Infinity16

The problem with conspiracy theories is how utterly implausible most of them are. You see, a secret is information kept inside by a chain. Chains are only as strong as the weakest link. A decade plus a few months ago, Dr David Robert Grimes went into fine detail into the maximum plausible size for any conspiracy. Edward Snowden's revelations may be used to back the paranoia of conspiracy theorists but I, as well as Dr Grimes, would say that they actually disprove it. To explain why, consider that we know about the extent of NSA spying because of a whistleblower. This brings up the question of why we have yet to see whistleblowers for a Holocaust setup, moon landing hoax, climate change fraud, or the 9/11 inside job. According to Dr. Grimes, up to 2,521 people can be involved in a five year conspiracy. A decade long conspiracy must have fewer than a thousand. One lasting a century may involve no more than 125. He looked at four different conspiracies, how may people would have to be involved in the coverup, and how long they would last. A moon landing hoax would have involved 411,000 people and been exposed within 3.68 years Climate change fraud would have at least involved the 29,083 published climate scientists and would have been exposed after 26.77 years. Vaccination fraud would have involved 22,000 people (that number does not include any employees in the drug companies) and been exposed within 34.78 years. A secret cure for cancer would have taken no less than 714,000 people and been exposed after 3.17 years. Paper by Grimes: https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2016-01-26-too-many-minions-spoil-plot Another lovely video:

All I can say on this topic is that the people saying that porn is harmful are making the claim. The burden of proof is on them.

Real life is bordering on parody

Honestly, the main reason why the middle east is in chaos right now is because of Israel and Iran. It ultimately hinges on Israel because if there was some two state solution that was satisfactory to the Palestinians, Iran's regime wouldn't have a leg to stand on.

Israel definitely has quite a bit of stage blue for a developed nation. Its fertility rate of 2.9 is still a bit above replacement ratio which is unusual for developed nations currently. My hypothesis is that as a country moves into stage orange, the fertility rate drops. This is because in stage orange, some people prefer focusing on their careers over starting a family. Stage orange is a super important stage because it basically marks the transition from a survival mindset to a self-expression one. Considering that Israel has more or less been in a constant state of war since its independence, it's not surprising that Israel has retained a survival mindset. There are also the very stage blue Orthodox Jews who have very high fertility rates. Saudi Arabia seems to still be in stage blue with the chance of moving into orange a generation from now. It currently has a fertility rate of 2.28 children per woman which is higher than the US but lower than Israel. As evident by the temporary BeastLand and the various development projects, the king seems determined to make the country into a stage orange paradise. Ditto all of the gulf states. There is hardly a better place for a rich person in stage orange to live than Dubai, even if the government holds stage blue values. Oman seems to be slightly behind SA and the gulf states on the spiral. The reason is because Oman has a fertility rate of 2.48. Furthermore, the monarch of Oman has been much more tame development-wise when compared to other countries on the arabian peninsula. Stage orange kills culture and it seems that Oman is intent on keeping its culture around for a little longer. Afghanistan, Iraq, and Yemen are relatively low on the spiral. Purple and red values seem to be prevalent in those regions as such values lead to a dysfunctional nation-state. All three countries have relatively high fertility rates. Syria has been through 15 years of civil war. What separates Syria from Afghanistan, Iraq, and Yemen is that Syria has a somewhat lower fertility rate which is the same as Israel. Granted, Syria may experience a post war boom as Syrians return to their home country. Iran has a fertility rate of just 1.7, the same as the US. This makes for an interesting contrast with a government that seems to hold stage blue ideology with stage red behavior.

I cited it because this film seems to represent the stage orange worldview. Other examples show the consequences of ignoring the power of big corporations. I would actually consider working in a big corporation to be a stage blue work environment because you're primarily just following procedures and submitting to authority. While orange emphasizes working hard, it contrasts with blue in that it does not consider obedience to be a high virtue. The ideal orange working environment is that of an entrepreneur.

I know that this is kind of long but it seems to sum up the stage purple response to stage blue.

I don't think there's a movie quite as anviliciously stage orange as Meet The Robinsons If you didn't hear it the first time, don't worry, you'll hear the message of the movie 20 other times.

Rationality Rules shows us just how to beat main tactic used by the alt right This tactic is the oldest trick in the book of plausible deniability. The "I was only kidding" defense has been used by many an impractical jokester when confronted on being a douchebag. On the internet, this is known as schrodinger's douchebag. Basically, I meant it if it goes over well and I'm kidding if it doesn't. This defense is best countered by pointing out just how offensive the joke really is. Of course, Nick doesn't care but that itself reveals that he is in stage red. Stage blue and above abide by the golden rule. The morality that Nick Fuentes abides by only seems to cover himself and maybe also his in-group. Most westerners are above stage red and are naturally repulsed by such utter disregard for the suffering of others. They would most likely face a lot of guilt and shame in Nick's shoes. The thing with him is that he's shameless and relishes in provoking people. Nick says that people need to grow up, implying that empathy is a childish trait. The irony here is that his behavior is consistent with a stage that most people go through and grow out of.

When I saw this video, I immediately thought of this forum. This seems like something unlocked at stage orange, green, or yellow.

That's a very good point. A societal collapse such as a zombie apocalypse would regress society below stage blue. It would most likely lead to a regression to stage purple since the world would be so dangerous that people need to group together in order to survive.

Productivity might be up but so is instability. The Fragile States Index measures 12 factors from 0 to 10 with higher numbers indicating more instability. Each country gets a score from 0 to 120. The main contributors to instability in the US are group grievance and factionalized elites. The US hovered in the mid 30s from 2006 up until Donald Trump won an election, leading to an increase in the score, peaking at 46.6 in 2022 (each year's score is based on events from the previous year) before going down slightly in the following years. https://fragilestatesindex.org/country-data/

I can think of two more: 🟪 Apocalypse The west has fallen. Billions must die. Likely to result from a nuclear war (during the cold war before the USA and Russia reduced their stockpiles by 90%) or some other apocalypse The only way to survive such a hostile world is to form bands which have enough collective knowledge for survival. It's unknown if AI can lead to this. Global warming is unlikely to do so but may exasterbate other crises. 🟧 🟩 New mode of government The nation-state gets replaced with a new mode of government. Just as the nation-state arose from changing attitudes regarding nationalism and economies of scale, this new mode of government will arise from a rise in cosmopolitanism and a decreasing scale to violence. This changing attitude will result from online work resulting in people being able to work from wherever they want in the world. During the peak of economies of scale, tanks dominated the battlefield. Drones are a game-changer, essentially making the war in Ukraine like WWI. 3D printing is now starting to reduce the scale of violence, allowing ethnic minorities in Myanmar to protect themselves from a genocidal regime. This will also make it easier for troubled individuals and organized crime to carry out acts of violence. Because of the reduced scale, the new mode of government will, on average, consist of less territory than the nation-state. The stage orange mode of government will operate akin to a business. Cities will be designed around profiting off of digital nomads. Revenue will come from rent and severance taxation. Land and capital will not be taxed as they will be mobile. Each mode of government is strengthened by the next stage because that stage accounts for the previous stage's limitations The stage red mode of government, the empire, is strengthened by stage blue because it leads to more stability. The nation-state, the stage blue mode of government, is strengthened by stage orange because it results in more diversity and innovation. The next stage will be strengthened by stage green because the main limitation of orange is that it lacks a sense of belonging. One major footnote here is that the stage orange mode of government will be the first to be less militarily capable than the last. This is because the previous is able to engage in total war, that is the use of all assets in a conflict.

We are currently in the stage blue mode of government which is the nation-state. It is distinct from the stage red mode of government (empire) in that it is supposed to be a state consisting of one people, united by an idea or by ethnicity. Stage blue oftentimes runs on an in-group vs an out-group. As such, citizens will always matter more than non-citizens.

That is somewhat true. The black community spans the whole spectrum much like white people. If you've ever seen the Boondocks, each of the main characters represents a different stage. Blue and ornge are about conformity while red and green are about revolution. Even though red and green are the opposite, they can still be aligned when we're talking about nonprivileged demographics.

Ukraine has been having this problem since the end of the Soviet era. The war will likely exasterbate this.

What you're seeing here is pre-orange spirituality. The problem is that pre-orange spirituality is typically dogmatic. I have recently begun to notice the role that leading questions and thought terminating cliches play in evangelical Christianity. Stage orange is typically detrimental to spirituality, but it is doing away with the spirituality that is dogmatic.

I think what this reveals is that while stage green has enjoyed an outsized influence for the past 15 years, not many Americans are at that stage. Democrats are mostly at stage orange. The Republican Party is divided between orange and blue but clearly has some stage red as demonstrated by Trump being president.

You can notice point 2 in spades. The US was already doing well beforehand but Trump seems to be under the impression that the ideal foreign policy is to disregard the will of other nations. Trump's supporters say that it makes America look strong. I say that it makes America look like a bully. Also brings me to the quote by Stephen Miller. A day ago, he said that it would be alright if the US took Greenland under the justification that Denmark is too weak to defend it. https://thehill.com/policy/international/5694105-stephen-miller-greenland-acquisition-defense/ Stephen Miller embodies a fascistic foreign policy. I don't use that adjective lightly. Trump's foreign policy seems to be a populist one without much thought put into it. Stephen Miller seems like he's trying to justify naked imperialism.

Am I the only one who thinks sounds like something a movie villain would say?

I personally think georgism will be more feasible than socialism, both for political reasons and for the geopolitical paradigm.

You probably find this mindset in poorer countries with unreliable governments. In countries like Russia, China, Turkmenistan, and North Korea, the government is simply a mafia that controls a nation. I wonder if this shapes society or if the state is shaped by society. Russia has no history of liberalism. It wasn't long after the end of the monarchy that it became a one party autocracy. The brief period that Russia was friendly with the west was a time of high unemployment, crime, and mortality. Putin promised order to the Russian people and they got it. Plus the Russian people tend very heavily towards conservatism. Russia would be the future of the US should Trump succeed in doing away with democracy.

I always figured that Russian culture was cynical but this video dives more into depth. Obviously this video does not use spiral dynamics but it contrasts the stage red Russian mindset from the stage orange western one. As quoted in 1984, power is not a means to an end but rather an end in of itself. Ideology and popular well being are the means; power is the end. In stage red, you don't question why those with power over you do what they do. Rather, you work around it. Orange seeks a meritocratic hierarchy whereas in stage red, there is no pretense that the hierarchy should be meritocratic. In red, your goal in life is to make your way up as high in the hierarchy as possible. We in our WEIRD society are oftentimes baffled by how differently the rest of the world thinks. I as a westerner was surprised that Putin decided to wage war a special military operation in Ukraine, not because I believed that there was good in everyone but because it's the worst move possible from a western perspective. I figured that as a dictator, one would want to ensure prosperity for the people, if nothing else, to stay in power. According to this video, the war is helping to keep Putin in power. The video says that with war, time stands still, but I might add a thought to it. Taiwan and South Korea both started out as dictatorships. Their economies grew quickly and eventually, both got to a point at which the people demanded a democracy. It might just be that dictatorships benefit from the populace being at a low level of consciousness. At red, you are concerned with survival and do not even consider the possibility of social change. At orange, survival can be taken for granted and social change becomes possible. The first video of his is about how freedom is scary from a Russian POV. This is because Russian society is at stage blue. People at any stage (at least below yellow) assume that the next stage is just like the previous one with those limitations. As such, people in orange hold collectivism in contempt, considering green to be oversensitive just as blue is judgemental. For people in stage blue, individualism is instability. They don't consider orange from above because all they understand is red from below. His video on propaganda mirrors a common take on MAGA talking points. The take being that Trump doesn't lie very convincingly, but he lies so often that it becomes pointless to even worry about it. The job is not to convince but rather wear you down. I don't quite think the comparison quite sticks because half of the country does believe that Trump was a victim of the deep state. With that said, Trump's way of doing things is authoritarian. That's why he gets along well with people such as Putin, Erdogan, and King Salman, but not so well with Merkel, Macron, or Trudeau. If the US didn't have a century long tradition in liberalism and was a fragile state for a decade, Donald Trump would probably have been more well received. It really seems like Russian culture revolves around fear, contrasted with the west which revolves around guilt. Authoritarianism is good from a fear-based perspective, not so much from a guilt-based one.

Indeed, it seems like authoritarianism is making a comeback in the west. I genuinely wonder if deepfakes will encourage the Russian mindset to truth.

We don't know how good his relationship with his parents was when the cameras weren't on them. Obviously that comes nowhere near close to justifying the murder but there is a lot that doesn't get discussed behind closed doors.