The following could amount to a crucial and timely philosophical

File: 00all_groß.jpg (1MB, 1914x1072px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1914x1072px

(2/2)
And it has some important conclusions for the present years' situation:
- Liberation is important only besides "best for all", therefore there has to be a dynamic limit to it: "increasingly voluntary liberations-sum equality" (Binding engagement subtracts from liberation.)
- Liberation, that is ignorant of other agents, risks their antiliberation, pressing them to liberate themselves as well. This possible mutually ignorant subgroup liberation can spiral down. The way out, even for past events, seems to be "increasingly voluntary antiliberation compensation".
The first point would ease inequality tensions and the second would slow downward spirals in politics, economics... from small to big scale.

-If you mind, take these last points to a news page of your flavour and test them.
-Please be careful implementing, I am too poor to compensate damage done.
-I cherish anonymity here, as I seem productive that way and I guess, that with a public position that would change, to long term detriment.
-I learned to prefer gradual evolution over disruptive revolution. This system should help with that.
-The most urgent consequence seems to be, that people keep calm and go on in their doings, now seemingly assured of improvement, to avoid systemic seizure.

Thanks for all good
All good to all

>>1581233
If man was not born to die then your system would work.
This is not the case, thus your system would ultimately fail.
We are not all you and I for one would work to deliberately hinder your pursuits to further my own.

>>1581769
Thanks for your high quality reply.
>If man was not born to die then your system would work.
Certain death is ending soon, so that should as soon be a minor obstacle.
>We are not all you and I for one would work to deliberately hinder your pursuits to further my own.
If my pursuits antiliberate you and you are fucking angry, you could make a justified claim for compensation. There would still be conflict but maybe more vocal and less violent. Resources may seem too scarce for all these compensations, but the world GDP still grows exponentially. Fair competition is maintained. Unfair moves are what qualifies for compensation claims.

>>1581233
you've already posted this and it's already been shown we can't have a philosophical discussion with you when your english is so poor

Why would man want to do what is best for all?

>>1582393
Thanks for replying.
It is up to you if you want to put up with my poor English. I certainly am unable to improve it upon request.

>>1582393
dont be rude, he is our friendly resident autist

>>1582399
Thanks for replying.
Because after more or less liberation and more or less experience in the effects of one's activity and more or less questioning the meaning of life, one sometimes grows a sense for purposeful activity. "best for all" gives a universal aim and a perfect quality. Unreachable, but inspiring orientation or framing thought well.
By current standards and in my case over some years it seems to have really worked wonders.