you to ponder:
How fast will Pennywise's wealth outpace Jiden's wealth?
I gave you a hint when I previously mentioned that you must understand the effect of compound interest if you want to understand the effect of monetary policy.
At the rate of 7% increase of the money supply, Pennywise doubles the money supply in about 10 years.
Thererefore he also doubles his wealth.
(You can google "The Rule of 72" if you want to check my math.
This rule is an easy way to calculate how long it's going to take for your money to double.)
As you understand, Pennywise enjoys the benefit of POSITIVE compound interest.
But what about poor demented Jiden?
He sees his wealth being cut by 50% in this 10 year timeframe.
The reason is that the doubling of the money supply cuts the value of each CD he owns in half.
(Again, you can use The Rule of 72 if you want to check my calculation.)
This is the same effect that you get when you double the amount of water you mix into your lemonade.
Jiden's wealth loses value due the effect of NEGATIVE compound interest.
However, my precise question was:
"How fast will Pennywise's wealth outpace Jiden's wealth?"
And the answer, since over the course of 10 years the former doubles his wealth while the latter's wealth is cut in half, the pace is 4:1 in 10 years.
After 20 years, Pennywise's wealth is 8 times Jiden's wealth.
And after 30 years, it's 16 times larger, after 40 years the ratio is 32, and so forth.
I have resorted to simplification to drive home my point.
For instance, few people people have all of their money in zero interest checking accounts.
But I have also left out the effect inflation has on people's tax burdens.
As one example, when people pay capital gains tax, they don't get any deduction of stock price appreciation caused by expansion of the money supply (meaning - we pay tax on inflation) which amplifies the rulers' benefit from the monetary monopoly.
To conclude:
This example demonstrates why the parasitical class is hellbent on keeping you in the dark about the potency of the monetary policy.
No other ordinary policy instruments come close to ensuring rapid centralization of wealth and power.
Therefore, I think you should support abolishing the current monetary monopoly.
You would also be well advised to learn more about the historical role of gold, as well as familiarizing yourself with #Bitcoin.
Thank you for reading.
If you enjoyed this thread, please hit the like, share and follow buttons and join me in the fight against abuse of political power.
https://image.nostr.build/66e3ecda616646642038921b53bda736b44cc942baf9dc712fa8d686e7c29fe2.jpg

2024-07-19 01:21:48

- reply

It felt big and positive, but mixed with a lot of uncertainty about how things would change going forward.
It typically only starts with a handful of people who create a crack.
The time from crack to crumble can be shockingly short.
Bitcoin, an utterly crazy leadership in the EU and the US, combined with the upcoming presidential election in the US are probably the catalysts this time.

2024-07-19 00:55:07

It feels like 1989.
What happens when people find out that our wall isn't made by concrete, as it only exists in our heads? https://image.nostr.build/a48cb5e7cbc912d00d12b0a04874484c9d96238c136ff0f4b50b2a05ab8fec21.jpg

2024-07-18 22:09:10

https://image.nostr.build/05f2ff6d68a12dba92ebc0bb4c5d56a1fda18d5213af356ae1d9d09eba44a3b8.jpg