What exactly do you feel is inaccurate in the original table and why? Also it would help if you would provide your definition of slavery.
As I already stated, your apparent bias to want to frame everything in terms of the importance of non-existent absolutely true morals (from my perspective my opinion that is a manifestation of your lack of freewill because you are enslaved in God religion delusion), leads you to put entries on the table which I assert are irrational, incorrect, and myopic.
...
How many times have I told you both publicly and in private messages that top-down control doesn't mean there is only one top authority. A diversification of cults each with their own top-down control, is consistent. Never do we have in the universe a falsifiable example of a single top-down authority for any phenomenon. Even you noted that religions are not all the same.
...
Afaics, the only absolute and thus noble goal is to adapt to maximize the increase in entropy in the universe.
I see so let me see if I understand your perspective. You feel that by accepting God as true and by accepting religion as a mechanism for optimising cooperation and health I am joining a philosophical cult?
The only way it could not be, is if you could prove it is a testable truth. But of course you can't, because God will forever be unfalsifiable. I had already refuted you when you tried to link God to health and other benefits and explained the benefits could be due to the control over defection which concludes nothing about whether God truth appendage is valid.
You acknowledge that some kind of philosophical cult is a requirement for all individuals (each with its own top-down control and organization) but but you reject the religious explanation because of it's claim of moral truth?
I didn't disagree that religion is a form of top-down control.
I reject that I have to agree that God is true or that God being true has anything to do with why religion achieves some of the benefits of top-down control over defection (and also some of the defects of it being an otherwise irrational faith mind control).
Afaics, you are still stuck emotionally on needing for their to be absolute moral truths that are "noble" fixes for what you hate about nature. Sorry IMO you are just deluding yourself, creating power vacuums with Frankenstein outcomes... And thus not understanding what I am writing:
I don't need to go controlling everyone else (but maybe I need to control my but not your offspring) and destroying diversity in order to feel good about the reality of nature. It seems most other humans today just don't feel comfortable without some grand accomplishments such as "absolute independence and freedom for every human" (which is of course is egalitarian, a uniform distribution, static, and thus absolutely impossible).
In its place you promote the cult of maximizing entropy which you claim is moral truth.
I am just claiming nature is truth. Morals appear to a nebulous, mind control lie that man created. Ethics based on falsifiable outcomes of best adaptation would apparently be a rational field of study. In other words, if a company has a code of conduct based on measurable outcomes that increase its success, I would consider that to be rational.
Morals as values not based on rational assessment of outcomes enables Frankenstein outcomes such as how SJWs are patting themselves on the back while they leave power vacuums in their wake and sending society into an intense phase of creative destruction in Stage #5.
From this truth you hope to rally a group of like minded atheist white men in the Philippines and form a cooperative and vibrant community where men are strong and control their women.
Huh
I have written numerous times (mostly in private to you and others) that I wish to leave the Philippines at my soonest opportunity to do so. I keep mentioning how it is dangerous to stay here given 70+% of the population has a LTBI (latent TB infection) and thus my risk of reinfection is unacceptably high (given the medications might not work the next time I am infected). I don't want to play Russian roulette with my life. I've suffered enough!I am not going to rally any men. I have stated I hope there are a few strong men out there who will be interested in the ideas presented. It doesn't mean I want to be involved with them or organize anything with other men. If anything, I wouldn't involve with other men who have their own values from their formative years. I am not about to try to get into indoctrination and re-education of adults (indoctrination of children is always done, so much better it be done by the parents than the SJWs and the State). I would at most do something if I had more offspring and I have told you numerous times that I probably will do nothing about more offspring because I am coming 52 this June.
I told you and others that I recently decided to make this a priority issue of discussion because I have to make a decision whether to give my 27 year old gf a child or not. And I am heavily leaning towards not, but at least I want to understand what I would require if I did. And this is all part of my analysis of whether she would be fit to my requirements for making a family again.
And again I think not. I don't want teenage kids when I am 70.
But I am open sourcing my thoughts.
You oppose coercion and do not feel force should be used to compel women to join or stay in your community. You believe women will voluntarily rush to give up their emancipation and join your community as the attraction of a true community of strong men will be overwhelming?
I already told you upthread that I am not focused on eliminating women's suffrage at the governance level.
I would rather be focused on what the women I am involved with actually do. I made an upthread post explaining to you that I would also leave it up to the self-directed autodidact choices of each individual offspring as to what was best fit to them as a person.
But in terms of forming a community, it would have to be built via the offspring, not from an existing pool of adults. It is clear it would require a multi-generational strategy and I mentioned this upthread.
You are just not comprehending all my comments holistically. You are forgetting many things I've written. You apparently need it all compacted into one essay so you can read it over and over and assimilate all the points holistically.
Do you foresee potential problems establishing your new community?
Of course, I see a lot of challenges to establishing a new cultural strategy.
But doing things the easy way is not acceptable to me if the easy way is failure directed.
As I said, I'll probably choose to just focus on my career and intellectual stimulation and not burden myself with such a grand challenge at too late of an age.