This ihas been one of my favourite Corbett chats ever. I've never come across Gabriel before but I'm definitely going to follow up on him and the digital freedom group/ org he is involved with. Gabriel had so many great insights - awesome! It's heartenng to hear such wisdom and keen analysis from someone young,, or at least way younger than me, who is ( probaibly) a digital native.
Loved this! Two of my favorite thinkers, thinking out loud together.
I just started reading Reportage and enjoyed the intro by Whitney. Looking forward to the rest. And Nick Heys contacted me after the comment I left on his interview on Reportage, and is reading my book in preparation for an interview! He's also preparing for his 9 mo-old son's eviction from his womb rental (in his words ;-) so he's a little busy, but I'm excited for that connection. I found his interview of James to be exceptionally informed and insightful.
As was this! I was especially happy to hear James expose the psyop of 'journalistic neutrality' as a recent invention. Looking back at the Populist movement, the motivation for starting a newspaper was to present the news from a particular point of view--the right of self-determination, for instance. To present events without historical context or meaning is already a pov, if it were even possible. The important thing is to own your bias, as the liberation theologians say. I see things as a mother and a small scale sovereigntist.
And James' emphasis on deciding what to believe rather than who to believe. I live in the world of ideas and I'm lucky to have one daughter who shares that. But also lucky to have a daughter who lives in the world of relationships and one whose preferred mode is food, exercise and spirituality. It keeps me both grounded and airy ;-)
Gabe, when we do the commonwealth simulation of my caret system, I hope you will be the technology czar. Where I differ from you and James is that I don't think sovereignty is possible without an actual flesh-and-blood community of the people who live around you. As long as the Rothschilds usurp ownership of the homes through the mortgage, they own our labor. No real change is possible without changing that.
In my system of distributing the collective mortgages as targeted, tax-free subsidies, each neighborhood or even block could support their resident techie, networked in to the hamlet, the village, and then the commonwealth so everyone's working on the same problems. This gives a real person to work with, not you alone 'trusting' some form of anonymous system. And it's my same objection to anonymous currency. The word credit comes from credere: credibility, reputation. I want to be able to trace the person to whom my money goes--especially when it's unauthorized by me.
Thank you Tereza, I learned a lot from this conversation.
Glad to hear your book is getting more attention, I look forward to the interview!
I think we're all aligned on the fact that true community does require real in-person social bonds, I guess where we all differ is our specific focus(es) on trying to reignite that particular bonfire. I definitely think to the degree organic interactions online are possible, we should refine our digital experience for them.
A big reason I think it's important to consider what to believe rather than who to believe is that I would wager many people can't even articulate what they believe in today's environment. The main reason I'm such a fan of decentralized fact-finding is that I at least hope it can help clear some of the fog over people.
But James did a great job at pointing out that there are things beyond the raw aggregation of facts, the importance of transferring wisdom can't be overstated. This is why recently I have been so concerned about the age dimension to the culture wars. It seems the separation of young from old has been the source of so much unnecessary confusion and pain. It's clear you've given a great deal of thought on how to directly address this head-on, and I think it's an invaluable stance.
Thank you, Gabe. And I would never trade in-person conversation for my real connections with people like you! I keep my convos superficial, intentionally. Love 'n lite ;-) I save my arguments for my web friends.
It's the logistics, not the content, that I'd like to see localized. I envision a parallel web that has no corporations allowed. All faux P2P services--like AirBnB, Uber, Lyft and especially Nextdoor--would be a network of sovereign community-owned hubs. So it would still have a global reach, but the locus of control would be local.
Thanks for your kind words about my book and my stance ;-) And yes, the 'boomer derangement syndrome' is another psyop, certainly. I've been seeing a lot more of that attack lately.
This ihas been one of my favourite Corbett chats ever. I've never come across Gabriel before but I'm definitely going to follow up on him and the digital freedom group/ org he is involved with. Gabriel had so many great insights - awesome! It's heartenng to hear such wisdom and keen analysis from someone young,, or at least way younger than me, who is ( probaibly) a digital native.
Great wide-ranging conversation. I listened while on a two-hour bus trek through the mountains of Croatia.
Loved this! Two of my favorite thinkers, thinking out loud together.
I just started reading Reportage and enjoyed the intro by Whitney. Looking forward to the rest. And Nick Heys contacted me after the comment I left on his interview on Reportage, and is reading my book in preparation for an interview! He's also preparing for his 9 mo-old son's eviction from his womb rental (in his words ;-) so he's a little busy, but I'm excited for that connection. I found his interview of James to be exceptionally informed and insightful.
As was this! I was especially happy to hear James expose the psyop of 'journalistic neutrality' as a recent invention. Looking back at the Populist movement, the motivation for starting a newspaper was to present the news from a particular point of view--the right of self-determination, for instance. To present events without historical context or meaning is already a pov, if it were even possible. The important thing is to own your bias, as the liberation theologians say. I see things as a mother and a small scale sovereigntist.
And James' emphasis on deciding what to believe rather than who to believe. I live in the world of ideas and I'm lucky to have one daughter who shares that. But also lucky to have a daughter who lives in the world of relationships and one whose preferred mode is food, exercise and spirituality. It keeps me both grounded and airy ;-)
Gabe, when we do the commonwealth simulation of my caret system, I hope you will be the technology czar. Where I differ from you and James is that I don't think sovereignty is possible without an actual flesh-and-blood community of the people who live around you. As long as the Rothschilds usurp ownership of the homes through the mortgage, they own our labor. No real change is possible without changing that.
In my system of distributing the collective mortgages as targeted, tax-free subsidies, each neighborhood or even block could support their resident techie, networked in to the hamlet, the village, and then the commonwealth so everyone's working on the same problems. This gives a real person to work with, not you alone 'trusting' some form of anonymous system. And it's my same objection to anonymous currency. The word credit comes from credere: credibility, reputation. I want to be able to trace the person to whom my money goes--especially when it's unauthorized by me.
Thoroughly enjoyed this!
Thank you Tereza, I learned a lot from this conversation.
Glad to hear your book is getting more attention, I look forward to the interview!
I think we're all aligned on the fact that true community does require real in-person social bonds, I guess where we all differ is our specific focus(es) on trying to reignite that particular bonfire. I definitely think to the degree organic interactions online are possible, we should refine our digital experience for them.
A big reason I think it's important to consider what to believe rather than who to believe is that I would wager many people can't even articulate what they believe in today's environment. The main reason I'm such a fan of decentralized fact-finding is that I at least hope it can help clear some of the fog over people.
But James did a great job at pointing out that there are things beyond the raw aggregation of facts, the importance of transferring wisdom can't be overstated. This is why recently I have been so concerned about the age dimension to the culture wars. It seems the separation of young from old has been the source of so much unnecessary confusion and pain. It's clear you've given a great deal of thought on how to directly address this head-on, and I think it's an invaluable stance.
Thank you, Gabe. And I would never trade in-person conversation for my real connections with people like you! I keep my convos superficial, intentionally. Love 'n lite ;-) I save my arguments for my web friends.
It's the logistics, not the content, that I'd like to see localized. I envision a parallel web that has no corporations allowed. All faux P2P services--like AirBnB, Uber, Lyft and especially Nextdoor--would be a network of sovereign community-owned hubs. So it would still have a global reach, but the locus of control would be local.
Thanks for your kind words about my book and my stance ;-) And yes, the 'boomer derangement syndrome' is another psyop, certainly. I've been seeing a lot more of that attack lately.
This could be a game changer or could be another "nothing burger" from Odysee.
As usual, they are very very light on DETAILS.
https://odysee.com/@Odysee:8/unveilingportalrequestearlyaccess:6
I signed up when they put that out but never received anything so far...
Great stuff Gabriel!
Just FYI, the link to the "Digital autonomy series" is broken (links to localhost) so you may wanna fix that.
Gah! Fixed đŸ«£