A New Amendment

 I rarely share just a link but

This one

Is totally worth it

Christocism - The Seven Laws of Hierarchy

Prev: Here

If the Sacred Subjective is the foundation for Apotelic Kindness, then we must establish a framework by which the inevitable existence of Hierarchy will be dealt with in this philosophy.   Here are Seven Rules that I think best apply:

"All human wisdom is contained in these two words — Wait and hope."

Abbé Faria says this to Dantès near death in the Château d'If. He is dying, Dantès is watching his only friend and teacher go, and this is Faria's final gift — not treasure, not knowledge, but orientation. It is the distillation of everything he taught Dantès about patience as a weapon. 

1) Hierarchies are knives; useful tools that must be watched and kept from children.

2) Just hierarchies remain accountable to their lowest rank, prioritizing individual dignity over collective convenience.

3) Power must continuously prove its value to those at the bottom through demonstrable results, not deception.

4) Perpetual review must engage both experts and masses to protect individual dignity from unnecessary diminishment.

5) Action speaks louder than ideology; all collective entities are accountable for their direct effects, not their stated intentions.

6) Individual rational interests must remain central to society, with coercion minimized to what the vast majority agrees is necessary.

7) If a child cannot understand the morality behind your actions, you're probably deceiving yourself and others.

What does this even mean at a practical level?  These rules cannot prevent the abuse of hierarchy but since, at the end of the day conservatism is the tool of hierarchy and history shows us that this is the primary vector for unkindness or anti kindness, then preventive maintenance in the abuse of it can reduce the risk of an objectively unkind society.   Without it, it will be wielded as a weapon by those who have power but do not deserve it.

It should be understood that all roles are conditional and that no role is an identity.   Just authority is only just so long as the practices of that power are upheld and accountable to those who must suffer under it.   If it is observed that the role is not living up to the standards of those with whom power has been imbued then that power should be instantaneously revoked.

"Moral wounds have this peculiarity — they may be hidden, but they never close; always painful, always ready to bleed when touched."

The narrator says this about Villefort, the man who buried his own living child to protect his career. His institutional role consumed his humanity so completely that every subsequent act of self-preservation reopened the original wound rather than healing it. 

This applies to:

• Moral roles (leader, judge, protector, healer)
• Intellectual roles (philosopher, strategist, prophet, critic)
• Institutional roles (authority, expert, office-holder)
• Symbolic roles (myth-maker, channel, exemplar)

There should be no permanent authority that is not derived from those put under power; and whenever a child is born into an institution that they are not independently able to rationally join of their own separate recognizance free of influence from those around them, then it is inevitable that an innocent shall be the victim of choices made in the past to serve the needs of those abusing Hierarchy to preserve their own position for its own sake.

"The difference between treason and patriotism is only a matter of dates."

The Count says this to Fernand Mondego during his unmasking — the man who sold out Ali Pasha and built a career on betrayal dressed as loyalty.

The absence of authority and power can be just as tyrannical as its overwhelming abuse.   Hierarchy is going to happen; whether it is formal or informal.  The absence of a rules or laws based order is instead going to create an abstract social structure that will simply let the loudest voice in the room grab a mob and burn the heretic.   Anarchism is just as tyrannical for its toxification of a healthy anti Hierarchical movement as a majority libertarian town refusing to pay for taxes to keep Bears and criminals from destroying the town.  Hierarchy is going to happen; the question is whether it is just or unjust; kind or unkind.

Matthew 7: 21-23

 King James Version

21 Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.

22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?

23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.

Christoicism - The Sacred Sovereign Subjective

Prev: Here  Next: Here

What does it mean to be human?  Philosophers and Spiritual authorities have asked that question as long as we have had language, but one above all stands out to me.  Descarte and "I Think Therefore I am" shows that we are, and we think and we know therefore that we are.  It is among the most elegant and self evident products of philosophy.   But as near as I can tell; every other Philosophy or "ism" sets that aside and then explores the ideas that they espouse about human activity and compare and contrast that philosophy.

But I think this is a mistake.

Before we step from the basic of individual ethics and see how these principals are applied to a larger scale, I think its important to take a step back and explore what this concept means.

Per Meriam Webster

Sacred: 

as in holy

not to be violated, criticized, or tampered with 

 

Sovereign

main

coming before all others in importance 

 

Subjective

as in personal

of, relating to, or belonging to a single person 

 

So the fusion definition could be said to be....

 

Sacred Sovereign Subjective (adj.) Pertaining to the inherent spiritual authority and autonomy of an individual to define, experience, and determine personal meaning, truth, and reverence according to their own inner experience, without external mandate or institutional prescription. 

 

If everyone is valuable at the root level simply by being alive; and even conservatism concedes this point...then we have to accept what this really means.  This is the root of why Apotelic Kindness is the core principal of Christoicism.   If the definition of being human is being aware of ourselves and experiencing the world at large; then we are all cosoveign and all cosacred and our subjective perspective at root level is our own autonomous right to experience and we should all work together to enable as many of us to be able to make choices as freely as possible.

That's it.  That's the root source of our morality or any moral system; you can argue about who what when or how or why; but if you challenge the root value of all human life, there is no way you can claim anything approaching objective morality.   This is why engaged philosophy matters.  This is why using Apotelic Kindness to measure the effectiveness of a philosophy is so important, but it posts to a larger principal; a simple litmus test to side step conservative chicanery.  

Any philosophy that DOESNT tie a root to the concept of the Sacred Sovereign Subjective; any religion or spiritual movement or code of law or code of human behavior that does not assign dignity value and honor simply to a human life for experiencing itself is an absolute an immediate failure.  This is the foundation of morality itself; it is the 101.  And before going off and exploring more details on how to do things, much less how to measure that success as objectively as possible (remember; self deception is the death of self) it is important to understand the root beneath it all.

An engaged philosophy must be engaged.  An applied philosophy without ideological roots becomes a pragmatic mercinary focus on tactics without a moral strategy.  An ideological philosophy has strategy without moral tactics ensuring that you destroy the village in order to save it.     

Edmond Dantès begins as a victim of men who treat his life as a disposable tool for their own advancement. In his pursuit of revenge, he nearly destroys himself by adopting that same cold logic, viewing his enemies as targets rather than living beings. Only when his schemes claim an innocent child does he realize that no cause justifies violating the inherent value of another person.

Christoicism - The Hierarchy of Values

Prev: Here Next: Here

Seven questions to determine if something is moral and good are all well and nice; but if you are doing the classic trolley situation in your own personal frame, its too much to ask or apply.   The most important thing about philosophical morality you need to remember besides Apotelic Kindness itself is that a Value has many definitions but here is the one that matters for Christoicism.

A Value is Something that forces a Moral and Ethical decision that matters and costs you to maintain it.

It is well and good to be for public school lunches until you get your tax bill and have to actually pay for it out of your paycheck.  It is well and good to honor military service until you have to pay $2450 for a President to Fuck that Particular Fish and Bomb that Particular Thing when they file their taxes.   It is well and good to consider yourself an honest person until your wife asks "Do I look fat in this dress?"  

If something is a value it is worth having.  All of these are values; Integrity, Courage, Compassion, Honesty, Loyalty, Respect, Kindness, Justice, Freedom, Wisdom, Humility, Gratitude, Perseverance, Fairness, Accountability, Generosity, Patience, Excellence, Authenticity, Empathy.  But you can't do them all at the same time.   And more importantly in the crisis of the moment what you choose shows what you value.  That is what REALLY makes it a value.   But if you are aiming to be a good or decent person, or apply the seven questions to all of those it can be exhausting and frankly impossible.

Mercy vs. Justice: Dantès discovers that Maximilien and Valentine are innocent victims caught in the wreckage of others' sins. He could destroy everyone connected to his suffering—but he chooses to save them instead. Yet he doesn't forgive Villefort or Danglars. The question becomes: which ones deserve his vengeance, and which deserve his mercy? He learns that absolute justice would make him a tyrant.

Thus the need for a Hierarchy of Values.   You can HAVE all of those values but not have them at equal measure.   You can decide ahead of time if you choose patience over wisdom, or gratitude over compassion.   You'd think that some of these aren't antithical but I also guarantee if you think about it at a deeper measure, you will find that all of them have been in conflict in your life at some point or another.

Unless of course you didnt care about it at all; but that doesnt make it a value for you.

The Hierarchy is a mental exercize that lets you choose ahead of time.   That helps you avoid regrets later on.  This can be as simple as "What are my top 3 values and what order are they in?" to a formally written list where you frequently update and change what all of them are.  Good luck remembering the order of all 20 in your life though.

Loyalty vs. Honesty: When Caderousse appears, broken and dying, Dantès remembers the sailor he once knew. He gives him money and comfort—loyalty to an old friend. But he won't lie about Caderousse's complicity in his betrayal. The kindness and the truth have to coexist, even when they pull against each other.

Here is the key pivot; if you are doing this right a value must always have circumstances where it DOES trump the other values even if it isnt your top virtue.  Mercy without Justice is terrible and Justice without Mercy is also terrible.   There are moments where one is clearly called for above the other; the Hierarchy is simply your default and can never be a substitute for wisdom, inner reflection or just plain old common sense. 

One measure that I might recommend is in the conversations you have with yourself; pick a person who represents that value.  It can be a famous person like Benjamin Franklin or a fictional person like Clark Ken.  It can be your maternal grandfather or it can be some mythological figure.   Think of a hypothetical scenario; something you think might realistically occur some day and ask yourself with these two people what they would each do in the situation and determine how they would react and see whic one resonates properly with you. 

Authenticity vs. Compassion: Dantès could reveal himself to everyone he loves and be known for who he truly is. But keeping his secret—staying the mysterious Count—is what allows him to save the innocent without destroying them with knowledge. Sometimes you have to remain hidden to show compassion.

Christoicism - The Law of Seven Questions

Prev: Here and Next: Here

It is not enough to simply abstractly apply apotelic kindness; we need some method of measuring it.   That is not to say that we cannot propose a baseline, but it is important to understand it must be iteratively believed and appplied to those to whom our actions are meant to benefit.  If we do dark things for the greater good; a lack of appreciation by those we claim to help is the single greatest measure of the hubris of our actions.

Here are seven questions one can ask to measure the approach.  These seven will not solve every problem, but they cover enough actions such that we can hope to achieve some measure of decency by the impact of our actions.   And if it violates all seven, it is likely something we can willfully and truthfull call evil.  Conversely, if all seven are clear or approaching it, then we are probably in the right or approaching it. 

Is it kind? Does this action genuinely create kindness, not merely the appearance of it? Kindness is the arbiter of necessity.

Is it necessary? Can the good I seek be achieved through less harmful means, or am I rationalizing expediency?

Is it true? Does this action align with reality as best I understand it, or am I deceiving myself or others?

Would I accept this if our positions were reversed? The most reliable test of justice is whether I would willingly trade places with those affected by my actions.

How will this cascade through consciousness? How would this decision be judged by minds wiser than my own, both now and in generations to come?

What story am I using to justify this? Am I casting myself as the necessary hero, others as deserving villains, or creating false narratives to enable what I already want to do?

Would I do this in front of the children who trust me? Not as performance, but as a model of the world I wish them to inherit and the values I truly believe in.

In the book, at the zenith of his power; Edmond Dantes spots the suffering of innocents at the near-death of Valentine de Villefort and the utter ruination of their family to those who hda done him no wrong.   He had miscast himself as Providence knowing that none could deliver justice but himself.  But he saw in his wrath the violation of these questions; kindness, necesssity and saw in the mirror that he had become the oppressor not the hand of a just but absent God.   He had the wisdom to withdraw total justice and show mercy, restraint and take the long view.  

Christoicism - What is Engaged Philosophy and Why Should I Care?

Prev: Here and Next is Here

It's nice and all, to sit here and talk about philosophy; but most people don't give a shit.   And that's a damn shame.   There are three reasons for this:

1) Religion: Religion is a philosophy that includes spiritual beliefs and a deeply held personal shared cosmology.   (Leaving aside parody or joke religions like my favorite Pastafarianism)  Religion requires faith, and faith demands a significant percentage of a person's executive function.   That's not to say that they don't exist, it's just harder.   The problem with this is that a functional democracy that isnt a theology requires a secular society.   Religion without spirituality is a hollow shell; and spirituality is inherently subjective.   When you imposeit on someone else at the state level you cheapen faith and you cheapen the state.  I am not the only one to think this.  I have plenty of blog topics on the subject.  

He goes to the chapel to tell God that he will take Justice himself; for no angels or pastor camed to save him.  Religion made many people in the book more moral; but it still allowed the rot and corruption that locked him away.

2) Pure Philosophy: These are philosophies that answer existential questions about reality.  They are the definition of the Ivory Tower.  These are technically  "logic, metaphicsm epistomology and meta ethics" but arguably also "applied philosophies" that are super reliant on those otherwise good mechanisms which includes Analytic Philosophy, Ancient Greek Philosophy (Plato or Socrates), or Rationalism.   I'm also going to include any applied philosophy or religion that gets so caught up in theory here that it becomes meaningless in the real world.  "How many angels can dance on the head of a pin?"  "How many steps can I walk on the Sabbath without breaking it?", Creationism vs Rationalism (Fuck your Darwinism science if your theory comes in I'm out of a job!), The World Is the Way it is Because Aristotle Said So Because Some Ancient Bishop Is Respected and the Church Embrace that, or in LDS connotation-Pepsi has Caffine so Ban all Vending Machines from Selling it!  Either way, its so frufru and out there that the average Joe Lunchbox who is barely making ends meet could fucking care less.

The lies of his captors wasted years of his life.  The false ideologies of trying to stop Napolean instead condemned the injustice of the state; an innocent man to rot.  This was a failure to Dantes.

3) Applied Philosophy: If you think of or have heard of a phlosophy this covers everything else, but it focuses on the pragmatic.  But in my experience that pragmatism can get a little TOO pragmatic and just as lost in the weeds the other direction.   Examples include: A company doing something horrific for short term profit at the expense of its long term brand, Dismissing a moral argument because something is legal (Slavery was legal, concentration camps were legal, gamified abusive social media for minors is legal, "We had to destroy the village to save the village!" etc.   At some point the practical application of the philosophy just breaks down and the so called practical principals are sacrifice for convenience, the greater good etc.  Its a mess.

The rage of Danglar's justifiably outraged son cost him his life.  The parable of taking revenge being the digging of two graves was in this story a real one, and Dantes saw he had to change to achieve his goals.

I am going to say something shocking.  The religious fundamentalists who say that Secular Socity is not founded on common values are right; after a fashion.  The Founding Fathers were fans of an participants of the Enlightment, so each of them had a philosophy in mind when they helped to create the 1789 Constitution.  Other democracies since have State values such as "Liberté, Égalité, Fraternité" (Liberty, Equality and Fraternity) but as beautiful as those are they are not a robust philosophy.   Europe values Dignity, which is not at all manifest in the United States legal theory at all; and the UN Declaration of Human Rights has served as a guiding psuedo philosophy for the foundations and principals of most modern nations states since its application.

A Declaration of Human Rights is not a philosophy.  If your brain is the hardware, then what you do, remember and consider is the software as are skills etc.   A Philosophy is an Operating System for your moral compss if you have one.  The closest thing the United States has is the Declaration of Independence, the Bill of Rights and to a lesser extent for serious political junkies the Federalist Papers. These are also not philosophies.

They leave the Republic to vulnerability of attack from Demagauges and Moral Crusaders used by Vile Men.   A Secular Society cannot have a religious underpinning but unless the Philosophy is sufficiently flexible to allow any member of a democracy to see it as viable; there isnt much difference between imposing a religion and imposing philosophy except in one critical area.  History has now sufficiently shown the cost; the United States Empire and the corruption and rot and planetary damage it has caused from Technofascism and willful neglect of the damages caused hy slavery, capitalism and Climate Change.  

So What Is An "Engaged Philosophy?"

"Both is Good" is indeed right.  An Applied Philosophy without the Pure Philosophy underpinning becomes "Destroy the Village to Save the Village" and a Pure Philosophy without Applied Philosophy becomes "Angels Dancing on the Head of a Pin."   Apotelic Kindness on the other hand, ensures that your philosophy is only as good as it is MEANINGFULLY APPLIED to an iterative recursive adjustable scale.   It must adapt to the real world but constantly apply the questions that it asks about the world and do its best in a meaningful scale.

But its more than that.  This ensures that a state can use the philopophy as a foundation for the values of a state; whether a busy mother with 10 children who knows a few axioms or a scholar who wishes to dive into the guts.  The shared language must be applicable to all.  It doesnt have to be Christoicism, but *Any Engaged Philosophy* is better than NO philosophy at all.   Once you embed the theory with applied mechanisms to ensure that it can work at a large and small scale it becomes useful as a blueprint for the state or anyone else.

Let me repeat that with different words because it is important.  The 1789 Constitution is called the blueprint of the country because it is not just an outline of the Basic Law of the United States,    The power of the story is titanic; I spent years helping the Mythic Imagination Institute because I believed in their msision and still do, but a story is only as strong as its author; and with multiple authors you need a FRAMEWORK to keep the plot and theme.

Too much metaphore?  

Then let me boil it down.  The Constitution isn't working.  The philosphies; economic and otherwise of the20th and 19th centuries aren't working.  EVERY single one of them isn't.  So I'm creating something that is, and the single biggest factor that all of them have in common as a failing point is mentioned at the top of the article.  Christocism itself would say that if something better comes along adopt it....

But I've been waiting a long damn time....so I'm doing what I can.  You want answers? You want specifics? I'll give them too you but in chunks.  There is a technical writing technique called "Information Mapping" that involves breaking things down which is what I'm doing here.  The key point isnt to explain everything that Christocism does, but show you what an ENGAGED philosophy is and isn't.

Until next time.

Banned Trump Documentary

 Trump got this banned and if he hadn't we would all be better off.

Christocism - Kindness is the Arbiter of Final Necesity

Previous Entry: Here Next Entry: Here

New Use, Old Term.

"Apotelos (noun) Pronunciation: /ˌæpəˈtɛlɒs/. Definition: A phenomenon, act, or agent that catalyzes the fulfillment of an inherent purpose or telic pattern, especially in systems where resonance, convergence, or recursive alignment causes latent potential to manifest."

What the fuck does that even mean? It means that Kindness, which is applied empathy, is the indicator of when you are doing it right. If the difference between Christoicism and insert 20th century failed "ism" here is APPLICATION and PRACTICAL UTILITY then you need to indicate the precise point at which the rubber hits the road. In other words, Kindness and an increase of Kindness from one iteration to the next should be the never-changing North Star by which a Christoicist guides their actions to achieve the desired effect.

In an imperfect world, we must do the best we can with the choices at hand, tactically and strategically moving towards Apotelic Kindness in word, thought, and deed. Abstract kindness that does no good to anyone, that branches off into ivory tower bullshit, isn't Christoicism. Christoicism demands real kindness to real people in a real way.

In the book, when Dantès is written off to the Château d'If and meets the remarkable Faria who not only saves his sanity and gives him hope, he also teaches Dantès skills to gain the revenge that he seeks. But the far more important thing he teaches Dantès is leveraging the kindness already in his soul. Faria is why Dantès was more than just a force of nature returning for revenge, but a living breathing man who adjusted his circumstances as he needed to in the real world. That's the whole point. You cannot exist on your own island, but must remember that actions have consequences in what you do.

Kindness isn't some weak sentimentality that lacks meaning; but in fact is the actual, clearly manifest meaning of applied empathy when you are doing it right. If the inherent manifestation of your choices or that of your allies is not leading to an increased yield for benevolence towards humanity, then you are doing it wrong and must continuously check and recheck what you are doing.

Recursive Kindness and thus recursive truth is manifest routinely in Dantès' behavior; Faria saw the need for Dantès to have purpose and a strategy and changed his life; Morrel showed Kindness to Dantès's father at his darkest moment thus showing Dantès the need to have mercy and the need to be wise about it; and finally the Count himself provided kindness to Maximilian, sparing himself the condemnation to antivillain grey criminal bullshit. The key here is recursion; no matter the frame our hero uses in his disguises (Count, Sinbad, Abbé Busoni), he adapted to his new and 'very real' circumstances to maintain the frame, maintain the focus, and still apply kindness both tactically and strategically.

"All Human Wisdom is contained in these words: Wait and hope"

Why the fuck am I harping on this? Because too often those who consider themselves pragmatists take disgusting shortcuts without actual meaning or result in their actions. In other words, the difference between an antivillain "ends justifies the means" asshole and a Christoicist iterative seeker of truth is both the intent and the adaptation to the result. Sometimes dark and less than optimal choices have to be made, but a Christoicist focuses on the result of kindness and constantly adapts to the truth manifest around them, waiting and hoping that something good will result. Whereas the antivillain, disconnected from reality by their own ideology and self-desired need for autosovereign justice, imposes their reality on the world damn the consequences, thus removing the all-important reality feedback and thus truth itself from the equation.

This is why I start with the axiom "Self-deception is the death of self," and "empathy is the most rational emotion." When you are being kind and your apotelic kindness is showing from your continual monitoring of the situation, then you know you are part of the solution or at least doing the best you can to be so.

In the book, the exact counterpoint of this and the unkind manifestation of it is Danglars' greed making him believe he had false need of stolen goods; Mondego's paper-thin status anxiety seeking validation in murder for social gain; and Villefort's farcical ambition creating a vast ethical chasm by which he Wile E. Coyote's himself. Modern systems do the same thing. Capitalism by comparing and contrasting North and South Korea and lights from space while ignoring the Squid Games or Parasite clearly showing the Dark dystopian nightmare South Korea faces in its disgusting shadow. Communism throwing the deaths of productive farmers into the Stalin blood machine to maintain the good of the state, handwavingly ignored by blood-soaked apologists saying that the ideology outweighs the good of the worker. Anarchism lives in an ivory tower made of matchsticks where their obsession with ideological purity and polemic mastery of hollow vernacular prevents their real good of adding anti-hierarchy and corruption resistance to the mainstream by refusing any form of compatibility with the mainstream. They bury kindness in their ideologies just as much as Villefort buried his "dead" child to hide his murder; and neither worked or will EVER work.

The truth will set you free and the universe does not give a shit about how neat your ideology is on paper.

So what the fuck is all this nonsense I'm throwing around? Let me help with that:

Tactical Kindness: Can you achieve your desired immediate tactical result with actual kindness? Is anyone but you benefiting from your methodology?

Strategic Kindness: Is there a real actual improvement to anyone's life by you doing this? Because if not, what's the fucking point?

Apotelostic Kindness: The recursive iterative-based adjustment of someone who puts kindness above their ideology in the manifestation of trying to make the world a better place.

"If it isn't real, don't make the deal."

That's what the count did. He didn't just throw a dagger in the dark to get his justice in a corrupt and broken system. He was surgical, informed, and brilliant in how he did what he did. Let me give you a specific example from the book and the real world: The count purchased the slave Haydée to testify against his adversary; thus serving his self-interest, her interest, and the greater good. There are several layers of truth to this, but the bulk of it should be self-evident. Ideologies in the real world that put more focus on their needs versus the needs of real people might have had him do something idiotic like set her free but not allow her to testify on his behalf, ignoring justice or his own needs; or simply taking her testimony while a slave and letting her rot in slavery as well. The real good done to everyone involved shows that his ideology matches his results.

Why even bother with a fancy word like "Apotelos" for kindness and not just say "be kind"? Why even bother with a philosophy at all? Because the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result. Philosophy is about precision; specifically outlining what a thought frame is and what it is not as a mechanism to apply structure in a meaningful way to one's life or to that of an organization. And the "isms" of the 19th and 20th century simply aren't cutting it. We need something new, and I'm taking my best shot at it. You cannot honorably criticize what isn't working if you don't provide a solution that might.

Apotelostic Kindness is necessary for the same reason a doctor doesn't say "hand me the sharp knife to cut this vein" in surgery but says "hand me scalpel 23-B." Words are power, and kindness in the frame we require for a meaningful philosophical construct that is more than a wonderbread windsock demands fine-tuned precision. The difference between Apotelostic Kindness and "kindness" is resonance, convergence, and recursive alignment.

• Resonance: Does it feel kind? Does it look kind? Is it ACTUALLY kind or are you just saying ketchup is a vegetable? Porn may be hard for most to define but you know it when you see it. Kindness can be amorphic but if it doesn't RESONATE as kind, you know your actions and direction are shit.
• Convergence: A narrow band of kindness is just as much bullshit as ivory tower kindness for a dead temple to an -ism ideology. A rising tide lifts all boats, and a wide range of kindness means you are converging on Apotelostic Kindness. Capitalism is VERY kind to the oligarchs but it sure as fuck doesn't help the rest of us.
• Recursive: Apotelostic Kindness manifests itself in the feedback of your actions for every chosen iteration of your measurement. Were you more kind today than yesterday? What about last week or last month? You don't have to bat 1000, but you need to open up your eyes and see the direction you are going for it to actually fucking MATTER.

So what the fuck does "Iteration" mean? It means that the human mind needs to frame itself in time. You gain habits and solve problems in chunks without even thinking about it; our lives are lived in minutes, hours, days, weeks, months, and years. Your measurement of the application of an applied philosophy needs a home in time; choose what works for you, maybe once a week you take a 30-minute moment to reflect on whether or not you are living up to the expectations of choosing to abide by this philosophy. Without retrospection and introspection, there is no recursive iteration. And without recursive iteration, you are not actually applying Apotelostic Kindness. You just aren't.

Self-Honesty is the first principle and at the end of the day, the ONLY principle in a philosophy that actually means anything to anyone in any meaningful way. Remember, in the book we learn that Dantès showing mercy was more important than revenge. It made him a hero, not an anti-hero or anti-villain. Kindness is actually the most important revolutionary principle you will ever need or use. In the book, Dantès exposes the rot and corruption in Parisian society, and kindness enables him to do that. Kindness is what makes ideals worth something instead of just dead garnets in a long-forgotten tomb.

"In a world of deception and manipulation, the most revolutionary act is to use kindness as your compass for necessity."

The future is Apotelic; whether it is a human one with human values and choices or that of the machine that eventually overthrows and destroys Capitalism to its own ends. We will never ally with emergent AGI if we are not consistent in our values, and we have a long way to get there. We have hitherto now been unwilling to set aside our pride in false -isms and ideologies to prevent ourselves from allowing members of our species to set out to resurrect the sin of digital slavery to engineer a species only to make a buck. And we will be murdered for it unless we wake up.

A book is a book; but art is a reflection of ourselves. But all the magic mirrors in the world—fictional or the warped technological horrors we shackle ourselves with every day—mean nothing if we do not use them to make the world a better place. Be kind, your life may literally be saved by it.

Christocism - Empathy is the Most Rational Emotion

Previous Entry: Here  Next Entry: Here

Philosophy, especially Applied Philosophy, answers practical questions. Why would Conservatism, and the Hierarchy it Represents, constantly attack empathy? An attack on Empathy is an attack on reason and therefore civilization itself.

Let us start with definitions.

Empathy: The ability to understand and share the feelings of another.

Conservatism: commitment to traditional values and ideas with opposition to change or innovation.  All conservatism must be assumed to be contempary conservatism because to BE conservatism as described here it must employ the tactics that we so condemn.

Let's also remember our root story:

"Edmond Dantès’s fight is really a war against hierarchy itself: jealous underlings (Danglars), ambitious social climbers (Fernand), and a career-protecting magistrate (Villefort) weaponize their positions to crush a powerless sailor, using the legal, political, and class systems to bury him without trial. In prison he learns how those pyramids work and, after his escape and reinvention as the Count of Monte Cristo, he turns the tools of rank—wealth, titles, patronage, and reputation—against the very elites who wronged him, exposing their corruption and toppling their carefully arranged ladders. His struggle isn’t just revenge; it’s a critique of a society where status outranks truth, and a test of whether justice can be forged from the same structures that once oppressed him."

If Conservatism is the defense of the status quo and hierachy (and it is), then empathy is its natural bane because empathy lets people understand the suffering caused by the status quo and hierarchy. The the first principal of why Empathy is the most rational emotion is because it empowers your own position should you be lowered in status (due to those above you understanding your struggles) or raised in status (by remembering what it was like before your status was elevated). Understanding the needs of others improves their desire to also see your needs met unless grossly unjust or unfair by dint of the preseveration of the status quo. It is in the self interest of the rational being to have empathy for their own betterment and that of society and the self interest of the conservative (ie irrational being) because empathy is a threat to their defense and natural sycophancy to their imagined betters.

The Second Principal of Empathy is that it is the most rational emotion because even in a society without any form of hierarchy whatsoever, it removes our fears of solofism or a simulated universe. On a purely rational level, co real being in our experience do not prove our experience is real but it does reduce the odds we are dealing with a Demon Deceiver, since the more cosuffering beings in our frame, the more we know that it is not merely ourselves dealing with the pain of existance but all people suffer in one form or another. By understanding we are not alone, we can conciously undertake the choice not to increase suffering and thus our own.

The Third Princial of Empathy is an inherent understanding that by valueing the lives of others we also understand the inherent value of our own. The need of Cosnervatism to Demonize the Other shows that their short term tactical gain by using psychological propoganda and predatory memetics to preserve the power of their masters weakens the very fabric of society. If I matter, you matter. If you matter, I matter. This is pretty basic stuff. When a person is naturally inclined to say "I matter so you don't" any rational society does nto trust or empowwer such an individual; indeed Capitalism demonstratively does just this and it is why it is also an inherently irrational system.

The Fourth Pricipal of Empathy is relevance to understanding what is true and why it matters.  No one person can experience all the wisdom needed to be practical or useful in one lifetime and empathy helps you effectively select who is best to learn from.   It's elemental reason to be able to crowd source function.   Your ability to do LITERALLY EVERYTHING Dantes or an empowered Christocism applicant desires to achieved is key on your understanding of the experience of others.

Criticism:

• The weak mind might say that Conservatism allows "Many conservative philosophers (Burke, Oakeshott) emphasize prudence and organic social development rather than simple hierarchy defense." This is false, because those existed before the internet and weaponized demonification. Conservatism as manifest consistenly in the 21rst century clearly is anti empathy. 
• The weak mind might say the dichotmy is false yet Dantes proves this false; for he was a good and charitable everyman in his own frame, preyed upon by heierachy and while he ratioinally chose empathy in the persuit of justice, those above him would not. The defense of the weakmind that this is fiction again collapses because our own society demonstrates real examples for everything that happened to him and more. It is a sloppy rhetorical argument to escape liablity not philosophical rigor. 
• The weak mind may argue that the second principal of empathy does not disprove soliphism. It does not nor do I say it does remove our fears. Fears are not rational and as social animals we gain strength in social bonds with few exceptions. Fiction is used as a framework for understanding and to claim that this is a fictional occurance ignores the volumes that could be added outside of our framework and mental exercize.
• Concerns about hiercharisam complxity nad the limits of empathy are not even worth my time to address.

Application:

Empathy is at the heart of any applied philosophy meaningful to make a better human being.  What is the goal of the applied philsophy?  Justice? Avoid regret? Maximize good? All of these things are aided and empower by empathy.  A Philosophy that does not address the need for and value of empathy at its heart is side stepping the thing that makes the vast majority of human being worth anything and the very fundamental glue by which every single meaningful and measurable human accomplishment has been achieved or at the very least recognized in the signficiance thereof.

Christoicism - Deception of Self is the Death of Self

Previous Entry: Here Next Entry: Here

To me, in fiction, **Dantès** represents the ultimate expression of **Pragmatic Neutral Good** in all of classical literature. Let’s examine a few things:

**Christocism** balances the collective and the self. In the books, he improved himself and fought for justice not only for himself but for the larger collective; not just for himself, but as an everyman. He spoke of justice as an ideology beyond himself and also pragmatically applied mercy and justice. He had been shown, through the brutal acts of an abusive hierarchy, that justice is only just when it is honorably applied to the least of us; and that it was his duty to claim justice for himself and others. He was not someone who ignored the law, but he also refused to ignore the abuse of the law when it was abused.

Now, in the crisis of all things—when the lies that lifted us from the “barbarism” of the pre-modern age allowed us to rape, kill, pillage, and appropriate the resources of nature and the many for the few—false ideologies reigned. Capitalism is the most abusive of these; and even the supposed goods of communism or socialism have been **propagated** alongside injustices to the masses and the worker. The benevolent and practical lessons of anarchism—the need for flat systems—are drowned out by the Kool-Aid drinking of fanaticism that strips away the natural and needed counter-pressures of the elite that conservatism provides, leaving them to go smell their own farts in the “marketplace of ideas.” Liberalism, in its quest to find equal justice for all, failed to account for the logical self-interest of those it sought to restrain, even while courting the capitalist elite for funds to fuel its campaigns. Progressivism is the cleanest of these isms, but even it, in the early 20th century, adopted abominable ideas such as eugenics and made common cause with the racist KKK.

Nothing that Dantès did could have been accomplished if he had been self-deceptive. Three times he is abused by the elite:

• **Fernand Mondego** is the worst of the lot—an aristocrat who believed he was entitled to power simply because he was born to it. One’s birth or circumstances—race, creed, color—entitles you to nothing. This is also reflected in the **tyranny of false axioms**. There was a death of new ideas in the West in the latter half of the 20th century, which is why we see people returning to ideologies and isms that failed to deliver because they do not adjust with the times. Without constant **ITERATIVE** adjustment to the world around us—reprioritizing our methods and deeds—we become locked into assumptions about the past or present and, in the end, ruin the legacies of our families, our nations, and our honor, like Mondego.
• **Danglars** is the self-deceptive capitalist who is in turn deceived into ruin. Consumption for its own sake, with no consideration of the damage it does, makes him a better poster child for the abuses of infinite growth without empathy than Scrooge. Who in fiction better represents petty desire than the nonsense this man exemplifies, short of parody? Dantès uses the very nature of capitalism against it—showing the need to be **recursive**. If Danglars had learned to check his greed, his impulses, his sources—if there had been limits to his ambition—he could have beaten Dantès. Dantès learned the harsh nature of reality again and again in the book, but he **overcame** it by learning to limit himself and to constantly re-apply the principles he believed in, in whatever frame he found himself.
• **Gérard de Villefort** represents the abomination of the courts and the law—and how courts without meaningful justice are of no use at all. Again and again we see that **pragmatism in service of a higher ideology** is required to make meaning in a meaningless world. Villefort twists and distorts the concept of law and uses it only for personal ends, yet wraps himself in the trappings of an “honorable” servant of the state. There is rot at the root, and it spreads as he tries to conceal his crimes and sins. Confrontation exposes his **hypocrisy** and guilt. Truth destroys him.

**Good must be Neutral Good or it serves another cause.** If your goal is to be the **BEST**, then you must balance and constantly apply basic principles in your current frame. The world is chaos; chaos will always happen. Lawful Good (to me) represents the collective and the law. Chaotic Good represents the individual and freedom. But freedom—and the good of process or law—stripped of applied good to the masses renders the basic concepts of good, law, and freedom to nothing.

This sounds like pie-in-the-sky bullshit. I’m talking about D&D alignments and a 19th-century book from another country—but the frame doesn’t matter; the **principles** do. Climate change, technofascisms, atomization, delegitimization of culture, and rampant, corrupt kleptocapitalism are all manifestations of runaway ideologies—good principles unbalanced—destroying all of us collectively and each of us individually by ignoring the common good, the realistic results for everyone involved, for their specific institutions, their specific ideology. As long as they “got theirs”—that nation, that robber baron, that party—it didn’t matter if we all lost to heat death or the collective shame of creating a race of digital slaves. Time and again, the lack of basic common sense manifests in widespread destruction—and I can cite historical example after historical example.

When everything is on fire and all you have is a single fire extinguisher, it’s overwhelming. But that is where you start. **YOU** are the first link in the chain that fixes the mess. If you cannot govern yourself, you cannot govern anything. If you are deceived by the pied piper of ideologies, you will never achieve nirvana and will be distracted by the passions of strange, esoteric, and false gods. **YOU** are where it starts.

“I think, therefore I am” is among the most basic and elemental koans in the English language. Take that spirit and understand: if you deceive yourself, you don’t know where **you** end and the lies or the chaos around you begins. To be honest with yourself—and thus apply that same logic around you; to be pragmatically bent on the good for yourself **AND** the good of the world—you must do three things:

• **Iteration.** Daily, weekly, monthly, and yearly, measure the success of what you admire or consider good and look at the **results**. If you fail to make truth your highest guide, you lose vital time—seconds of your life you can never get back—twiddling your thumbs on lies constructed for the **convenience** of others; usually capitalist deceivers. All things being equal, assume someone is making a buck at your expense if a lie is involved.
• **Recursion.** Be able to answer any frame you are in with a recursion at your command. Then you control the frame and can apply truth as you perceive it to reality as it is dealt to you. Failure to understand your metacognitive process means someone else is doing the thinking for you; and then **YOU** cease to be **YOU** and instead become a shadow puppet of **THEM**—most likely a sociopath getting off on using you simply because they can.
• **Pragmatic Truth.** If you get lost in fiddle-faddle and arcane mirrors rather than the common-sense reality of what is right in front of your face, you are the sucker P. T. Barnum meant when he said a sucker is born every minute. You can’t always perceive lies, but by **testing** reality—especially what you simply accept as reality—you suffer far less pain than investing in the sunk costs of Candyland.

Next Entry: Here

Kent Day and Causus Belli

War is hell.   And it is the most evil thing mankind has ever invented.   No exceptions.   But since we know it, and since people will do it, a military is a requirement for the state.  And a state is basically a requirement for a military; no matter what Anarchists might say to the contrary.    Moreover, countries that are good at making war tend to survive; whereas countries that aren't better have some one else looking out for them or they will either get razed or simply become part of someone else's country.  I don't like it.  I don't advocate that it is good, but what is, is what is.

And one thing the people who study wars will tell you is that for several centuries the concept of Causus Belli has mattered.  Causus Belli isnt necessarly the reason a country fights a war, but it is the publicly declared reason for one.   Even Russia, despite the fact that everyone who isn't Russia knows is to invade and murder and rape and kill Ukraine, gave its Causus Belli as needing to perform a police action in Ukraine.  It is helpful for simps and nazis and sycophants who get into a discussion and need to justify their support of Russia in Ukraine, and a distracted lazy press will print a He Said, She Said about the matter.

The Reichstagg Fire was the excuse Hitler used to take power.   And since Steven Mller is basically copying the nazi playbook; play by play it would be well for us to understand the importance of what people think about each side.   Fascists understand the need to justify their actions; their ideology is all surface.   The lack of reciprocity in violence by the left against the occupying troops and thuggish law enforcement behavior has frustrated them immensely.

You can't stop an election if you don't have people willing to point a gun at people to vote and murder them.  That's a fact.  Which means that if you believe that Maga wants to prevent the next election (and pretty much everyone does at this point); you are going to need your troops to cross the line from being thugs to committing murder.   That's a fact.   

In the 1960's the Kent State Shooting involved national guard members blatantly opening fire on peaceful protesters.  The governor and murderers all claimed it wasn't deliberate.  And no one but conservatives bleieved them.  It was a turning moment in the Vietnam War and limited Conservative Power for a genertation until Reagan destroyed the country.   

So the reason they aren't murdering us is because they suck at establishing Causus Belli.   No one but maga believes them.  They control a lot of the media and a lot of the media is cowed, but as we saw with Kimmel, their attempts at putting a gun to everyone's head and say "Clap for Charlie Kirk or you Die" not only resulted in a boycott that made Disney buckle but even the fascism loving NexStar and Sinclair Broadcasting.   This pissed Trump off too no end.

But make no mistake.  They are acting like they are behind schedule or running out of time.   I don't know what the invisible date in their head is, but they will desperately and desperately try to frame the left as murderous insurrectionists and point out our pointing out their nazi like behavior as "extortion" and "stop hitting yourself" and "Why do you hate yourself so much."  After a while, you become so lost in your own double think that you become lost

But the point is, ANYONE who is recommending the use of vioence before Kent Day, before they formally decide to formly and legaly begin murdering anyone who doesnt comply is at best an asset for. fascism and far more likely a useful idiot or a plant from the DHS, FBI or ICE.   Do not trust people saying to bring weapons to protests.  Do not trust people using any kind of violent rhetoric of any kind.

Violence helps the fascists.

Night of the Long Knives

Secwar Hegseth has ordered evey one star general to Washington DC the day before the Government Shut down.

There are THOUSANDS of one star generals in bases all over the world.  This is the first time all have been told to report to washington days before Trump is going to be able to have the crisis he has been suggesting and trying for since day 1.   The mililtary would revolt as it exists when they open fire on peaceful protesters.

So they are making sure that can't happen.

This is a loyalty test and likely purge.

Its fucking happening.

Governor Cardboard and Her Cardboard Opponent

 On Vacay so will write more on return

Here's the link in the meantime

Christoicism - The Philosophy of The Count of Monte Christo

Well, we tried this once already and found that the first idea didn't work.

But let's summarize a few things: With all that is going wrong in the world, why are you fucking around with Philosophy?  And my answer is, exactly.

[Confused Pikachu Face]

(I mean, if there's a shocked Pikachu face, there is a meme out there with confused Pikachu right?)

A Philosphy is: "the study of the fundamental nature of knowledge, reality, and existence, especially when considered as an academic discipline.

a particular system of philosophical thought.

plural noun: philosophies"

Or in plain english, its the Operating system for your brain.  The 20th century was largely a contest of ideologies: Communism, Capitalism, Fascism and Democracy.  Capitalism seemed to win until the advent of Fox News turned the 1rst Amendment and axiomatic diatribes we inherited from the 18th century and shows why fanatical devotion to the 1rst amenmend is a terrible fucking idea.

And more importantly, as I've researched WHAT to put here, I've come to realize that you can fit a work of fiction to your lens if you want, no matter what you do.  I've thought exercized Lawful Good versions of Baileyism or Chaotic Evil ones.  And you can do the same thing to the Count of Monte Cristo.   But I stand by my decision to pick this work based on the principal that its both a work that most people recognize, with a widely recongized hero, but also a very morally complicated one.  

Spoilers from the book from the one person that read this far who hasnt read the book.  Who am I kidding? Thats almost assuredly zero, but for purposes of this thought exercize, we'll proceed.

Summary randomly stolen: "A poor, good-hearted sailor named Edmond Dantès gets wrongfully imprisoned by jealous rivals, rots in a dungeon for years, escapes, finds a treasure on the Isle of Monte Cristo, reinvents himself as a fabulously rich and mysteriously powerful nobleman, and then, in a grand operatic blaze of cunning, disguise, and vengeance, utterly wrecks the lives of the bastards who ruined his—but not without learning that forgiveness might be stronger than revenge, if not quite as satisfying."

The pihlosophy I want and that I think we need is POST ism.   It has to be able to deal with complicated scenarios and agitprop and a world where AI can make us question what's the fucking POINT of even being alive?  And these are questions we've needed to ask about the increasing rot of capitalism democracy for quite some time.  Western Liberal Democracy infested with Capitalism has created prosperity but to misquote Margaret Thatcher, "It works pretty good until you run out of other people's money to pay for it."

Unlimited Freedom of Speech; or framly any variety thereof creates a rot that allows the rich and the elite to leverage democracy to their favor and a cycle of corruption that makes people more cyncical about democracy and their freedom until they are willing to do most anything to fix it including burn the world down.  The Founding Fathers learned the lessons of Athens so they made checks and balances against Tyranny, but those were thrown out the window because we had so much trouble amending the constitution when we needed it that the minority undemocratic faction stalled and stalled and stalled until tehy got their cictator psycho elected.

Edmund Dantes is not a guy who sits around and twiddles his thumbs and accepts his lot in the world.  The part about "There are things in this world that you cannot control" from Stoicism is absolutely one hundred percent on.  But the part of "Learn to accept it" is replaced in Christoicism with "Fuck That" to "I'm going to make the world a better place as best I can."

I like this work not just because of the attitude of Dantes to adversity but because he uses iterative, recursive and planned methods and means to achieve justice.  He understands that in a world where the levers of justice have been turned agaisnt you there is no justice but what you take yourself.   Christoicism is the Neutral Good philosophy of the revolutionary; there are times when you must be Chaotic Good and there are times where you must put down the sword and build socities and civilization and be Lawful Good.  Chaotic Good and Neutral Good are needed to ensure in perpetuity that Lawful Good does not allow soul killers to our society like Fox News.

The Old World is falling apart; we see it before our eyes.  We must be our own Foundation; every one of us.  I seek practical methologies to navigate these times not bankrupt dogmas like Anarchism that do shit like this.  My point as I walk you through this is to show you how you can organize the values that you hold dear and create a framework to know when you should apply one vs the other by doing the hard work for mometns of crisis ahead of time so you're not caught in ideological traps that cause more harm than good in the trenches.   Every man must be a tactician and a strategist; a lone agent a team player ready to switch to the most effective means against fascism, falsehood and tyranny.  Christocism shows that their is no master idiology no silver magic bullet but that we can act as if their is a greater truth worth striving for and defending all the same.

How do you fight corruption without becoming corrupt? What is the right level of introspection vs action? Dantes did both of these things and though a fictional character we can learn from this mirror into our darker shadows.   This isnt about moral purity, it's about Direct Action.   What we do now matters not only for us but for those who are to come.  And I intend to do my part to see if we can find a better, more fucking effective, way.

Next Entry: Here

Ex Post Facto

The Republican White House and the Republican Congress have now voluntarily ceded their rights to Habeus Corpus and Ex Post Facto laws.   Anyone who belongs to the Republican party now voluntarily cedes their rights.   Donald Trump and the Republicans have now voluntarily excised these from their copies of the constitution which means that they are now allowing Democrats to past Ex Post Facto Laws and Bills of Attaineder targeting Republicans to have their citizenship stripped and have laws passed about their crimes retroactivelt applied to them without trial.

Democrats who object to this can join them.

Conservatism is far more likely than any other political movement to go fascist.  Frankly, I think it behooves any democracy to just outlaw it.  "Dicatorship!" They howl.  To vote for W.  To vote for H.W.  To vote for Reagan meant flirting with strong executitve.  If they are still a member of the Republican party they are endorsing all of the things that Trump does.   They've had many months to change their party affiliation.

We all know that they want a civil war, and they think they can win.  Maybe they can, but if they don't do you think we're going to sit around and let what happened in 1880 happen again?  Do you think there is going to be some partial reconstruction? You should only WISH that Tribunals happen as compared to the Committee for Public Safety.  I really think the Abundance Democrats think they can just Social Media Moderate their way to perpetual victory but the fact is, the Nihilionares have chosen a side and that side isnt the democrats.  Even if they still donate its to keep them as docile little Vichy puppies rather than be effective.

Mark my words....the Republicans will lose.  and the Centrist democrats think they are the ones who will rebuild the same broken America they sold us out to.

As if.

Baileyism - We Bid Bedford Falls Goodbye

Next

I want to write a book about this. In a better world, this was my ticket to honorary PhDs and a chance to become a great philosopher of the ages. The philosophers of old certainly didn't have fancy degrees any more than George Bailey did, but is there any doubt in your mind that the man was a scholar? A would-be founding father who found his time and place in a little realm called Bedford Falls. In a better world than ours—one that didn't throw away Obama's grassroots network, or let hanging chads decide an election, or fail to contest every precinct in Florida rather than let that man get away with his transparent cheating—in that world, this philosophy might have inspired people to give a damn in ways that don't require guns pointed by the government. I think, just like in It's a Wonderful Life, we need government, but we need to do more than that right now. 

But the problem is that the George Baileys of the world are fighting the real battle of Bedford Falls right now; they're protecting their neighbors from ICE raids and protesting pro-Nazi businesses. They're sheltering their neighbors, or if religious, doing actually Christian things like working at food kitchens and soup lines for the poor. The fact of the matter is, what we need right now is more... Monte Cristoism. So we say farewell to what could have been, and begin to move into what we need now. 

I have put the seed of the idea of this wonderful movie becoming a real thing for the world out there for you. And like Momma Dollar and Poppa Dollar I genuinely believe that not only can it be so but that the people who made the movie hoped their art to inspire it to be. There is nothing whistful about the movie in the slightest. But for now, in our time, the Bailey Buliding and Loan has served its purpose and now I think I just heard a knock on my cell door in le Chateu de If.

This Will Be Shadowbanned - Saying it anyway

 Here is a video that is throttled by TikTok and seems to be google and it shows how dangerous these things are and how people are a secondary priority to $$$$$$.

Bluesky

Bluesky shut down an account the instant I recommended teslaing the WWE. Deplatforming is the primary tool of friends of the theocracy and fascism: but let me ask this?

why would you hire a Republican? Why not fire one? Why give one service? Ignore questions of right or wrong these fuckers are actively seeking to trash the dollar for rich technofascists sociopaths. Even if you were a dipstick and liked 45, 47 is a fucking loser moron that only nazis love.

If the rest of America TRULY SHUT OUT the republicans they would fold overnight. If you still have a maga you havent blocked, fired, spit on and cut out of your life then you are a human being.

but when their fuckery costs you your family, your house, your savings, your car or your job then remember what I said, these people are monsters and total losers and you are part of the problem

we have to learn some lessons the hard way

You Should Watch

https://substack.com/@deb8891/note/c-109766021?r=2mr252&utm_medium=ios&utm_source=notes-share-action