💾 Archived View for library.inu.red › file › anonymous-intersectional-egoism.gmi captured on 2023-01-29 at 20:52:58. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content

-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Title: Intersectional Egoism
Author: Anonymous
Language: en

Anonymous

Intersectional Egoism

The belief that the self is an emergent intersectional phenomenon of

conflict and consent by a multitude of intersecting agencies that all

have their own desire to bind you to their perpetuity. Self empowerment

can only come from the dismantling of the intersections of internal and

external oppressions by being cognizant of what seeks to control you,

this cognizance can only be recognized through struggle. No perfect self

actualized ego can ever be formulated, rather it is a continual process

of renewal. Only the dismantling of those systems can foster the

societal environment necessary to give power to marginalized groups. The

very act of dismantling oppression and empowering the self creates the

politics and culture necessary to respect self actualized identity.

Maximizing the agency of ALL beings is a process, not an ideal, and it

can only be done by maximizing the potential for emergent gains within

any system via synergistic laws of common properties.

Identity can not be found reasonable or respectable if it is formed

through barriers of any oppressor, whether that be the State, the boss,

another person, or a god. Any identity formed by the intersections of

agreement by other people is only an egregore(spook) that seeks to set

limitations on self empowerment because it creates a controlling

narrative of what one can actually become. And therefore it is not truly

an identity that can empower the individual. It is a false identity that

is being used to ensure that the individual agrees to limitations in

order to receive acknowledgement by the group and with this

acknowledgement a certain amount of privilege.

True identity must come from self actualization of the individual

through the ability to create wards against ones own oppression. It is

only by ones power that they can be true. By creating barriers that do

not allow egregoric identities to arise, they ensure their own

properties are secured.

Any agreements created between agents must be done towards negative bias

and not towards positive bias. This is the nullification principle for

confederation. By saying that the collective will not agree to an ideal

towards something but rather to negate ideals from occurring against

them, they make more room for the individual to self actualize. If an

agreement is not nullifiable, it is not a true agreement. One must be

able to question the agreement and say, am I allowed to leave this

agreement and still be my own person without being made into a slave to

another?

For instance, if a group of people say that they all agree to ensure no

boss can rule over them, they are setting a barrier against the ideal of

boss, they are holding themselves up as the highest ideal while not

negating one another's prerogative of self. But if instead they say that

no individual can be allowed to become their own boss and control the

value of their own labor because that labor must go to those in need,

they have just created an ideal by which it is a boss. They sacrifice

agency rather than fortify it. And anyone that were to leave that

agreement would actually become an enemy of the groupthink. They would

be seen as seeking self empowerment and that would be evil. Whereas the

man who leaves the group that no men should be bosses over them simply

leaves a group that will not allow him to be their boss.

To deal with inequality and social healthcare in a society, one would

thus make an agreement that access to the properties of their existence

shall not be denied to them. Land, water, fire and air are the

properties of self, and thus to set up a barrier to ensure no ideal may

strip them of their properties, they create a system that necessitates

the individual's survival. But conversely to set up an agreement where

all resource is distributed by an ideal of how people should be valued

in society is to control the access to the properties of the individual

by homogenizing the individual into the group. It is theft of the

individuals agency.

It is only through negative bias that true consent can exist. Love is

not an agreement to become one, it is an agreement to carve out a world

of two. It is not a sacrifice of power to the relationship, it is the

stacking of power to build emergent gains which the two both obtain.

Consent is not sacrificing power to the other, that is called

compromise, rather true consent is the assuredness that power will gain

because no barriers are set against their relationships.

We do not need to become a united world, we need to become a self

actualized and diverse world. Our phenomenological sense of self is not

derived from oneness, but from the conflict and consent of our

multitudes. And our health is not derived from our ability to control

and manipulate our multitudes as one, but instead to allow for our

multitudes to all self actualize into a culture of many. Our inner

microbiotic diversity is what makes us strong. Our ecological diversity

makes systems more adaptable. Our cultural diversity makes our

perspectives keen and unique. It is by carving a world out for the many

that we may come to our fluid nature of intersectional egoism, and

because we become more diverse and unique as individuals and as a

holobiont microbial confederation, we are able to flow more freely into

our own evolutionary self empowerment