Update: In my latest update, I mistakenly attributed the promotion of the Sorus-funded INET to N. Stephan Kinsella, the anti-IP advocate. It is actually a position taken by Stephen Kinsella, an economist, whom I confused with him. I have deleted the note. My apologies to N. Stephan Kinsella. Still, it is the case that the Access to Knowledge Movement, some of whose concerns about the overzealous pursuit of IP rights are not mistaken, is promoted by INET (The Institute for New Economic Thinking) and that INET is chock-full of the usual globalist suspects, from the technocracy (managers of Citigroup, Bank of England, IMF, BIS, etc.) to theorists of managed globalization, like Joseph Stiglitz, Amartya Sen, and Jeffrey Sachs…
[By “overzealous pursuit of IP rights” I have in mind things like Mark Zuckerberg’s attempts to trade-mark the words “face” and “like” and sue businesses that use them for infringement.
Cathy L. Z. Smith writes:
“I’ve been following your writings on IPR and I want to thank you for your tough, principled stand…..“
Widely admired and prolific libertarian novelist L.Neil Smith writes:
Dear Lila (if I may),
“I will happily concede your precedence in the coinage of the word “illiterati” and mention it if it becomes appropriate in my future writings……
…You should understand that you’re an heroic figure in our household. Owing to the pressure of my work, my wife, Cathy L.Z. Smith, ended up doing more combat than I did with DELETED.
She beat them to a standstill and DELETED… In all of that, she felt inspired by what you had done before either of us….all that’s really necessary is to call them out in public..”Neil.
(April 11, 2011)
Reader G. Anchley writes (April 20, 2011):
“Mining another writer’s ideas, phrases, research, anecdotes……. without acknowledging the borrowing or influence…. is intellectual fraud of a really despicable kind. It’s soul-theft.”
(Names of the last two The name of the last correspondents haves been disguised, since the letters were intended to be private. Some comments were paraphrased or deleted, as they were not suitable for public display. Correspondents were made aware that emails would be published in a responsible way.)
My take?
If you don’t “own” your mind, then you don’t own your own labor. We have to concede we own our minds and the works of our mind, if we wish to have ownership in anything else.
If we own the works of our mind, then we have the rights of ownership – the whole bundle: use, possession, enjoyment, disposition, destruction….
Yes Lila, I concur that we do need and require ownership of our minds to be awake and aware in this world of the third density. I am becoming more attuned to the notion that the battle for the ownership of our minds has entered a new and frightening level. I don’t know whether anybody else feels this way, but I believe that the ‘illuminated’ (recognising that their plans for world control through domination of the international bond markets, etc, are now exposed as never before by the Internet) have thrown open the doors to their organisation, so to speak, and given the sheeple what they think is the chance to be on their winning side.
The sheeple have been happily allowing themselves to be manipulated by the ‘easy’ debt money provided by the international Fiat based currency system controlled by the banking elite. Incrementally they have individually and collectively been manoeuvred into a position of being utterly controlled by that accumulated debt owed to the banks. This is part of the subliminal lever that convinces you to give up your mind and thus all intellectual property rights to the entities that control the repayment structure of those debts. Because the twisted logic goes that if the sheeple swallow whole lies such as the ‘We killed Osama Bin-Liner just yesterday’, then those same liars will open their gates to the world of unlimited government guaranteed debt money for those sheeple who show their loyalty by defending outrageous propositions.
This is a sophisticated sting operation against our presence of mind. Our essential ability to tell truth from lies is being constantly attacked and eroded by the debts that bind us and deny us access to freedom of thought and expression because of the FEAR of the consequences if one dares to dispute the ‘official’ line put out by government and slavishly promoted by the bought and paid for Tame-Sheep Media. Sheeple are controlled by fear and the Money Power knows how to use implement and use fear as no other group in history has before.
This, I conclude, is because of the global reach the Money Changers have achieved through the technologies they have selectively funded and morphed into the world-wide control grid that is now up and running as our ‘shadow’ world government (IMF, World Bank, Goldman Sucks, etc). It is all connected by DEBT. All of these Multinational Corporations that run all the BIG institutions and employ a large chunk of the worlds population (over 50 million from estimates I have read) just operate by churning debt through any wealth creation cycle initiated by the Bubble Financiers with the debt being transferred onto us hapless citizens incrementally in the form of increased taxes and charges that the privatised service providers cost. Costs that are spiralling out of control because we have allowed ourselves and our countries to become pawns in the Great Geo-political Game being played out by the Brzezinski’s of this world using the all-encompassing weapon of mass indoctrination; DEBT.
So, for me, the recognition of IP rights is wrapped up in a much larger issue of mass mind control. Without them, as Lila says, you own nothing, not even your mind. This is what makes this situation in the world (of moving towards control of the many by the few) so fundamentally dangerous to us as individuals within the human race. With thinking controlled by an elite through the technologies we take for granted such as this device I’m tapping into now, we will no longer be able to recognise our BIRTH-RITE to be free to choose because we will no longer be able to recognise the self as having legitimate interests that should be pursued by the individual as distinct from the perceived (read faked-out reality fed to us by powerful interconnected groups/corporations/institutions and people in ‘authority’ in our societies) collective ‘need’ to group-think about EVERYthing in a particular way.
This is key to why there are thousands out in the USA celebrating the announcement of the violent death of THE perceived villain of the West (who’s families construction business dealings have placed all the main protagonists in the same room) in Pakistan, who was based in Afghanistan (Saudi Arabia really). Confusing ?? Only to those who bother to THINK about it. Because……. It’s time to move the hot war (read expensive, and the Money Power have established their reign of financial terror through their central banks now, anyway.) of Afghanistan elsewhere so “mission accomplished” must be declared to the sheeple so that their reality bubble can continue with the guidance/connivance of the government and tame sheep in the media.
Long live IP rights!!! When I’m dead all that will be left will be my words. To deny them IP rights is to deny me the right for those words to bear witness to the tenor of my existence.
Brilliant, John.
You stated exactly why the IP rights issue is at the heart of the matter…and the intended theme of this blog.
Privacy and IP rights and individuality are inextricably linked.
Take either away and everything else falls..
Thank you, mb4. Your words have encouraged me to contribute this now.
In this world, now, the sheeple have been convinced, through arguments such as the ones surrounding the IPR issue, (ie. that our carefully formulated and publicly articulated IP can be appropriated and re-contextualised without reason or attribution.) that the history and evolution of ideas is utterly unnecessary and obsolete. That somehow the end product is all that matters and the journey of how that product in knowledge came to be has no requirement to be told truthfully, if at all. I see this as a fundamental and dangerous obstacle to our society having effective ownership and control of itself through protection of the ‘voices’ of those who comprise it.
I do not to sit here and regurgitate some ideological track that has been imprinted into my unquestioning mind by one ‘all seeing, all knowing, authority’ because that is NOT the end products only producer! I still can have choice on how Marxs and Engles is viewed and interpreted through other producers surrounding their work. This choice will wither and die with the corporate/Statist model being applied to everything these days.
(The essence of the Corporate/Statist Model? Get big, get out, or get swallowed, about sums it up for me.)
If I did, as many sheeple do, and repeat the mindless nonsense that gushes in flourishes of self debasement from the mouth-pieces of the elite I would be giving myself up to the corporate mind-set of consuming the latest and greatest version of that most heavily promoted (and handily backed by the corporate/state conglomerate that is the product of centralised mass production) thinking product.
If we give away our right to own and control our IP I think it will lead to the eventual destruction of copyright which I believe to be the real danger. Why? Because if what people produce with their minds can be appropriated without attribution or recompense of any kind then the output of productive ideas will stop, only to be replaced with unproductive/negative ideas that will surely turn our world into an even more inhospitable place.
People/individuals come up with ideas, not organisations. Organisations, of all stripes, TAKE peoples ideas and WORKSHOP them into a form that is useful to the organisation as a whole, which means, that the people who have control of the organisations are the ones that manipulate peoples ideas to further their own ends. The permutations and combinations to this arrangement are legion, but suffice to say, they all make the controllers stronger in their positions of power.
The spectacle of the OBL narrative as clumsily set out by the BO camp illustrates one of the oldest and most effective expressions of how holding the reigns of power can make your arguments/disinformation cut through and hold the sheeple in control. I can hear the refrain now, “You know, there are so many conflicting stories out there on the Internet that they just make me frightened and confused, so I’ll just watch the TV and get my views from it on any subject that is deemed by it or my boss and co-workers as being ‘controversial'”
Which brings me to the manufactured attitudes of the sheeple to the High crimes and Misdemeanour’s of our government leaders around the world as opposed to the also manufactured attitude the sheeple have towards each others crimes and misdemeanour’s. The sheeple are now past the point in their mind control by the Money Powers state/corporate apparatus that they are ready to accept the cognitive dissonance (lying to ones self) required to make every conceivable excuse in defence of everything promoted by our governments/corporations, like;
the insane military adventurism of our governments,
the overt regulation and control of our diets through the food that we grow and eat,
the overt and covert surveillance and control of our daily lives,
the rush to introduce Carbon taxes because of ‘climate change’, etc,
torture.
But as for attitudes regarding each other, say as to whistle-blowers, who contradict government/corporate assertions through insider knowledge and thus can cause disruption to their selfish agendas, their actions are considered ‘crimes’ to be thought of as a terrible sin against all that is good and right and wholesome in our society, which should have the perpetrators severely dealt with, when the opposite is often more true than not. Sane individuals do not expose themselves to ridicule, contempt, and retaliatory action unless they are convinced that it is the only course open to them to further the greater good of humanity. Selfless as opposed to selfish.
However, this preposition about whistle-blowing is just too simplistic as a useful idea by itself because of all the ‘curve-balls’ that can be thrown into that process. J. Assange/Wikileaks pops into my mind as someone/something who has illustrated the 1/2 good data, 1/2 bad data = all faulty intelligence, way of corrupting the basic human urge to tell the truth by marketing truth telling without the truth being the priority. It’s a technique to alienating the very people we need for the process of forcing transparency on the subversive/secret machinations of organisations that employ/use people/things/environments in various ways.
Without due regard to IPR’s history will become a complete whitewash/fabrication pushed out by monolithic structures that the sheeple will have no conception of because they will have been thwarted in their attempts to go to the source or basis of the present situations repeated patterns of Empire throughout history. Why? Because all references to and the eye witnesses accounts of previous times will be erased and/or fabricated to suit the prevailing mood/ideology in the all powerful centralised world government.
The breakdown of IPR’s and the erosion of copyright will not in of themselves cause this calamity, but I can see how all these promoted themes and memes in the new world of publishing on the net dovetail neatly into the Money Powers habit of devaluing that which it cannot own or control. They cannot own or control all the content that is on the net, so they are doing their level best to devalue it all with regards to the more ‘established’ forms of media such as the newspapers, TV, radio, and the like, which they most definitely do control.
The Money Powers are playing on many levels to balance the forces that they use to keep us hypnotised, confused, and buying useless s#it! What an inertial juggernaut of chaos that awaits us from the inevitable ‘slips be’twix lip and cup’ that our not so smart rulers/owners have tricked-up for us.
I’ve just been over at TDB, and coincidentally, Dr T. Machan is discussing his libertarian attitude toward selfishness. Since I made mention of acting in a selfless manner as opposed to selfish one, I thought I would discuss his article here and reference it with some of my own views.
I can’t help but think he is missing the point about selfishness/selflessness. He seems to posit that you must chose selfishness to be an authentic libertarian, when in my life these acts of selfishness/selflessness are used interchangeably by myself and people around me depending on their circumstances and needs. These are elements that cannot always be controlled by the individual concerned. To say that you can and will always act selfishly makes me wonder whether he would consider sacrificing himself for the sake of his own children? Living seems to involve trying to resolve a number of dilemmas that the human condition animates for our selves to deal with.
He ends his article with “The drive to besmirch proper selfishness is a misanthropic one. It shows disdain for people, promotes their sense of ineptitude. So I recommend that everyone follow the motto I have made up as my bumper sticker: “Assert yourself, thoughtfully!”.
Now, my immediate question to him would be (If I could trust the site to publish my comments/questions without interference) that if the words on the bumper sticker means to be selfish in your day to day dealings, then why don’t you add it to the bumper sticker. You know, say what you mean, and mean what you say. I think I know why it wasn’t added is because if you go to any dictionary meaning for selfishness you wont find a phrase like ” Assert yourself, thoughtfully. Instead you’ll find things like;self·ish
1.
devoted to or caring only for oneself; concerned primarily with one’s own interests, benefits, welfare, etc., regardless of others.
2.
characterized by or manifesting concern or care only for oneself: selfish motives.
—Synonyms
1. self-interested, self-seeking, egoistic; illiberal, parsimonious, stingy. – Source ‘Dictionary.com’ –
Doesn’t sound too similar to ‘asserting yourself, thoughtfully’. Makes me wonder what those folks over at TDB are really disseminating in sub-text philosophy.
However, I do not wish to be accused of using this as a forum for sniping at others. It’s just this concept of selfishness just came too quickly on the heels of what I wrote to not take the serendipity of the moment and comment.
I don’t think a purely selfish person is any more valid as a functioning civil creature than a purely selfless person. Selfish/selfless acts are tools for living in an uncertain world. To my mind restricting yourself to a philosophy based on the disregard of others misconstrues what it is to be human.
@John Edwards [May 8, 2011 post)
A very profound post, John. It shows you are a thinking and caring individual. If all people were like you the world would be a better place.
To the defense of Dr Machan, however, I must say that he has a tendency to take extreme positions, not so much his own views necessarily, but to provoke thinking. After all, the extremes are pushing the individual brains at work – the mediocrity puts brains to sleep. At least that’s my take after analyzing tens of his posts @DB. Now assume my assessment has merit, would your post be any different?
@ Leonardo Pisano.
Thank you for replying. To answer your question, no. I am over playing word games. By way of explanation, I spent 4 years of my life studying at one of the many ‘Towers of Babel’ (University) and after obtaining my degree have never felt the need or desire to enter any of their hallowed halls again. I came away from there realising that words are weapons, you just need to know how to load them and how to pull their triggers to wreak havoc on their intended (and often unintended) targets.
Because of my beliefs, extreme positions, if to be used in debate, should be sufficiently contextualised so that the author is not attributed with implicitly condoning that which they do not believe. One of the ways to turn words into weapons is to form them into an ideology that encapsulates your needs and desires then get prominent/celebrity/respectable type people to promote them as their own. These people don’t have to understand the whole philosophy just be taught to broadcast the trigger points that use the ‘Lizard’ or hind brain to alter/amplify certain hormonal=emotional responses that interfere with out thought processes. Causing us to make decisions that we normally wouldn’t.
With that in mind, if Dr T. Machan is stimulating debate, that may be good. But by taking a (IMO) flawed perspective to argue a premise that is simplistic and jingoistic undermines, for me, the integrity of any fundamental logical meaning to what is being said. I’m sure I would consider Dr T. Machan a much better economist than social philosopher but, no, I’m not going to read all his old articles to see if I’m right or wrong. I have read a few of his other pieces and thought them solid if not inspired. (I did, however, take the time to read all Lila’s articles on Goldman Sucks because I find her to be an inspired and inspiring writer. She is not afraid to speak the names of the greedy people and organisations that have conspired over the years and generations to defraud us of our chance to enjoy our short period of incarnation on this mortal coil. The DB’s contributors IMO are writing with one eye looking over their shoulder to the elites they so disparage. I don’t think they can avoid it, based in Liechtenstein sandwiched between Switzerland, (with some of the most secretive and oldest banking houses in existence today) and Austria (which is where the whole NWO programme was kicked off with the assassination of Crown Prince Ferdinand). I am suspicious of all web sites. Some for internal reasons, some for external reasons.
But I digress.
The trouble I have with this re-defining of selfishness to being more in line with the concept of self-interest is that I think it conflates two very distinct concepts with vastly differing outcomes for the participants involved. For me self interest posits that the self is of paramount importance to a healthy existence. But to acknowledge your existence as paramount to you, it follows that you need acknowledge the other people around you must also be selves that are of paramount existence to them. To draw a different conclusion that disregards the ‘other’ seems to be pathological to me. Even if you do not agree with what they say or do it doesn’t mean that they don’t have the same principle at their core. If we could all take a moment to consider the ‘other’, rather than just judging it by assigning labels that stereotype and thus devalue and degrade them/it, maybe we could start making some inroads on the people and institutions that have become psycho-pathological due to the corrupting characteristics of the infusion of debt into our lives over the generations. Being selfish doesn’t get ME there, at any rate.
I have watched in astonishment as people I have known in the past develop and exhibit hateful behaviour which has left me in no doubt that they could kill in cold blood, or order it done, especially if it were sanctioned by someone in ‘authority’, if they felt so compelled. Some of these people hold our future in their hands but they are dangerous hypnotists of the sheeple. Licensed by the media corporations and government bureaucracies they spread their spells of mind control throughout the world and the sheeple tune in and turn off to reality. The good Doctor, I’m sure, is not attempting overt mind control, or that his intentions are malicious, but there are plenty of players who will appropriate some ones work and re-contextualise it for their own purposes that may be antithetical to the originators intent or wish. (IPR’s play into this little discussion as well, I’m pleased to note.)
Anyway, Leonardo, thank you for the words of encouragement and giving me the opportunity to engage with you on this ‘Dead Blog’.
John Edwards –
Well said…especially that about ideology.
And yes, the blog is dead, but there is death…. and there is death..
And the corpse of this one is going to stay embalmed…for a while.
But being give to intuitions of many kinds, to the displeasure of my atheistic libertarian readers, I consider death not the end of life but simply the gateway to a different mode of life.
@John Edwards
Very eloquent and satisfactory.
Re DB I have done some bg research, and if you are interested in what I found send me a PM (leonardo dot pisano57 at gmail dot com).
@Lila
Many people miss you, Lila. For sure, you are one of my heroines. They are all prepared to support you in your passive resistance. Indeed, you have death and reincarnation…. ‘Panta rei’ the Old Greek said.
Anyway, after the positive response on my first fairy tale you were so kind enough to publish here, I decided to dedicate a blog to “fiction stories” (uhhh….. maybe they are non-fiction after all). Hope they are thought-provoking, especially for people that need to be awaken but for some reason refuse to educate themselves….
As soon as I launch officially, I will ask you to be kind enough to link to me and allow me to promote it. For a sneak peek: http://80.85.130.106 [Lila: feel free to remove this shameless promotion if you don’t consent]
Hi Leonardo –
Promote away. My blog is open to friends for promotion any time.
Actually, even some of my foes get promotion from me, maybe not quite the way they want it..
Regarding intellectual property, I think this talk given by Gary North is worth viewing:
http://mises.org/media.aspx