Infinity16

I definitely agree. None of us know what a stage turquoise society would look like or how it would interact with a post scarcity society.

I was just thinking of this lovely gem from Isaac Arthur a bit ago In this video, he speculates on what will we do with our lives once AI can do everything for us and technology can give us everything such as perfect bodies and lots of material wealth. The question is what purpose will there be in life Isaac Arthur is asking this from a stage orange perspective. This is important because stage orange eliminates the sense of belonging that previous stages held and makes achievement the main purpose in life. On a sufficiently long timescale, achievement as a purpose becomes unsustainable because a post scarcity society will have achieved everything. This got me thinking that higher stages would operate better on stages above orange. Green or even the tier II stages would be better suited for a post scarcity society, especially one in which people can live forever. Stages below orange abide by survival values which would be of no use to a post scarcity society. Meanwhile, stage orange is of the mindset that struggle is necessary for living a fulfilling life.

Because I don't want arbitrary laws and I want to preserve personal freedoms. When the burden of proof gets shifted, bad things happen. "These people must be witches because they couldn't prove that they weren't" "Communists must have infiltrated out government. There is no proof to the contrary" "We should keep an eye on those Muslims. Just to be safe, of course" "Iraq must have weapons of mass destruction because there's no proof that there isn't" Shifting the burden of proof also leads to conspiratorial thinking. You can't understand how a tragedy happened, so there must have been a conspiracy behind it. No thought is given to how plausible the conspiracy is.

Sure it does. Most legal systems around the world make use of burden of proof.

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.