Subject: Chat with David G.
From: "David G." <kawphy@gmail.com>
To: barriticus@gmail.com

David: So the Revolution seems to be doing very well
me: surprisingly so
David: I'm of the opinion that there should be a 'corporate death penalty'
David: if an individual can be proven beyond a reasonable doubt to have broken a law, prosecute him or her...
David: if a corporation clearly has violated the law, but you can't prosecute an individual... hey, corporations are people, prosecute them!
me: yes, there are any number of great ideas that could be implemented if the voting public were different than what it is
David: and for grevious enough crimes, the punishment should be Nationalization, whereby the State then either liquidates the company, or makes it transparent, makes it profitable, then sells it off for revenue
David: agreed.
David: I think the movement is wrong to ask for the repeal of corporate personhood though.
me: The political process is only as good as the public
David: agreed.
me: which is the entire reason for Anon and other such entities; you can have as good as argument as possible for a certain policy but the public and its representatives are the limiting factor
David: we need a focus on the need for fiscal literacy in the 99%
David: not blame-oriented
David: skills training
David: I got a buddy that does that professionally
me: That's why I, for instance, am more interested in dissolving the nation or at least activating the intelligent and organizing them into active entities
me: rather than trying to win arguments with people who have proven themselves to have emotional commitments to other arguments
David: my feelings are that we're already in the 'transitional government' phase. We need to plan the NEXT economy, rather than take down the present. The present has already failed.
me: A lot of Anons believe the problem is that the public's wishes are not expressed
me: I think the problem is the public
David: agreed. The public got together and voiced their wishes, and there was no unified idea
David: which is fine!
David: but that needs to be the starting point for a conversation
me: And they were for the war in 2003
David: I think historians will regard this period of time as "The Great Conversation"
me: There's a lot than can be done to change the public stance, but there's more to be done without regard for public opinion at alll
David: certainly
David: establishing science, reason, and an understanding of Hume amongst policy-maker
me: The question, I think, should be, "How can those of us who know these things implement policy ourselves?"
David: here's my thoughts on that...
me: And the answer is to prompt the intelligent to start their own insitutions
David: we have two traditional class divides - the rich vs. the poor, and the ruling class vs. the disenfranchised...
David: and the wealthy class and ruling class have massive overlap
David: but there's a new class divide emerging... the digital divide
David: the connected class vs. the unconnected
David: and the barrier is much lower with that divide
David: so we need the connected class to become the ruling class
David: we don't need to 'eat the rich'; just remove their 'ruling class' status
David: meanwhile, we should have a new 'moon mission', whereby our nation invests in developing a global satellite network that provides free, broadband, uncensored, unfiltered, unmonitored wireless internet to every inhabited corner of the planet
David: and a push to provide internet-ready devices to any who want them
David: do this, things will work out
David: (along with the corporate death penalty, and a new constitutional amendment establishing a 'sunset clause' for ALL legislation)