negative democracy — Q47,76
The concept of a republic where everything decided by a representative or owner or occasionally an election is up to an anti-vote (this can be called anti-voting, negative voting or un-voting). Within negative democracy, it would actually be possible to anti-vote for the president instead of voting for another candidate, or anti-buy an iPhone rather than buying an Android phone. This concept seems to be vastly more intuitive to most people in the United States, who in practice tend to misuse existing voting systems specifically to "un-vote" for people they voted for solely to be able to take their vote back.
[Dimensionality:] S - abstract concept or motif
[Field:] meta-Liberalism (MX onto LR), "Zinovievism" (Zv)
What is an MDem entry?
"MDem" is a work-in-progress book (very in-progress) about what nobody has understood about applying and communicating Marxism. Every time I think I've figured out a major error where various Marxisms have failed to analyze recent decades or each other I attempt to add it in some form to this book.
Some things get cut out and only remain as a single sentence. Some things get extensive chapters written about them. The book evolves as I get better understandings of individual things and how they go together.
As the underlying model evolves I sometimes separate out entries into different "versions" (similar to book editions, only none of them are published books). Relatively small changes separate entries into point versions. Big rewrites lead to new major versions.
"MDem" (when not in italics) also refers to a cluster of theoretical methods, including meta-Marxism (a framework for comparing multiple separate Marxisms despite them otherwise talking past each other every time they try to analyze each other), and hypothetically, future country-specific forms of Marxism which would start their models at small scales working up to large discrete objects and would be created using the meta-Marxist framework.
The "M" stands for "molecular", and in short refers to dialectical materialism. The title of the book is trying to say that "democracy" amounts to nonsense gobbledygook unless it includes an understanding of all cause and effect in the universe as coming from collisions of two separate things that change each other and produce a new big thing that exists at the same time as them. In version 4.3 I assumed it was perfectly intuitive to illustrate this with chemical reactions and polymers, though I now think I undershot on that and I'm working on a whole chapter about "relativistic determinism" (that's dialectical materialism for math professors) and what it actually is and the basic ways it changes nearly every physics equation.
'Molecular Democracy' 5.3 [chapters]
These are the ones I currently consider finished.
in this case one with bright color-coded lists on it
now imagine you don't need MediaWiki to run it and it's just a folder of text files
no user account login. no database. you have the flat wiki page. and the rendered one.
the only drawback is it's for one person to edit, not several
that's a bop stem
(It's a MediaWiki-like thing that unlike MediaWiki is meant to have a very low footprint, practically "zero weight")
But I want to use it for something called SSRs (Space for Special Research)
These are mini ontology projects
The main ontology project has 10,000 Items or something and they all have a particular number that is universal to all members of the wiki
But an SSR has its own numbering so anything can go in it, because it mostly references itself (it can reference the main LithoGraphIca Items too)
So what I want to do is make it possible to put up arbitrary SSRs that can be used to track book barcodes for particular book locations in the library constellation
The bop stem is full of text files
The text files contain data tables
The data tables contain barcode numbers, book numbers, and what user has checked out the book
None of the text files contain address information, that gets exchanged privately somewhere else and you just keep the locations of your nearest constellation points in your room somewhere, not in the bop stems / "wiki pages"
I am not sure the stems / data tables even say who offers them — the great advantage is as long as they have a bar code identifying the unique object they don't really have to
This would be a library that organizes itself by individual book, not by library location
It would be trying to have this sort of, "efficient coverage" of a few things the ontology project is studying instead of a lot of redundancy
That's not to say variety is forbidden, only that you could contribute those extra things but some things might not appear multiple times across the constellation
With a wide enough constellation of people it would be easier to have books in range to get to you within a day
Maybe easier than a "real" library, compared with how far away the libraries with the actually-interesting books are where I live
I call this phenomenon a Light Library
I will be sticking to Light over Shadow but mostly just because I don't have the time to put any of them on The Place
Like, I have physical books that I know to not be in libraries although they weren't expensive or anything, they're just ordinary but unnecessarily-hard-to-find books I hoarded
And I let people borrow them for a month
There aren't fees based on how many days but I ask that you refund me some $5 if you can't get the book back. Simple proof you donated the book somewhere is equally okay
My thoughts are this:
I have been building a catalog of concepts, book titles, and motifs in books
I usually work with a set of slightly older or off-beat things that poorly overlaps the set of things people are most familiar with — there are some exceptions, like when I analyze Deltarune and the cult following on that is pretty big
But if I let people approximately in range borrow the books — which aren't in the library — it would be like I made the library bigger
And people borrowing the books might edit the ontology project and make it easier to complete. At this moment I'm still prototyping some things and it's just me
(I sound weirdly like I am 60 years old or something and have never seen a Gen Z book. I'm only 31 years old)
#LithographicaConceptPad
In other ways, people seem to associate into groups around particular ideologies relatively naturally, and start all moving at once like one object. Religion. People getting pushed away from one race category and into another one through the process of forming populations. People sorting together around the same experiences of gender, and settling onto their accurate gender, and possibly forming a movement. Not all of it is reducible simply to "cultural traditions", "cultural compatibility". What if people cluster into a more highly-specific, constructed identity like "Trotskyist" or "Gramscian"? It's like there's something actively gluing people together that keeps them from merging into the same Marxism. Something which also might be operating in some of the supposedly "cultural" cases.
I have been fixated on quarks for a really strange reason.
Of course I take the literal physics on their own seriously, as you can see here.
But I have been thinking about whether capitalist biases have warped everyone's sense of what causality and time are.
Everyone keeps trying to understand society from the point of view of specific individuals and the life they supposedly "choose".
But every time, I would keep thinking, does any interaction of two anythings in the universe function that way? Every interaction uses and comes from each of the objects at once. Every chemical reaction, every bundle of quarks, every interaction between two animals we can name.
Caveat #2: I could absolutely be wrong.