|
|
Post by aarvoll (INTJ) on Sept 19, 2018 19:41:53 GMT
The rules and schedule for round 3 will be up by 9/21. The rules for round two will provide the basis with a few modifications, a checkpoint discussion feature (mentioned in my Round 2 Organization post), and the introduction of a dedicated informal space. My work will primarily be cleaning up the rules post compared to last time, allowing it to be coherent and self contained enough that anyone can understand it without background knowledge. A new introduction to the project pinned to the main page should be created as well featuring a mission statement, guidelines for content (no advocating violence, no hate speech etc.), and an explanation of how to navigate the forum (this objective will probably not be achieved by 9/21). I'd be interested to consider sample mission statements from everyone if possible, so please reply to this thread with your idea, and also some feedback on the rest of these general notions for setting up this coming round. My research team will be dedicated to refining the "New Integralism" concept mentioned here. This is really the same task as generating a mission statement IMO. The application of the research team will be producing a one page conceptual breakdown of what it is we're trying to achieve with this academy model- it will be more specific than my colloquium post and refer to the nature and structure of our efforts. When we've produced a concise one page breakdown we'll be able to convert this into a video advertisement. We need a marketing strategy, since we aren't generating new unique visitors just by having this site sitting here. The concepts outlined in "A New Integralism" are basically my ideas for a mission statement, and refining that into a compelling elevator pitch is the next step toward marketing the project. Also any recommendations for a platform for informal discussion/ notifications and updates would be great. An email list serve and/or Slack are what I have in mind, but there are probably some more secure or convenient alternatives out there. Consider this thread an informal space to discuss the project until we designate some other platform. |
|
|
|
Post by vennyflennard (ENTP-A) on Sept 20, 2018 10:03:29 GMT
Here is a rough attempt at a mission statement; i think the structuring of the statment is a little off and that the ending is abrupt while also lacking brevity but here we go:
This page is dedicated to the creation of an organized network of functionally compartmentalized institutions, dedicated to and working harmoniously towards our shared goals synchronized along lines of ethics, metaphysics, epistemology, logic, and philosophy. Recent political movements have been populist in their nature and anarchist in their meta-structure. We wish to draw up from this great sea of peoples brought together and through a unity of effort create an organization that can; shape the talent, combine the skills and hone the wild creative energies of these waves into a strong, serviceable hierarchical structure capable of ushering in the aims of our shared constitution. In concrete terms this means the creation of an academy; this can offer us a chance to gain, process, analyze, synthesize and judge the knowledge increasingly central to the nature of the struggle, hopefully beyond the scope, depth and grade of what can conventionally be offered. Likewise we wish to create a meritocratic and dynamic system of electing and molding accountable authority figures and content generators that can deliver to a high standard. The result of this will hopefully be a more textually rich and complete culture as well as helping to fix problems caused by a lack of traditional authority figures in new movements. It will also allow us to remold our hierarchy away from the shares, likes and clicks model we originally coalesced around but which can only take us so far, and towards one which has a form that reflects our values and thinking. A meta structure of our own, encompassing a wide spectrum of efforts and faculties will allow us to combat and overcome the degeneracy of imagery, symbols, values, imagination, innovations, ideas that has gained traction. Long term success in politics, through mass protest and mobilization is largely an invention of left wing propaganda; in slowly taking control of the institutions of a society nefarious organizers have thrown civil institutions into crisis, altered family structure and social roles, reshaped cultures and changed the face of value systems. Any response to this has to be equally broad spectrum in scope , a true counter effort involves replacing or offering alternative institutions to those of our enemies. This is a first step towards not only structuring the movement in which we operate but redefining the theatres of engagment under our own initiative. |
|
|
|
Post by Napoleoff (INTP) on Sept 21, 2018 5:03:43 GMT
I think we should try out the checkpoint discussion feature as mentioned in your Round 2 Organization post, and I agree with the introduction of a dedicated informal space (I think this could act as something along the lines of what I suggested in my short Round 1 Colloquium post).
I also considered the possibility for the voting system to be abused and the telos subverted by organized groups of ill-meaning people (they could gain rank by herding into research teams and voting for each other), so we should think of ways to avert that.
I am composing my sample mission statement and will try to get it up soon in a new post below this one on this thread.
|
|
|
|
Post by Napoleoff (INTP) on Sept 21, 2018 13:16:20 GMT
I'd be interested to consider sample mission statements from everyone if possible, so please reply to this thread with your idea... Perennial Perspective - Mission Statement
A creative academy constituted around meritocratic principles which is devoted to distilling the truth and perennial wisdom hidden in the unprecedentedly-abundant but diffuse information sphere and, by logically-integrating this extracted truth and wisdom, to forging and promulgating a weltanschauung of an elemental scope commensurate with the great intellectual and spiritual needs of our people, in the process effecting abatement of their psychic distress and perplexity and producing in them the spiritual health and serenity to desire and thence undertake their own collective physical sustainment. We seek to embody the ageless spirit of truth and wisdom, creativity and upward motion, order and harmony, morality and religion and are as such uncompromisingly opposed to the chaotic principle. In pursuance of the above-stated telos, we place no theoretical limits on our activity. Hence, our compass is not a mere atheistic, Nietzschean or Faustian enterprise but much broader, deeper and higher. In this capacity we extend our fellowship to all people of goodwill.
"But there are some people, nevertheless - and I am one of them - who think that the most practical and important thing about a man is still his view of the universe. We think that for a landlady considering a lodger, it is important to know his income, but still more important to know his philosophy. We think that for a general about to fight an enemy, it is important to know the enemy's numbers, but still more important to know the enemy's philosophy. We think the question is not whether the theory of the cosmos affects matters, but whether, in the long run, anything else affects them."
- G.K. Chesterton
Full text of Heretics at Project Gutenberg; press ctrl-F to word-search when on the html page (top document in the list) and type "landlady" to find the quote in its original context. |
|
|
|
Post by Napoleoff (INTP) on Sept 24, 2018 9:54:12 GMT
Consider this thread an informal space to discuss the project until we designate some other platform. Seeing as this thread is an informal space and we have not yet formally begun Organization Round 3, I want to leave a thought here about transparency as referred to in aarvoll's Ray Dalio essay from Organization Round 2. I think in most cases when a structural or organizational change is made it should be accompanied by an explanation. The first example of this I can think of is aarvoll's Round 3 Roll Call where he says members can now participate in Organization or Colloquium but not both, whereas in the previous round they could participate in both, but does not explain the reason for this change. I think in future all such non-intuitive high-level changes should be accompanied by an explanation so members are kept abreast of the reasoning process behind them. I don't think the addition of believability-weighted voting needs to be explained because (a) the reason for that is in the Ray Dalio essay and (b) it's kind of intuitive anyway why you would want to experiment with that idea.
It says in the Ray Dalio essay:
“5.3 Think about whether you are playing the role of a teacher, a student, or a peer and whether you should be teaching, asking questions, or debating.
a. It’s more important that the student understand the teacher than that the teacher understand the student, though both are important.
b. Recognize that while everyone has the right and responsibility to try to make sense of important things, they must do so with humility and radical open-mindedness.”
If someone, let’s say Jim, has significantly higher believability on a given issue than someone else, call him Gerald, Gerald will be expected to seek and then demonstrate comprehension of Jim’s point of view on that issue before expecting Jim to comprehend his (Gerald’s) point of view. This can seem unfair, but if you fail to establish these norms much time can be wasted satisfying the fractious instincts of less knowledgeable people.
5.6 Recognize that everyone has the right and responsibility to try to make sense of important things.
a. Communications aimed at getting the best answer should
involve the most relevant people.
b. Communication aimed at educating or boosting cohesion
should involve a broader set of people than would be needed
if the aim were just getting the best answer.
c. Recognize that you don’t need to make judgments about
everything.”
This has to do with the limitations of Radical Transparency, and in our context this would mean not necessarily letting lower level members criticize the decision making process of Organization, Colloquium and Academic Directors, but encouraging them to criticize final products..."
This is all very well but there's a difference between not letting lower level members criticize the decision making process and not even apprising them of said process.
Without compelling the Directors to waste a lot of time explaining to underlings, perhaps every time executive organizational changes are made there could be a small section set aside in the roll call listing, numbering and explaining them for easy reference. "Organizational Changes in this Round" or something like that. Such a section should include both the intuitive and the non-intuitive changes, along with an explanation for them, or at least for the non-intuitive ones. If the lower ranking members don't comprehend the reasons for any changes after they have read a coherent and logical explanation from the Director then it won't be the Director's fault, and nobody will be able to accuse the Director of not being transparent or of acting tyrannically.
If anyone sees any reason why such changes as the first one I mentioned above do not need to be accompanied by an explanation then I'm open to hearing it.
Edit: I also think giving a logical explanation for executive changes as I have recommended in this post will help to give authority to those decisions.
|
|
|
|
Post by flimp (INTJ) on Oct 5, 2018 22:52:14 GMT
A lot of what I am going to say is probably already been thought of and perhaps it will be nit-picky/backseat driving/ throwing mud on the wall, but they all relate to the idea that this thread is “an informal space to discuss the project until we designate some other platform.”
In the future I think that adding in the checkpoint feature is a good idea. Like you said, an agreement upon the underlying principles is more important than the agreement on the content of the post itself, however I do think that we should not include this for the time being because that is another layer of complexity. Since we are a new organization and are vulnerable to the loss of members, adding complexity will decrease the willingness of people to participate.
I'd be interested to consider sample mission statements from everyone if possible, so please reply to this thread with your idea, and also some feedback on the rest of these general notions for setting up this coming round.
A sample mission statement combining quotes from Ken and Aarvoll:
When we examine the right wing today, we see a lot of wheel spinning, reinventing the wheel, and making the same mistakes over and over again. There is little inter-generational education, little learning from the past. In some senses, the right wing is less organized, less disciplined, and less resilient than ever before. In today’s world, most right wingers exist within a subculture of media entertainment. Whatever is interesting, edgy, trendy, entertaining, memetic, and comedic is what captures interest. Ultimately this trend of the modern right will achieve nothing and become nothing.
Those who achieve real change will not necessarily be those who are chasing the thrill of extremism. They will be careful, methodical, disciplined, and patient. The group which succeeds in achieving sovereignty for itself will not be the one which best organizes street fighters, but the one which is capable of discovering a powerful enough religion to motivate them. For those who are intelligent, this requires a powerful metaphysic. For those who aren't, this requires a powerful hierarchy and authority structure.
Today we do not have the benefit of an academic system unified by an overarching metaphysical and moral consensus, and we living in the current civilizational interstitial are faced with the task of surveying the least integrated and most abundant intellectual environment in our history with an eye to the materials necessary for a sound framework. Many of the philosophical developments which will lead to the successful integration of Metaphysics, Ethics and Epistemology are no doubt already extant, and it will be up to those seeking the foundations of a new and comprehensive worldview to take stock of these developments with an open mind. Lastly, as every conspiracy requires shared goals a brief outline of the sequence of goals is listed below.
functioning online academy
physical academy with media outlets (publishing, radio, video, etc)
physical community growing around the academy with industries and a selective filter for recruitment
a culture and religious conception crystallizing (eugenic laws determined)
a network of communities sharing that culture that is anti-fragile to civilizational collapse
a new civilization
a new world order
space stuff.
I think that generally the mission statement should
1) Assess the state of the modern right
2) Offer a future of the right using religion/ metaphysics, motivation.
3) A basic, easy to understand explanation of the framework or the organization
4) Talk about Svalbard like stuff. Moving to a community. Sequence of goals.
Perhaps instead of each of us writing a mission statement, we should agree to broad principles to be included in the mission statement and then vote for a person who is good at rhetoric, to write the mission statement. Then a final yes/no vote with last-minute suggestions. Then we can put it up.
Also any recommendations for a platform for informal discussion/ notifications and updates would be great. An email list serve and/or Slack are what I have in mind, but there are probably some more secure or convenient alternatives out there.
Discord is not secure, in the least, but discord does have a thriving dissident right community. This is a pool that we can tap into and even if we don’t choose discord as the final platform for informal discussion, we should at least invest some time into joining a collection of servers so that we can selectively advertise and get the best people to join us. If we all want to have secure emails for secure communication then we should all use protonmail.com
|
|
|
|
Post by Napoleoff (INTP) on Oct 14, 2018 16:46:35 GMT
Today we do not have the benefit of an academic system unified by an overarching metaphysical and moral consensus, and we living in the current civilizational interstitial are faced with the task of surveying the least integrated and most abundant intellectual environment in our history with an eye to the materials necessary for a sound framework. Many of the philosophical developments which will lead to the successful integration of Metaphysics, Ethics and Epistemology are no doubt already extant, and it will be up to those seeking the foundations of a new and comprehensive worldview to take stock of these developments with an open mind. Lastly, as every conspiracy requires shared goals a brief outline of the sequence of goals is listed below. functioning online academy physical academy with media outlets (publishing, radio, video, etc) physical community growing around the academy with industries and a selective filter for recruitment a culture and religious conception crystallizing (eugenic laws determined) a network of communities sharing that culture that is anti-fragile to civilizational collapse a new civilization a new world order space stuff. I think that generally the mission statement should 1) Assess the state of the modern right 2) Offer a future of the right using religion/ metaphysics, motivation. 3) A basic, easy to understand explanation of the framework or the organization 4) Talk about Svalbard like stuff. Moving to a community. Sequence of goals. Perhaps instead of each of us writing a mission statement, we should agree to broad principles to be included in the mission statement and then vote for a person who is good at rhetoric, to write the mission statement. Then a final yes/no vote with last-minute suggestions. Then we can put it up. Also any recommendations for a platform for informal discussion/ notifications and updates would be great. An email list serve and/or Slack are what I have in mind, but there are probably some more secure or convenient alternatives out there.
Discord is not secure, in the least, but discord does have a thriving dissident right community. This is a pool that we can tap into and even if we don’t choose discord as the final platform for informal discussion, we should at least invest some time into joining a collection of servers so that we can selectively advertise and get the best people to join us. If we all want to have secure emails for secure communication then we should all use protonmail.com I agree with your idea of first agreeing to the principles in the mission statement before we vote for one person to write it before the final yes/no vote. I think all the principles should be discussed in detail first, perhaps even have a research round dedicated to them, before this final step. However, we need to get organized again because aside from Ken's research team, the other teams have fallen apart. I think I will write a separate post in Organization about that last problem. |
|
