I strongly disagree. For me, submission is not a pejorative and certainly not limited to adversarial dynamics. You can voluntarily submit to authority, submit your body to manipulation by someone you trust (a surgeon, for example), submit to a court judgement and so on. Violence is only one, and the least desirable, way of establishing a hierarchy. Trust is a better one. On a religious note, alluding to a thread you started elsewhere - when mystics speak of submission to God's will, they certainly don't mean being beaten and guit-tripped into conformity (the Protestant way), but a voluntary and deep conformance to the deepest structure of reality.

Bruh, pls stahp

Are we not an "organ" of the universe?

Oops, I mean 😬

Wen ?

Yes! I've been watching this for quite some time. The people I follow from spheres of Bitcoin, carnivore diet, physical fitness, meaning-making, psychedelics, neo-mysticism (and so on) seem to orbit around the same attractor. Examples off the top of my head: - John Vervaeke interviewed on "What is money" - being here on nostr, shilling Bitcoin - Peterson talking to (two carnivores btw) - Guys like who I often find speaking my exact thoughts Guys, I really think something big is happening.

The connection between soil erosion an the fall of civilizations, you non-orthodox (but probably right) views about grazing intensity, your personal story... A lot of good stuff overall. No questions for now - I'm getting down to reading :)

Thanks, that should keep me occupied for quite some time!

The article you sent is great. I would appreciate some literature on regenerative grazing, soil health and also the business side of starting and running a regen ranch.

listening to the podcast (link for others: https://open.spotify.com/episode/0JUy8gt3jNIkRk4hIKSfhj?si=5ucmKMC5QVOT4ZBCiqHD4Q). The most interesting stuff I've listened to in a long time. Would you be willing to make a must read compilation about the topics you covered in the pod?

Have you done any profitability analysis on that? I wonder if it makes sense to run one, given the cost of equipment and solar panel degradation over time.

I don't think I'm confusing those terms, but I see trust as a prerequisite to fruitful submission. I tried to define my terms in the response to your question about hierarchies. I don't know how to link notes, I hope this works.

That's a very grim, although not baseless, view of religion. This is the great problem with religious institutions - they tend to ossify around a set of moral rules and dogmas, leaving the proper religious experience far out of reach of the people they claim to serve. Ironically, I often (almost always) find that atheists in my circles are more christian than the self-declared christians.

Hierarchies - to a degree, patriarchy - not really. I think that the answer to the question of a proper human organization resembles something more like a dance than a rigid structure. To be more specific - I understand the word "submission" as a temporary and partial ceding of control over yourself to somebody else. And the degree of proper submission to others greatly depends on the circumstances, the competence of the person I'm submitting to, the relation of trust between us, my own competence/skills and a host of other factors. Therefore, the structures of authority and submission should never be to rigid - sometimes I lead and sometimes I'm led. However, some people will be more equipped to leading than being led and vice-versa. And this is the degree to which I believe in hierarchies. I find this dynamic to be reflected in multiple aspects of life, including sex. And like in sex, I do believe that if the dynamic is based on trust and love, it won't really matter who's submitting to whom at a given moment.

> are you submitting to the masseuse when you get a massage? Yes, in a way. I won't be able to prove to you that my intuitions are right, but this is my perspective. And of course I'm in no position to question your own experience.

I would say that giving your body up for somebody else to manipulate (pardon the awkward expression, can't express this properly in English) is inherently submissive, or at least I strongly feel it to be so. The problem I see is that we've (by "we" I mean both the patriarchal and feminist worldviews) started seeing all kinds of submission as something to be shunned. But not all kinds of submission are created equal. I think that it pretty obviously boils down to whether the act is voluntary. There are few experiences that can compete with willingly surrendering yourself to someone else, if you do it in love and trust, while the same (if viewed mechanistically) act is traumatizing if imposed upon us. So, in terms of sex, I think that being a bottom in STRONGLY submissive (you're being penetrated, for God's sake), so men will tend to be more dominant in this sphere of life (also taking into account the vast discrepancy in size and strength), but: a) it's not a bad thing, b) it's not true 100% of the time (we can chose to be submissive and it's much more fun if we do from time to time), c) it does not have to carry over to all the other aspects of life, as some more patriarchally-minded people would like it to.