Bitcoin is a tool for facilitating peaceful human interaction on a scale larger than Dunbar’s number.

What the red pill crew gets fundamentally wrong about humanity is that the human survival adaptation is not domination, it's cooperation.

If you’re a supporter of capitalism you’ve probably been watching in dismay as the word has slowly become a slur. You can get mad and yell about it, you can lean into dictionary definitions, but really, when has that ever changed someones mind? You can’t fix a problem that you don’t understand. So, if you’d like to understand, and get some new strategy ideas, here is my shot at it. We can know that “capitalism” as in free markets, is what brings about the best and most humane outcome for a population. We can know that this is what improves quality of life, and bring peace and freedom, but no one else will know this if we repel most people. If we are the experts, then it’s our job to communicate our knowledge effectively. It's complex, but the primary issue here is a conflation of “hyper-independence” or “self reliance” and the concept of “capitalism” mixed with a failure to understand human evolution. We've messed that up. The human survival strategy is connection and co-operation. We form bonds and groups as a means of survival and we defend and lean into our community as if our lives depend on it, because it does. One human with one tiger means the human is lunch. 10 Humans with one tiger mean the tiger is lunch. We all know this deep in our bones. Rarely do we acknowledge this interdependence reality in our culture, at least in the States. We tend to view humanity as a “every man for himself” kind of world where “winning” means being above others in a zerosum hierarchy. And this concept seeps into our language, especially the language we use when discussing economics. But this is contrary to the reality of human well being. Most humans know deep in their bones that they need community. They can only thrive with community. And they are right. An interesting bit of evidence here are the studies on loneliness and all cause mortality. When we sell “capitalism” as a lonely endeavor, when we sell it with words used to signal distance and friction with our fellow humans rather than connection to them and care for them we trigger concerns for well being. ...valid concerns. When we use words like competition, profit motive, self-interest, self reliance, sink or swim, rugged individualism, survival of the fittest, etc. we signal to most humans that we are not fit for community building. We bring up sensations of loneliness and ostracization. We give the impression that we will destroy the community that they have a deep longing for. Now we can know, because we have done that math, that “capitalism” will bring about much better outcomes for a community, but wow are we doing a horrific job of communicating that. We know that mobs can bring out the worst of humanity. We know that the only way to prosper is to have a strong respect for individuality. But we need to be very conscious of the difference between respecting individuality and individual rights and disrespecting community and the close bonds and mutual support that it brings. We need to clearly communicate that free markets very much support and strengthen voluntary, respectful community. If we want to stop a wave of coming socialism, we really need a marketing overhaul. We need to understand that the human survival strategy is co-operation and community and we need to give that the respect it deserves and support that reality in our language. Very rightfully so an “every man for himself” world is being rejected, and “socialism” is the tool of that rejection. If we want to change that then we need to be better than the socialists at communicating the free market benefits to society and community. We can adapt ourselves to the reality of humanity, or we can die out as another ism. It’s our call.

I'll admit that I do have a bit of a preference for the... aesthetic. But when you think about it, it's kinda barbaric. And, in the modern world there just isn't any need for it. It's probably time to let this one go.

Are they someone who engages in understanding, or someone who engages in division? Someone can discuss things in an entirely factually accurate way, and use those facts to sow division. You can be technically correct and be trying to bring about division at the same time. Or someone can discuss difficult things, in a factually correct way, and do so with understanding and decency. Let’s start with a difficult fact: 90%+ of violent crime is committed by men. Of course there is nuance here, are we talking charges brought or convictions? In a specific country or globally? But even when adding all these specifics, the number stands. But how do we interpret this data? What does it motivate us to do? Are we looking at this from a mindset of understanding or a mindset of division? -- From the perspective of understanding: Men in general are physically bigger and stronger than half of humanity. This makes violence a much more effective tool for men than for women, thus making them more likely to use it. We know that violence is often the resort of people who feel that they don’t have other options. Men are often taught that they are supposed to be dominant and aggressive and that culture may push them in the direction of violence. We need to update cultural narratives, and support men to help ensure that they have better options in life than violence. -- From the perspective of division: Men have more testosterone and so they are just naturally more aggressive and this is why we shouldn’t trust them in positions of power. Probably a big factor in why humanity has dealt with so many wars in the past few thousand years. Men are so much more likely to beat and abuse when they think they can get away with it. There needs to be a higher bar for men when it comes to access to firearms or anything that could be used as a weapon. -- You can see here that someone can look at the same bit of accurate data and use it dramatically differently. The data can be used to belittle and diminish, or it can be used to understand and support.

I held a plank for 1 min and 45 seconds today! That's a personal best for me!

The algos will manipulate you. You gotta be careful.

So who's got the best write up on the GENIUS Act and it's impacts? Ya, ya I know I'm late to the party. Just send links! ...gracias.

As I know I'm going to keep getting questions about it, I have to go read up on the GENIUS Act 😫

We have regressive instincts and we have enlightened instincts, and we get to chose which ones we lean into.

Lying to someone destroys your ability to feel loved by them. Because you know, they can not love you if they do not know you.

All these stereotypes about men this and women that are far too rigid, they just don't make sense. Good honorable qualities are attractive in everyone, male or female. Like this idea that nurturing is only attractive in women and is weak in men. Wildly inaccurate. This morning I had to take my dog to the vet. Also sitting in the waiting room was an attractive man in his 20's, way too young for me, but he had long hair, a beard... and, he was cradling a small sick dog. He was comforting that little creature and my ovaries nearly exploded. We're I in my 20's and single I would have been throwing myself at that dude 🤩 Nurturing is an honorable quality that is wildly attractive in anyone who has it.

Women do not have legal equality until they have full bodily autonomy. Yes that means no bans on abortion. To be clear here, I am not ‘pro-abortion’. Never was there ever an abortion that wasn’t a tragedy. But it’s pretty clear, if you are not pregnant, then this is not your decision to make. Pregnant women are the only ones with the rights to make those very tough decisions. People in fancy suits hundreds of miles away have no right to make such difficult, nuanced, and personal decisions for another person. It is a wild trampling on freedom for them to attempt to. God/The Universe/Biology gave this burden and responsibility to women. We need to respect that, and respect women’s decision making.

There is such incredible beauty and power in motherhood. ...imagine, the ability to create whole new people! Wild.

I’ve known plenty of Christians who are/were lovely and loving people, but also, many, many who are not. Lately in my life there has been such an epic overlap in those who call themselves Christian or who wear a cross, and those who spew hate at me. Those who want to see me subservient, those you treat me with contempt, those who try to explain to me why my dear friends will burn in hell. It’s gotten to the point where there is so much overlap that when I see a cross around someone’s neck or in a social media profile my nervous system goes into alert mode. 🫤 To the non-hateful Christians, could you maybe have a chat with your compadres here? Maybe you can encourage them to be a bit more loving. I doubt this is the impression that you’d like to be having on the world.

It’s amusing that people say Charlie Kirk believed in freedom. I have some rather old school libertarian values. I very much support civil liberties and individuality and autonomy for every one, even married women like myself. Charlie did not, he wanted me to be subservient to my husband. And what he wanted for my LGBT friends… wow. This guy liked to use words like freedom, but actively spread ideas to the contrary. Not only a hypocrite but someone who trampled on the values of liberty. Sad.

To the men who tell me that I talk too much about misogyny… were the roles reversed, if you were dealing with what I deal with, and you did nothing, I would find you to be a coward and I would lose respect for you.