Culture is not a right. It is an emergent phenomenon, the cumulative expression of human action, preference, and exchange. To speak of a right to culture is to confuse cause and effect. Rights exist in natural law only insofar as they pertain to life, liberty, and property, which are the preconditions of voluntary cooperation. Culture arises from those freedoms; it cannot be legislated or granted by a state. When the government interferes, whether by censorship or by subsidies, it distorts the spontaneous order from which genuine culture emerges. If funding is withdrawn from programs sustained by inflationary credit and deficit spending, this is not a repeal of rights. It is the unwinding of a system built on fiat illusion. To lament that as a loss of culture is to reveal an economic misunderstanding: vitality cannot be preserved through coercive redistribution. It is preserved by allowing value to form organically. The Austrian economics view is that money is not a decree but a discovery, an emergent medium of exchange rooted in scarcity and voluntary acceptance. The same principle applies to culture. Both collapse when detached from natural law. No one can claim a right to someone else’s production, creativity, or taxation any more than one can claim a right to another’s labor. The tragedy is not that the state is defunding culture, but that the people still believe culture depends on the state and remain ignorant of the most important question: what is money. Begin by reading three books that will clarify this. The Creature from Jekyll Island by G. Edward Griffin, The Fiat Standard by Saifedean Ammous, and The Big Print by Lawrence Lepard. These explain how money is created, why fiat is unsound, and how every distortion in society begins with the corruption of value at its source.

I am psyched about this talk, as I have used Mi Primer Bitcoin’s curriculum to educate those who are willing to invest their time learning about the most important technology of the 21st century. Inquiry leads to awareness, accountability, and action, the foundation of value itself. Inquiry leads to awareness, accountability, and action. Get your tickets myfirstbitcoin.io

Annual voluntary contract

Unpopular point of view: The Paradox of Bio-“Hacking” The obsession with optimization has replaced the art of listening. Listening to whom? To your body. It already knows how to repair, regulate, and evolve. The need to hack comes from control. Every shortcut creates dependency. Every injection, a distance from rhythm. You can do you, and I’ll do me. This is the wisdom at sixty-one that I bring forth.

Enjoy ur 🌞day

Self-knowledge is the highest value, as @_yerasimos says, and I couldn’t agree more. With courage, we can integrate our shadows and become our unique selves. Synthesizing it through diverse tools becomes a path towards truth. Go check this beautiful conversation with @joelrafidi and Yerasimos from @areyouhereforthetruth #humandesing #jungianshadowwork #evolutionaryastrology at MonikaBravo.blog

Grammar has power, so do logic and rhetoric. Learn your grammar, for its structural reasoning is the architecture of lawful thought. Together, they form the original trivium—> the foundation of law and philosophy. Grammar expresses relationship, logic orders it, and rhetoric gives it resonance. So here we go. These are grammar capsules.👇 The Body as Property under Law Under Natural Law and Common Law, property begins with the body and its faculties. John Locke, whose Second Treatise on Government shaped the Declaration of Independence, wrote: “Every man has a property in his own person. This nobody has any right to but himself.” From this premise, life, liberty, and property form a trinity—>life as the source of liberty, liberty as the expression of property. Any law or mandate that compels medical treatment, bodily submission, or biometric surrender without consent or due process constitutes a taking of private property under Natural and Common Law. The Fifth Amendment states*: “Nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation.” Interpreted fully, this applies to any forced use or invasion of the body; the first and highest form of property. Statutory Law, which operates as public policy rather than higher law, separates bodily autonomy from property, allowing coercion under “police powers” (Jacobson v. Massachusetts, 197 U.S. 11, 1905). This creates the central divide: 👀👇 Natural / Common Law: The body is sacred property; consent is absolute. Statutory / Public Policy: The body may be regulated under a “compelling state interest.” This boundary defines the private and the public. The body is the first property right, and any act imposed without informed consent is a trespass against both property and liberty. Universal Principle Natural Law predates all governments. It forms the foundation of the Anglo-American system and remains valid in the United States, England, Canada, and Australia. Its principles are universal: You own your body, labor, and capacity to act. Consent is the precondition for any lawful claim upon your person. Violation of bodily autonomy is trespass upon property and liberty. Common Law in all these nations upholds this doctrine. The principle in Schloendorff v. Society of New York Hospital (1914) affirms that “Every human being of adult years and sound mind has a right to determine what shall be done with his own body.” In England, the Human Rights Act (1998) enforces this under Article 8, and in Australia, Rogers v. Whitaker (1992) 175 CLR 479 affirms bodily integrity and informed consent. The Modern Conflict Across jurisdictions, public policy statutes; health, emergency, or biosecurity acts create temporary administrative authority to override consent under “compelling state interest.” Thus: Private Law: Consent-based, rooted in property and liberty. Public Law: Permission-based, regulating subjects. Basically The principle of the body as property is universal. Every human being holds an inherent right of self-ownership and bodily autonomy. No law, statute, or administrative order can lawfully compel an act upon the body without informed consent; except by presumed consent under statutory jurisdiction, which can and must be rebutted. *The Constitution recognizes certain rights; it does not create them. Lawful order exists to acknowledge what already belongs to life itself.

Sacred -> sacrifice > offering Full episode here with Joel and yerasimos from here for the truth

Excited to share this episode! I really loved the conversation. Joel + Yerasimos have such an incredible community, an ease and depth in dialogue that allowed my whole range of themes to unfold naturally. I truly appreciated that flow. here for the truth :::::: In this episode, we dive into the extraordinary life and mind of multidisciplinary artist and philosopher Monika Bravo — a woman whose journey spans continents, paradigms, and dimensions. From her early years in Colombia and Greece to three decades of public art installations around the world, Monika shares how her path of self-education, intuitive inquiry, and disillusionment with institutional systems led her toward synthesis — bridging art, philosophy, Austrian economics, and consciousness. We explore her experience surviving 9/11, her rejection of indoctrination in favor of true education, her awakening to Bitcoin as a state of consciousness, and her vision for a civilization grounded in value, truth, and individual sovereignty.

📊 Bitcoin Technical Analyst One of my wishes is to become a proficient Bitcoin technical analyst by studying and specializing in Ichimoku structure, Gann time cycles, and volume analysis, with the intention to develop a personal view on how the market is breathing. My background in astrological and Human Design chart reading gives me a unique perspective, as I naturally think in cycles, geometrical patterns, harmonics, and multi-timeframe relationships. This translates into strong pattern recognition and synthesis across different analytical methods, allowing me to see confluences others might miss. For entertainment purposes only. Value is subjective.

In the Middle Ages, lawfulness meant alignment with natural and customary law; taxation was lawful only by consent, for the common good, and within moral limits. Common law affirms that property rests in natural right, government power arises from consent, and any exaction without lawful authority is void. The essay Why Taxes Were So Hated in the Middle Ages from the Mises Institute reminds us that modern taxation rests not on lawfulness but on legality, a system of power that replaced consent with authority. In other words, it traces the transition from lawful order to legal power, allowing the reader to recognize that modern systems operate by statute rather than by natural law. “During the Middle Ages, taxation was considered to be appropriate only as an extreme measure in times of emergency, and as a last resort. Kings were expected to subsist on revenues from their own property, and to respect the property of others.” — Mises Wire, Why Taxes Were So Hated in the Middle Ages, Ryan McMaken. https://mises.org/mises-wire/why-taxes-were-so-hated-middle-ages

Wise take from the tower position; I observe and discern Thanks bob Core vs knots 👀👇