“The road to hell is paved with good intentions”

by @ankorinclan There was a period in Antonio Escohotado’s life that many are unaware of or prefer to forget, because it contradicts the image he projected in his later years. Before becoming one of the great champions of individual freedom, before writing against communism with unusual harshness, he himself was part of that world. It wasn’t just a passing phase. In his youth, at the height of Franco’s dictatorship, Escohotado participated in anti-Franco circles and even became active in groups close to revolutionary communism—something quite common at that time among young intellectuals who saw that ideology as a way to challenge the established system. But over time, something happened that he himself would later acknowledge with complete clarity: he began to study in depth what he believed in. And that study changed everything. For decades, Escohotado immersed himself in the history of communism, researching everything from its earliest origins to its modern manifestations. He did so without any preconceived notions, but with an obsession to understand how those ideas actually functioned when put into practice. He himself explained in interviews that this process gradually dismantled many of his initial beliefs, forcing him to reevaluate everything he had taken for granted. The result was not a simple change of opinion. It was a profound transformation. He went from seeing communism as a source of hope to analyzing it as a system that, in his view, tended to devolve into forms of control and authoritarianism—a point he elaborated on extensively in his work *The Enemies of Commerce*, where he examined the evolution of these ideas throughout history across thousands of pages. Over the years, he came to define himself as a liberal democrat, though he never quite fit into conventional labels, because his focus revolved less around left or right and more around a constant tension between freedom and power. And perhaps the most interesting thing about his story is not the point he reached, but the journey. Escohotado made no secret of the fact that he had changed his mind. On the contrary, he considered it proof that true thinking implies being willing to correct oneself, to abandon certainties, and to accept that one may have been wrong. For him, the concern was not changing, but remaining trapped in an idea out of emotional loyalty or fear of questioning it. That is why he is an uncomfortable figure for many. Because he was not consistent in the classic ideological sense, but in something more difficult: in the constant quest to understand, even when that meant breaking with what he had previously defended. His life leaves a lesson that goes beyond any political movement. It is not about what you believe, but whether you are willing to reexamine why you believe it. And that, in a world where many cling to their ideas as identities, is probably one of the rarest forms of freedom.

Good morning!

Hoy siento mucho asco de mi país. Es una sociedad podrida hasta la médula, un cáncer metastásico.

Well, that’s it—Noelia is dead; she was murdered by the state. If I were her father, I would seek revenge. R.I.P View quoted note →

Videos of the girl who, according to the media, is paraplegic. The videos were posted by her father, who is the only one trying to save her. View quoted note →

View quoted note →

by @RoguesPhilo Ted Kaczynski was right. We think of him as a "schizo extremist", but his philosophy predicted the response to the Epstein files — nothing. The Epstein files makes it clear: everyone in the government are traitors; they're all "in on it". So, why does no one overthrow the tyrants, like our ancestors overthrew the British during Revolutionary War? Ted Kaczynski claims that: "Several hundred years ago, violence was not considered immoral in European society. In fact, under suitable conditions, it was admired. The most prestigious social class was the nobility, which was then a warrior caste." The Western world was once defined by hierarchy, rule of great men who organized the lesser in accordance with God’s will. The ideal of Empire propelled us to dominate the world. The warrior held the most valuable position in the hierarchy, as his force was necessary to conquer and maintain the law decreed by the higher. Now the “man of action” is spat upon, anyone who remotely suggests organization is quickly labeled a “fed poster” and singled out for elimination. Why? What caused this shift? With traditional, Aryan hierarchy abandoned, technological progress has become our organizational principle. This was, however, not always the case. Progress was "held in check" by tradition until the 1700s, when: The "French Revolution [lead to the] disappearance of religious and social taboos [and replaced them with] materialism, the suppression of the various hierarchies, regicide, and the struggle against the clergy”. Modern civilization may appear to be “collapsing”, but it is rather being molded to “smooth out” any differentiation that may impede technological expansion. Progress is the force of inversion in itself that mandates everything degenerate into a lowest, collective, indistinguishable sameness. The will of technology is to expand as efficiently as possible; it organizes civilization in such a way that barriers to its expansion are rapidly eliminated — this means the total deletion of unique expressions of identity. The “efficiency principle” functions as follows: "In addition to suppressing racial, ethnic, religious, and other group hostilities, it also has to suppress or harness for its own advantage all other tendencies that could lead to disruption or disorder, such as machismo, aggressive impulses, and any inclination to violence”. All cogs in the machine must function at maximum optimality at all times to quicken advancement. Individual expressions of uniqueness become impediments to progress. Therefore, all must become the same. All must become normalized, standardized, stripped of any hindrance. Culture is first targeted and destroyed. The time required to produce beautiful works and architecture is the first to go. We don't need quality. We need quantity. We demand simple, mass production to expand the urban environment as quickly as possible. Families are ripped up from the wilds and quickly filed one by one into concrete honeycomb towers to forever remain. This process of coaxing members into urbanized environments and removing them from folk practices has caused a crisis of skill. We literally forgot how to rebel against the system, after generations of urban and suburban life. We cannot remotely fathom how to revive, let alone value, American folk practices related to frontier life — homesteading, self-production of food and resources, hunting, trapping, etc. The Americans were able to win the Revolutionary War because of our frontiersman culture. Our people fought perfectly integrated with nature and supplied one another with goods produced by our folk. We maintained a rugged, self-sufficient population and an ascetic warrior culture across generations in such a way that most everyone was both ready and capable enough to fight “at any minute”. Rebellion today is impossible; we are completely reliant upon the system for all goods, income, defense, etc. The list of our needs is endless and eternal. It makes no difference that we “notice” the chains around our necks and the Satanic pedophiles who whip us. We have no skill, no virtue, no ability to fight. Rather, we are happy to be slaves, so long as we have access to an unlimited amount of “goyslop” to distract us. Even we revolutionary types are too useless to act. In our profound stupidity, we "high IQ" members confuse the act of “noticing” our chains with rebellion in itself. In fact, we're "noticing" ourselves to death. To pretend that knowledge alone constitutes an authentic revolutionary act against "the system" shows how useless we've become. We lack the skill to engage authentic acts of resistance. We lack the will to go beyond our prison. Worse, we rationalizes the prison as our home, our most holy value. Surely, we believe, someone more powerful will save us, will come to our aide in our time of need. So, we go out triumphantly and vote, consenting to continue our demise. Until we are able to overcome materialist fixation and our authentic belief that the slave system is a value we will continue to lose and rationalize passivity as an ideal.

Why is Bitcoin losing the dark-net markets? The article is from 2022, but it’s very candid, and the situation is even worse now.

Why is Bitcoin losing the dark-net markets?

If you wanted to buy contraband online in the last 5 years or so, you may have noticed that the option to pay in Bitcoin - once the most popular fo...

It’s sad that people haven’t realized that stablecoins are essentially CBDCs. Countries like the U.S. will never issue a CBDC because they already have one. In any case, there may come a time when either Tether is seized and placed under the control of the Fed, or the Fed creates its own ERC-20 token. An ERC-20 token can be frozen, and you can also add an expiration date and many other features to it. The only advantage of an ERC-20 token over a CBDC is that, since there isn’t a single wallet, it’s harder to implement geographical restrictions, for example—but it’ll all come eventually. In short, Bitcoiners are accepting the very CBDCs they’ve fought so hard against—what a bunch of morons.

by @PostigoElena Buenos días. Ayer me pidieron que dijera algo sobre el caso de #Noelia desde la #Bioética. Confieso que su historia me ha conmovido profundamente. La de una joven, hija de padres divorciados con dificultades, de la que se hizo cargo Asuntos Sociales y fue internada en un centro de menores. Allí sufrió una violación grupal y no recibió la atención psicológica ni el acompañamiento humano que necesitaba. Un intento de suicido fallido, queda en silla de ruedas y ahonda en su dolor. Su historia deja al descubierto las grietas más profundas de nuestro sistema: una víctima de un abandono institucional que la dejó completamente sola ante el dolor. Ahora, su petición de ayuda para morir se presenta como un acto de libertad, cuando en realidad expresa la desesperanza de quien nunca fue acogida ni tratada como merecía. No estamos ante un caso de #eutanasia, sino de #suicidioasistido. Noelia no padece una enfermedad terminal, sino una depresión profunda derivada de un trauma no sanado. Aun así, la ley permite abrir esa puerta sin distinguir entre un sufrimiento físico irreversible y un sufrimiento psicológico que puede tratarse y aliviarse. Es una falla gravísima que sienta un precedente: una norma que hoy se aplica a quienes podrían recuperar su vida si recibieran la ayuda, la terapia y el acompañamiento adecuados. La vida de Noelia es valiosa, aunque ella no lo perciba ni lo vea. La #dignidad humana no depende del sufrimiento ni de la autonomía entendida como autosuficiencia. Nace del valor único de cada persona, de su necesidad de vínculos, cuidado y amor. Sin embargo, la ley, en lugar de ofrecer compasión real, termina legitimando la renuncia a la vida de quienes más necesitan apoyo y esperanza. Noelia no necesita que el Estado le ofrezca la muerte, necesita que alguien le devuelva el sentido, la ayuda y la posibilidad de sanar. A mi juicio, lo que está ocurriendo con ella no es un gesto de libertad, sino el reflejo de un profundo fracaso colectivo. Cuando la vida duele, lo verdaderamente humano es cuidar, acompañar y sostener, no matar. Me duele una sociedad que sólo sabe ofrecer esta salida a una joven de 25 años, adulta y consciente, pero con heridas aún abiertas y profundas. Siento una enorme compasión por Noelia, una compasión que debería traducirse en presencia, acompañamiento y cuidado, no en la autorización para morir. Que el Estado contemple el suicidio asistido para una persona tan joven me parece un error gravísimo y, sobre todo, una derrota moral. Sí, la ley de eutanasia lo permite y Estrasburgo ampara su decisión, pero no todo lo que es legal es necesariamente ético ni verdaderamente humano. Estas palabras no servirán de nada. Todo mi afecto para ella y su familia en estos momentos tan duros.

People aren't taking this the right way either. Chat Control is going to be implemented no matter what; forget about all this voting charade.

Conspiracy mode on: The difference between men and women and their behavior is primarily driven by testosterone. Testosterone makes you more aggressive and less fearful. Testosterone levels have dropped dramatically in Western societies over the past 50 years. Maybe the government wants us all to be women.

The root cause of all this is that women cope with fear less effectively than men because their genetic makeup is geared toward protecting their offspring, which means they experience fear more intensely. This is great for statism; they are the perfect victims.

A Jew playing the victim, the Holocaust, and all that.

Good morning! “Too many laws in a country, like too many doctors, are a sign of illness.” Voltaire

The media, the education system, and politicians show you Option A and Option B, but they never show you Options C, D, and E.

They put you in a detention center with juvenile immigrant offenders. You’re raped by a pack of savages. You jump off the fifth floor because you can’t cope with life anymore, and you end up paraplegic. You’re 25 years old, and your only hope is to die. Tomorrow, you’ll undergo euthanasia. This is Spain, folks.