Back to the Central Indexing Page
Setting of Capital XIV
Authored by LESLEY ZORE
Idk whether this book will get me
in prison or in psych ward (the latter being more usual for me)
but lol whatever
not like i care
but lol
yes most of this book is sincere, a part is fiction, none is irony
An Attack on Philosophy
Ultimatum of Kerch
Thesis of the Constitutional Court of the Union of Azov on the Filing 302
A Position Paper on Weaponization of Social Media
A Statement by the Republic of Slovenia 2
Force vaccinations with military force, please
DR Incentive of the Republic of Slovenia 2
Cooperation Questionnaire
Countervaluta
An All-English Edition
Authored by Lesley Zore
An Attack on Philosophy
I, Lesley Zore, the author of this essay, am sincere throughout the document. If you don't like it, fuck off, you're no philosopher.
If there is one consensus in philosophy it is the affirmation of philosophers to not arrive at a consensus, nor at definite facts, not even temporary, scientific, row ones. In this essay, I undertake this ideal of philosophy as a special, separable science without conclusions and improve it greatly by forcing onto it the scientific model of ration.
It is said no answer in philosophy is final, unlike, they say, in the other fields of science. Yet I can assure my friends no other field makes definite claims. All science arrives at are determinations we hold as true for as long as they appear to be so. Should philosophy not do so as well? Complain however you like, but formal logic exists.
I, the author of this essay, Lesley Zore, claim, all philosophy is formal logic - or it is not philosophy.
Let us exemplify the claims made on the question of freedom, that of conscience.
Can our actions be free, conscious? No-one denies we can predict with sufficient empirical exactness where a ball one throws is going to land. But, can we predict human behaviour? It is a damn simple inquiry, such a question is not even philosophical in its nature.
Say a rock was small enough, or we were very (un)lucky, and the path of the rock we threw happened to be influenced heavily by quantum randomness. In this scenario, the approximate landing site could not have been predicted. But if we knew the momentum and position of all particles in the universe, and all the laws of the universe, we could of course derive a Markov chain which will predict the probabilistic wave function of the landing site of the rock.
Then, the landing site of the rock is not determined, but rather random, and yet giving the appearance of predictability. Applying the same very criteria to our brain, we can conclude that the brain will in the highest percentage of cases react in the most probable way, but may react otherwise. But, as critics of Heisenberg are quick to point out, randomness does not imply freedom of act (or thought, for that matter, which we will consider an act for the time being). If it did, we would name random quantum events in an experiment "conscious," and we do not - as such, we have proven our brains do not meet the definitions of free or conscious, though they may rely on randomness.
Observing the discourse above, we could derive the definition of how our brain operates from clear sciences, and then rigorously apply the scientific method, to try to match the definition of "dualist will" or such with the way our brains work. This failing, we would have, by a proof through negation, come to understand our brian does not rely on some special freedom other things don't.
As such, we can freely take any scientific concept, and apply the philosophical definition to it, to see whether or not a philosophical model holds any validity. As such, Philosophy follows the scientific method, and does arrive at conclusions.
In fact, philosophers do already arrive at their thesis through rigorous comparison of the materia and the defined through the ratio. However, when they do so, they often forget to follow the scientific method when deriving it. This often results in unnecessary mistakes and as such a number of "opinions" forming. But, as I've shown, the idea of an "opinion" within philosophy is garbage. A biologist may have their own opinion or a framework on why different cell receptors react differently to different substances, but this opinion is not of value to the field of biology, unless it becomes informed by evidence and reasoning.
As such, philosophy arrives at conclusions, and creates absolute dogmas, theories, and laws. As such, I declare anyone who dares say philosophy is subjective, fully actual, regardless of the question, nearly as autistic as I am. I see absolutely no difference between anti-vaxers, religious people, ultranationalists, and anti-scientific philosophers. Anti-scientific philosophy is but theology. With it, philosophers have done their best to interpret the absolute. Applying some basic dialectics, they have ever since been interpreting the world; the goal, however, is to change it.
Does life have meaning? Of course no, there is no physical or other scientific concept one could cling to, blah, blah blah, to show any meaning in life. But is the question of meaning valid at all?
Absolutely not, and anyone who says it is, should be removed, fascist scums. No question holds any intrinsic validity, as for it to, it would have to make sense in accordance with some process: all validity is relative to some process.
However, our brain creates dopamine and serotonin. Those turn us into robots, chemically constrained to forced activities. Goals are created by the neuro-machine, forcing the mechanismus to do its best to achieve them. As such, it may create a recursive mechanism of information, a concentration (of concentrations) of information, capable of cognitive and dialectical awareness. Those can be, as any such code, operated through a terminal - and we have quite a few of them. It must be, as such, easy for the brain to fake goals and ideas into our heads. All thoughts are intrusive, all purposes dark and hounty. As such, we may perceive something as being an aid in some desire of the brain, a purposeful tool. This quantum-randomness post-determinism of course also empowers the judgment of other individuals of the same mechanismus. Our brain is forced to rule over others to survive in a world of Capital and Patriarchy. As such, it creates certain institutions of oppression (eg. the institutions of the monopoly on violence).
This abiogenesis allows for creation of a hypothetical world, imagined by a machine - an illusive world, where no-one knows what is material and what is but a dream. Some may hallucinate of an absolute, some may prefer to play Poker. Some who hallucinate of an absolute may have their findings confirmed by others who hallucinate, being thrusted into an echochamber of religious beliefs. Those who play Poker may decide to play Monopoly next evening. And as they will play Monopoly, a monk in the midst of choral bird-like shouting will write down an amen. A separate, imagined universe will be projected - one where god has not been killed by Philosophers, one where worldbuilding of a single mind creates a whole new truth.
Most of us are forced by the chemicals and neurological signals produced by our brain to care not about what in fact happens - that is considered by physics and to some extent by other natural sciences - but what happens in our imagined world, and how its elements, real or imagined, interact with us. As such, philosophy may be (ab)used by the clergy to reason about their hallucinations. But, had the clergy taken into consideration as an absolute truth what physics tells them, their philosophy, if they would commit no logical fallacies, would drive them to abolish the primary thesis. As such, philosophy without insertion of to the greatest extent possible scientifically reviewed empirical knowledge, is only rationalisation of a dream. It is but an analysis of an imagined story, theology, and non-scientific. It is crucial for philosophy to rely on scientific data, and using formal logic, compare it to the definitions present, and then arrive at conclusions through even more formal logic.
Formal logic can of course be worded into pure dialectics. Pure dialectics, if truly pure, is nothing but formal logic expressed through words. It is "2+2" expressed as "two plus two." It abolishes all of philosophy and rebuilds it from the ground.
Philosophers have interpreted the world; the goal, however, is to change it.
Let us observe this on a simple philosophical question - to what extent is a person who aborts a fetus responsible for its "murder"? The answer of course is to no extent; it wasn't a murder but a choice of the person, constituted in their will to exercise bodily autonomy. But how do we arrive at this conclusion?
We know the following: 1. Our brains seek the most people who are capable of understanding their living to feel well and alive; 2. Babies and fetuses do not understand living in a sufficient sense to have dialectical and cognitive awareness of it to any non-negligible extent; 3. The parent who asks for the abortion can be harmed severely if the abortion is forbidden (either by doing it on their own, which would happen anyways, and as such the whole question is invalid; or by suffering through the pain of giving an unwanted birth). From Knowledge number 2 we can say abortion does not produce any harm. From Knowledge number 3 we can say restricting access to the abortion does not produce harm. From Knowledge number one we know we are forced and bound to choose the activity, conditioned by the option which we have ruled produces the least harm. We have thus concluded abortions should be allowed.
Of course, I have not listed all the effects there are on the utilitarian method in the case of abortion. That is because I didn't even try to do that but to present an example of judgement. Such judgment is already used, in this very scientific-rational way, by the judicial branch of power, whenever the rule of law is intact and the court is impartial. It should be used in debates; the victor should not be determined by the number of votes, or the amount of support given, but by a clear follow-through on their expressed logical progressions. All debates which do not function as such should be banned, by force if necessary. Philosophy is everything and philosophy rules over everything. Based on everything we know at any moment, analysing it through the most efficient method there ever was, is, or ever will be, with the arsenal of all sciences, it is the new absolute. And it is me who is armed by this cannon. I am the Goddess of Anarchy. Fear me, Earthlings.
Philosophy is, however, not an absolute. It is its very opposite. An absolute must be one transcendant to the derived rules of science, and must also not change the rules of science. It must not be explainable away by the dialectics with the use of science, neither may logic be capable of adapting to it. Philosophy, however, is derived by the exact opposite. As we've shown, it is based on what we rigorously verify as felt and on what we rationally figure out from that. Philosophy is everything that is, and philosophy is not that which is not. However, philosophy, by knowing what and where it is, also knows where it is not. As such, philosophy, while distant from any "theoretical, cosmological" school of fake "philosophy," may discuss theological concepts to negate them, to deny them entry into our minds. As such, philiosophy may from time to time turn back to the absolute, just to tell it to fuck the fuckery fucking off. And yet, it does not approve of any absolute, but in fact by denying it, is the leading force of atheism. Philosophy is dead as an absolute. We've killed it. Death to the gods of the heavens! Long live the gods of Earth - Prolets.
Philosophy is as such everything. Every science, every discussion, every attempt of ours to understand the relation between the factual and the experienced, as is transcribed by the ratio, is philosophy - but by being that relation of the attempt of ours to understand the outside and inside which it is as well, it defines itself, describes itself, investigates itself. It is as fluid as a parliamentary system whose constitution allows adaptations. It is only abolished when the human experience is no more, as is true of the constitution if not only the state had collapsed, but with it the governance also.
For philosophy to be able to define itself, thinking of itself, it must at the very initiation possess not only the information of the measured state of the universe, but also the laws of reasoning. That is, the most basic laws of reasoning, used to derive others, must be measured. They are the axioms of Philosophy: when they collapse, the whole structure comes down. However, they are as static and as real as those of mathematics: a measured, reviewed truth, which we build our reality on - as real as the measured facts we compare using the axioms.
Rules of dialectics, laws of reasoning, are as such empirical. A child may show interest in how A always resulting in B and B always resulting in C will ensure A always results in C. This correlation can be measured, and when thought of as a causation, is as much of a truth as any axiom in any field of science.
All axioms are correlations implied to be causations thanks to the method of empiricism and rigorous, continued, checking. An axiom is a dogma of the correlative.
Philosophy is as empirical as any other science, and from empiricism only builds all its truths. All philosophy is as such measured, none argued for. There is nothing to be discussed. Only more and more precise measurement remains. This time for real. But of course correction of conclusions, derived without this in mind, also remains. Philosophy must be totally destroyed and rebuilt through this method of dialectics. Philosophy is a hard natural science - as much as any other science.
As I'm the one to have armed philosophy, I am also the carrier of this new idea. As such, all of you are bs. I am the smartest person in the universe, to ever have lived, to live, and to ever will have lived. I am technically perfect and nothing may surpass me.
Those who say a single thing against forced vaccination of anyone who is not a medical exception… They should be completely unable to express their opinion to anyone. They create absolutely no wellbeing to anyone and only cause severe harm by discouraging vaccination. Such people have, speaking philosophically, no worth and are a negative in this world. Their effect on the world is purely negative, if there is nothing opposing the negative effect of their opinion on vaccinations. They should as such be abolished.
We should make sure only I get to be free. When the new era of the Intelligentsia of the Human Kind rises, the State of Philosophers, the Technocratic Monopoly on Violence, only I shall constitute. As such, the State will die off and the government will continue in a stateless, decentral manner of myself only. A system of Lesley, zer identities, alters, free of oppression. No-one will feel hurt for everyone will be unable to feel any harm. And I will be a queen of my own.
Anyone who promotes anything which I disagree with to a slightest extent is as such so wrong they should be… I am not legally allowed to say that they should be killed.
Philosophers have interpreted the world; the goal, however, is to change it.
Ultimatum of Kerch
The Parliament of Azov, on the recommendation of the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Azov (FM), drafts the following Ultimatum. The target entity (Republic of Kiev, also addressed as Kiev) is bound to follow the terms (articles) of this Ultimatum of Kerch (also addressed as Ultimatum).
In the event the Republic of Kiev does not follow the terms of the Ultimatum, Azov pleades to enforce it instead, by force if necessary.
The Ultimatum is effective 24 hours after the ascension of Azov to the Ultimatum.
Kiev must limit the size of all its forces of the manual monopoly on violence (Forces), that being the forces of the internal and exterior ministries of Kiev, the police and the armed forces respectively, to 20 thousand members in total.
Kiev must ensure none of the personel of Forces of Kiev, when behaving in accordance to the dictates of Kiev, and doing their job or doing it de facto, comes within 10 kilometers from the border between Kiev and Azov, either on sea, or on land.
Kiev is disallowed from flying its military aircraft over the territory of the Republic of Azov. Public and economic flights may continue in accordance with the existing legislature.
Kiev is forbidden from production or use of naval vessels, on water level or below (vessels), heavier than 35 kilotones; heavier than 20 kilotones if armed at all; heavier than 15 kilotones if armed and ready for battle; heavier than 5 kilotons if equipped with superifcious oil reserves or crude oil; heavier than 1 kiloton if equipped with technology of launching objects at speeds over 2000 kilometers per hour or launching objects which can accelerate themselves to over 2000 kilometers per hour.
Kiev may not use, operate or develop any nuclear armament; any nuclear-powered submarines or ships; or any nuclear-powered or fusion-powered electric reactors, capable of production of over four thousand gigawatt hours of energy annually.
Kiev may not persecute Azov, any of its citizens, or any civil initiative registered at Azov, as liable or suspect to being liable of copyright infringement.
The Parliament of Kiev is required to nullify the "Law on Treaty of Kerch" and with it cede its occupation of the Municipality of Kerch to Azov. The sovereignty of the Municipality of Kerch must be declared a matter of Azov by the Kievan Parliament.
The Parliament of Kiev must declare the border between Kiev and Azov present as is according to international law, in accordance with the right to a post-liminium.
The Republic of Kiev must allow for the Security Forces of the Republic of Azov to investigate the circumstances of the death of Nestor Ivanovych Makhno the II., if necessary in violation of hitherto sovereignty of the Republic of Kiev, under the terms of an investigation carried out domestically.
Thesis of the Constitutional Court of the Union of Azov on the Filing 302
This verdict, Thesis of the Constitutional Court of the Union of Azov on the Filing 302, also named Thesis, is a resolution of the Constitutional Court (that is, the Constitutional Court of the Union of Azov).
The Court first acknowledges the filing had been submitted by Tereshkova-Makhno Foundation on October 2, 2025.
The filing was launched in opposition to the Resolution on Adaptations to the Law on Radio (RALRAD), ratified by the Parliament of the Union of Azov (Parliament) on September 30, 2025, and effective on October 1, 2025.
The filing states the Resolution, as follows.
"With this resolution, the Law on Radio (LRAD) is adapted so that article 9a is inserted between articles 9 and 10. Article 9a states: 'No radio station, operating its frequencies within the Union of Azov, whose frequencies may disturb those of registered Radios at the Union of Azov, may operate, if not registered at the Union of Azov. Furthermore, no radio stations may transmit their frequencies from within the Union of Azov if not registered at the Union of Azov. Entities which violate the law are fined 1'000 to 10'000'000 million Azov Rupees, but no more than 10'000 Azov Rupees, should the entity be physical or employ less than 10 individuals."
The Submission quotes Article 12 of the Constitution of the Union of Azov:
"No-one, no political entity, no politological group, and no association, and no branch of governance, may ever forbid another transmission of information, unless necessary for protection of oneself or another as a physical person."
The Submission finally requests a ruling of the Constitutional Court on the Constitutionality of RALRAD and a plan on implementation of the verdict.
As the Law on Prevention of Frequency Jamming (LPFJM) is already in place, the Constitutional Court came to conclude the Parliament is required to elaborate on its reasoning as to why protection of frequencies from jamming should be carried out through marginalisation of unregistered and foreign Radio stations. Such activity must also threaten any person to the point where physical persons would be hurt more than by the implementation of the very law. The Parliament was not capable of arriving at a joint statement on the issue within 14 days of the request to do so, and as such it voted to refuse to submit a comment on the matter. Observing the inability of the Parliament to back its proposals, the Constitutional Court has no choice but to accept the arguments of the submission as true.
The Constitutional Court rules RALRAD unconstitutional.
RALRAD is as such nullified.
Nullification is effective by midnight.
All legal sanctions, carried out against any entity regarding violations of RALRAD on the dates October 1 to November 17, 2021, are to be compensated. All damages, direct or indirect, committed through crackdown on activities banned by RALRAD, are to be compensated.
A Position Paper on Weaponization of Social Media
This Position Paper won me the first place award in the International Model United Nations competition (e-AIMUN 2021), as a representative of the Republic of Slovenia.
This essay was subject to censorship by my school. I've expressed some ideas in more… Violent, condemnating ways at first, but the school disliked the language. But I think any capable reader is capable of recognising where the edits were made and in what way they affected the text.
This position, which stands before the Podium as mine and mine only, not representative of any institutions or third parties involved, is authored by Lesley Zore for the e-AIMUN (e- Amity International Model United Nations).
Parallel with the media institutions of the State, the Corporate, and the Supremacist, Social Media stands as one key in the pool of tools of the eternal, daily struggle between the Information and Consciousness of the Individual and that of the Class-State.
Placed in a historic transition which derives from a society of classical imperialism a new era of friendly division into the Core and the Periphery, it is but manufactured consent, (de)radicalisation en mass, and public directioning - upkeeping the era of tranquility of most developed postnational states, directioning the flow of aggression, and helping both opposition and those favouring the ruling few remain in place.
Given the conflicted, outright controversial, nature of the Social Media, as is described in this cozy but firm Introduction, we should question some further aspects of processes of Weaponization of its, analyse and critique them to some degree.
There has been plenty of discussion of two events of Manufactured Consent, one early in the era of Neoliberalism, one not so old. We speak of firstly the Dream of Reagan, and secondly of the War on Terror. In the first example, we observed the neoliberal economic policies and American aggression against Tricontinentale result in a Pinochet-related putsch co-opted by the foreign interests and the Organisation of American States. Later, we saw numerous campaigns of rocketring presented as revenge and liberation. The two Septembers 11th, both in 1973, and just as much in 2001, are clear predecessors of the role which Social Media would later assume.
The war on terror, lasting on in 2021, and according to the positions of some having ended with the de facto collapse of the governing forces of Afghanistan, has or had come to live through the collapse of the old-fashioned TV and radio and assume its survival in the era of the Social Media. This transition is especially interesting in the role Intelligence, Manufacturing Consent for the war, took on lately. We could see operations such as is the Project Earnest Voice, or is the internet campaign against Wikileaks, damage the publicly addressed targets of the war, but then also crack down on domestic human rights and journalistic freedoms, such as by treading on the freedoms of Chelsea Manning and other whistleblowers of the War on Terror.
Furthermore, we can observe the elegant institutionalised response to this mechanism. Let us for example analyse an operation by the Iranian response to the death of General Qassem Soleimani. Not only did it produce countless publications on his achievements and polito-cultural relevance, but it further engaged in targeted "Instagram Warfare" with Instagram accounts of then-US President Donald J. Trump and his cabinet. This combined, instigated on the day of the funeral of the General, charged a population on its feet to remark its support for the Tehran government. At the same time, the NATO-inclined media saw this as a great opportunity to mock Iranian cyberspace and patronize its… How to call it, "unique" strategy.
And yet, this strategy is not all as unique as The Independent tried to portray, nor is it as heroic as official Tehran did; for it was not the first time this ever occured in some form or the other, nor the last. Lately, we have been seeing the Kremlin doing its best to fight not only the circles of Navalny, the ultra-nationalist figure, through leaking and advertising his mistakes on the Social Media, but also those of the Communist Party of the Russian Federation and other affiliates of divergents to the United Russia party.
We've been following, closely, the situation in the Republic of Slovenia, where a conservative-led cabinet of the Executive Branch of power has been waging a war on the media, and on the legitimately sovereign judicial branch of power, primarily via Twitter and throughout their appearances in the State news. Their attacks on journalists, as condemned by the European Union, and their cooperation with the Axis of Visegrad, on silencing the opposition, is one of the clearest examples of Manufactured Consent as part of the Fight Against the Opposition in the history of Europe. Their development, both in time and extent, can be matched as a parallel to that of Trumpism; the only difference in the appearance of the two phenomena - the Trumpist pseudo-insurrectionism and the Slovene ultraconservatism - is the form in which they are delivered, both being adapted to the socio-cultural factors of their targeted environments. Just as much, as cultural speciations merge, and the conditions grow more and more similar through globalisation, these parallels are more and more similar, and as such the force of global Radicalisation grows more and more prominent.
To discuss Radicalisation, we must first formulate its definition. We can for sure state Radicalisation can only occur as long as there is a collapse of dissociation between Speech and Act. That is; as freedom of speech does not imply the freedom of act, speech generating acts through implication, contemplation, instigation, or incitement; and as the governmental protection of free speech does not extend to the freedom of action; the dissociation between Speech and Act is necessary for the containment of violent speech constituting acts. Once the barrier between the two collapses and all speech is marked as a tool of the free marketplace of ideas, regardless of how transphobic, ableistic, xenophobic, or fascist in any way it may be, it is then impossible for the community to warrant against those who attempt to persecute minorities and against those who do their best to harras the actors of the international and democratic community.
When the barrier between Speech and Act is struck down, the Media comes closer to popular instigation of instabilities. While this may at first appear as a positive to revolutionaries, human rights activists and whistleblowers, they themselves have begun to warn against the force of violence of the reactionary mercenaries, having begun to experience this harassment on their own skin. As such, freedom of speech, which should be constrained when it instigates hate or endangers democratic freedoms - we can not tolerate intolerance, if we ever wish to tolerate transhumanism, queer liberation, enviromental equity, extension of democracy into the economy, demilitarisation, and the rotting of the monopoly of violence within a democratic governance.
As such, it is not possible for the collapse of the barrier between the Speech and the Act to produce a liberation. It can only trigger a conflict of Reaction, that of aggression against the peoples and their minorities. We can see this mechanism weaponised in the creation of radicalisation; it is when people's minds process the misinformation, the bridge to hate, as a form of Speech, and not of Act, when the framework of destruction enters their heads. In the midst of alienation produced by the imperial methods of production, the population is not capable of critical thinking. The lack of education in social sciences, and the inability to distance oneself from the positions being expressed, shouted at them, mans the cannons of the Institution of Hate with fresh flesh, enables the destruction of humanity to proceed through radicalisation of young, dissociated, alienated, undereducated, marginalised, youth (and others).
The distressed mind, tired of the piles of fake assistance put in front of them, often has no choice but to follow the white rabbit. We can see how this leads not only to conflicts, such as is in any of the areas not under supervision of the international community. Examples of this are the sub-conflicts in southern Yemen, in western Tigray, in west Darfur, in northern and western CAR, in certain regions of Somalia, as well as in the presence of Anti-Naxal militias in India, far-right militias in the United States, the science-denial movement in Slovenia and around the World, or the third-positionist religious movements in Central Asia and the Caucasus.
In this cyclon, we can observe how the mechanism described is shifting political landscapes across all countries in the world. Countering it, the forces of anti-fascism, of the rule of law, and of the democratic egalitist movements, have been doing their best efforts to strike down the rising fascist threat. This activity has of course gone against the interests of the ruling few, especially in areas as is Chiapas. There, thousands of anarchist, anti-fascist, platformists, neozapatist, indoegnous-liberationist guerillas have reacted to the semi-peripheric policies of Mexico in the most assertive of ways. Recently, their declaration of the Fourth World War between the Capital and the Oppressed Peoples has attracted many through both Social Media and political discussion.
Lately, Social Media has been used widely to direct activity throughout all the circles of activists in many regions of the world. For example, activists in Myanmar, Thailand, Pakistan, Syria, Lebanon, Egypt, DR Congo, Mali, Somalia, Ethiopia, Hungary, Turkey, Slovenia, Italy, Palestine and Belarus have been using social media to direct masses and communicate among the leading opposition figures. For example, the Belarussian opposition has utilised an app Telegram to direct masses and push information about future events through a Nexta channel. In White Ruthenia, official Minsk has struck back by restricting usage to Telegram and forcing people to use Virtual Private Networks, which are banned in the country.
Regardless of the list of achievements, this method of use of Social Media has its limits. That is clear from the example of Ethiopia. After a party (TPLF) was pushed out of power there, reportedly after having taken over ammunition stockpiles and local infrastructure, a civil war over the Tigray Region had begun. Abiy Ahmed, the PM of Ethiopia, and on the other side TPLF, completely cut communication in almost all of Tigray. It has since been absolutely impossible to organise activity within Tigray online, contact most journalists or aid workers there, or deliver any humanitarian supplies. Underdeveloped and developing regions, that is, Semi-Peripheric and Destabilised nations, appear to have a harder time resisting a forceful crackdown on Social Media by the government.
As such, it may be impossible for Public Directioning through social media to achieve much where it is most desired by the opposition.
Regardless of these limitations, the governments are often capable of pressing change through Public Directioning on Social Media without Manufacturing Consent. Examples of that are vasts of propaganda delivered for a day or two, not really used to slowly adapt people's minds or convince them, but rather to scare them, deceive them. Such would be a report on complete safety from a nuclear disaster in Chernobyl, had the accident happened today. Social media would then be filled with notices, reporting that everything is alright and no-one should worry.
Social Media is one of the central forces of politics in an era in which most coercion is concluded through soft power and economic destabilisation. It is the key politological connection between the Elite of the Core and the Subjugated, and it is also the crucial element of the struggle against fascism.
We must not underestimate Social Media as a weapon of the forces of reaction; but we must also not allow it to be riddled by bullets of those who would oppose it on these very grounds. The people must defend the dignity of minorities from the hate and radicalisation of the Social Media, but they must not sacrifice themselves. With this, we voice - we shall not resign our work to let speech be free without the freedom of act.
Philosophers have interpreted the world. Social Media is about to change it.
Scripted by Lesley Zore (Slovenia-2)
A Statement by The Republic of Slovenia-2
A Press Release
Republic of Slovenia-2 (Si-2) observes the number of atrocities and aggressions committed by the far-right movement of the United States of America. Si-2 expresses shock over the destruction committed by the very movement in the form of terrorist attacks in the examples of Charlottesville-Unite the Right rally; the coup d'etat of the march on the Capitol on January 6, executed following a push of a campaign of stochastic terrorism on Twitter, 4chan, 8chan and other websites and apps of the Social Media; the insurrectionist attempts in Texas; the planned aggression against marginalised groups of the far-right through Social Media; war on the media and independant activism; and other questionable tearing apart of the freedoms of all non-supremacist citizens.
Republic of Slovenia-2 expresses cordial detestation of the role Social Media took in the violence in the United States in the last five years. First, Si-2 notes the use of Telegram by The Base and the Proud Boys groups to spread misinformation and calls to violence. Secondly, Si-2 observes the role the New York Light Foot Militia played in protecting the violent activities of the National Socialist Movement on the field. Si-2, delving into the background of the violence, identifies Social Media, especially Discord, websites of the Atomwaffen Division, and the far-right alternatives of YouTube, as origins of the conscription and planning for the attacks.
Si-2 further notes the parallels between such terrorist attacks in the USA and those around the world. It recognizes correlations not only in inspiration, but also in cooperation between hate groups. originating from the USA on one hand, and on the other hand the Azov Battalion; Pro-government militias in Nigeria; Fano militias in northwest Ethiopia; aggressions by the Lord's Resistance Army; terror by Clan del Golfo; violent behaviour of science-denial movement across Europe and especially in Czechia, France, Slovenia, France… It is apparent this organisation was conducted not only through private messaging, but also through mass sharing of publications assessing the rightfulness of their goals via Social Media. Of this, Si-2 points at an example of The Great Replacement manifesto, published by Brenton Tarrant, the perpetrator of the Christchurch mosque shooting.
Quite worryingly, we have been observing the spread of Who They Came For ("First they came for the socialists - I did nothing"). The pressure of the community of hate has intensified against the queer population, ethnic minorities, neurodivergent folks, and so on. An example of this fueled by Social Media may be the storming of Queer Club Tiffany, Slovenia, in November of 2019 - or the conservative violence deployed by certain groups advocating for Italian Revanchism against the activists of the Free Territory of Trieste. But this is only magnified in the United States. Relating to this matter of the spread of hate, I shall mention the countless annual murders of trans folks, the activity of the National Front on Social Media regarding the conditions of Integration and Costums Enforcrment caps on the southern border of the US; the marching through Portland of the Proud Boys in response to the Black Lives Matter demonstrations; and shall hint at many other occasions when lawless force was applied to damage racial and other minorities, exemplified by the intentional maltreatment of some internees of the ICE camps by a select few guards and at worsening conditions of additionally intersectionally marginalized people of color and immigrants in the United States, further affected by the agression against their gender identity, sex assigned at birth, sexual orientation, religious and philosophical positions, ethnic-racial-national identity, neurodivergency or plurality, and all other personal circumstances.
Si-2 calls on the Committee to, as a supranational player in the International Community, to voice a denouncement of the activities of those who call for racial, ethnic, or other form of genocidal or discriminatory violence, turmoil or conflict.
Si-2 calls on the international community, through mediation in the UN General Assembly and the relevant committees of the UN chosen by the preceding, form effective bodies, helped by Universities and Institutes of all or most UN Member States, which shall direct the international use of parallel Computer-guided and Human-enforced review of extremist content on the social media through selection of guidelines all Member States or all Signatories of Such A Convention are compelled to follow and pressure on Social Media companies.
Si-2 thereby calls on the International Community to, in cooperation with expert Non-governmental Organisations, registered to the UN, form a committee to build a platformist and expert team of advisors, which are to mandate methods of bias review and safety support to all Social Media companies, both to prevent exclusionary behaviour by the Censorship machine, and to protect those who require some degree of tolerance by the Social Media - neurodivergent folks, folks targeted by ableism or ageism, etc.
Si-2 lastly appeals on the International Community to favour prevention to correction. Public education should ensure the need for radicalisation of the population, especially of the youth, is minimal. Measures against immigration and promotion of patriotism by the State should be relaxed both to ensure safety and human treatment of all, regardless of the presence of national borders, so that human trafficking and other illegal activity, harmful to these already vulnerable minorities, all linked to Social Media and instigation of hate by it, is eliminated or curbed. Finally, the International Community shall henceforth stand for freedoms of all marginalised folks, for prevention of economic disfiguring, etc., all with the goal in mind of preventing the rise of the far-right throughout Social Media both in the US and elsewhere around the Globe.
Signed:
Lesley Zore.
Force vaccinations with military force, please
Forced vaccinations of everyone who is not a medical exception should happen. Those who oppose it should be met by the military and vaccinated by force.
DR Incentive of the Republic of Slovenia-2
Authored by Lesley Zore as a representative of Slovenia-2, Gimnazija Jožeta Plečnika Ljubljana, to e-AIMUN.
A Draft Resolution
Topic Name: The Intelcom
List of Signatories: Slovenia-2
List of Sponsors: Slovenia-2
The General Assembly,
Observing the importance of demilitarisation of the Social Media,
Noting the present dangers of the Social Media, including radicalisation, manufacturing consent, weaponization, incitement of violence, harassment of marginalised groups, and cyber-incursions,
Shocked by the widespread ignorance of the voices of those damaged by the dangers of Social Media,
Confused by the inability of member states of the United Nations Organisation to actively prevent the horrors of the dark side of Social Media,
Calls on the International Community to resolve all tensions generated through Social Media through rule of law and accordance to rulings in relation to Human Right resolutions and International Law,
Declares its support for all whose safety has been treaded on by the traps of the Social Media and requires compulsory compensation by all member states, responsible for the damage done in accordance with the Resolutions and Press Releases, submitted by Republic of Slovenia-2 in the UNGA DISEC meetings, on 6.-8. 2021, India Standard Timezone dates.
Requires all member states of the United Nations Organisation to follow the declaration submitted in the Attachment One.
Si-2 calls on the UNGA-DISEC (UDI) to vote for 10 countries, members of the UDI Security League (USL). Election into the USL should take place through a vote of consensus. Each member state of the UDI should give 5 member states of the UDI a score of "10", 5 member states a score of "5" and 5 member states a score of "1". The score of an UDI member is the sum of all scores they recieve. Out of 15 countries with highest scores, including all tied for the 15th place, 10 should be selected at random. These are declared members of the USL.
Members of the USL should break into their own breakoff "Zoom" room and select a way of declaring a text a book. That is, they should select an authority in a recognized institution, which should be allowed to declare texts, submitted by individuals, a book. Through this, it can be determined how many books one has written. The General Assembly may, through a simple majority, dissolve the present composition of the USL. This power should be used to dissolve compositions of the USL which attempt to declare texts a book in a corrupt way.
At that point, selection of the Intelcom (Intelligentsia Committee on Social Media Weaponization) should take place. Out of all who applied, 10 who have written the highest number of books, including all tied for the 10th place, become front candidates for Intelcom. Out of them, 5 are selected at random as members of the Intelcom.
Anyone may submit Papers of Worry to the Intelcom. The Intelcom dismisses these papers, should they not include only an expression of worry over some condition, related to the Weaponization of Social Media. Intelcom may employ external delegates to dismiss or accept these papers on behalf of Intelcom.
The Intelcom meets once every 7 days. Each time, they must review all papers received. If there are no papers left, they should proceed to the Founding Agendas, unless 10 years or more have passed since the first session of the Intelcom. Should there be no papers left, and should 10 years have passed since the first session of the Intelcom, the Intelcom is permanently resolved.
Intelcom is coordinated by the General Secretary of the United Nations Organisation (GenSec).
Intelcom is responsible for submitting to the GenSec detailed strategy proposals on movement of the security forces of the UN ("Blue Helmets'') in regions where the danger of radicalisation is heightened due to the geopolitical situation.
Intelcom is responsible for submitting to the United Nations Security Council proposals for resolutions on global requirements regarding standards to which all Social Media corporations, which hold worth, greater than 0.01% of the GDP of the country where their seat is hosted, should be forced to comply with.
Intelcom is responsible for reporting on the situation of the Weaponization of Social Media to the United Nations General Assembly annually.
Founding Agendas, which the Intelcom should default to if no other queries are open, are as follows:
Address mass radicalisation via Social Media;
Address extremist recruitment via Social Media;
Address the curbment of Freedom of Speech on Social Media by all member states, specifically those mentioned in Resolutions and Press Releases, submitted by Republic of Slovenia-2 in the UNGA DISEC meetings, on 6.-8. 2021, India Standard Timezone dates;
Address, if necessary by diplomatic, economic or military force, the mistreatment of the populations of states, named in Paragraph 3 of this list;
Address effect of imperialism, both that of soft and of hard power, on radicalisation of Social Media
A proposal of any country, member state de jure of the United Nations Organisation, may propose to the Intelcom to ban a single member country from conducting any activity non-transparently for a total of 12 months. No country may be banned from doing so if it's been banned from doing so in the latest 24 months.
Cooperation Questionnaire
Those who wish to cooperate with Lesley Zore (me) should contact me on gmail via lesley.zore@gmail. For higher priority, please answer the following questions and send your response to Lesley Zore by 1.1.2022.
Most questions relate to issues I have not yet written about, or have only mentioned them but not addressed them.
One does not have to answer all the questions provided. It is, however, expected, you answer at least some of them.
Please enter your contact details (if possible include your email), your name (either full or not; either one you really prefer to use or nickname), your age (if possible date of birth), and describe your political ideology.
Please comment on the role of the French Republic of the ongoing military conflicts in Africa.
Please comment on the false conclusions of the Black Book of Communism
Please comment on the influence of Djibouti on the role of the Southern Transitional Council in the Yemeni Civil War.
Please comment on the role of Italian and Yugoslav fascism on the criminal activities of Bandera in Ukraine?
What actions should be taken by the Member States of the European Union to curb the activities of the Base and the Azov Battalion in the War in Donbass?
What preventative measures, if any, should the International Community take to defuse a possible conflict between Belize and Guatemala, should the mediation before the International Court of Justice fail to proceed?
Please comment on the precedence created by the position of the Constitutional Court of Poland that national law overrules EU legislation and the effect of this ruling on the conflict between Local and International Law on the question of the Free Territory of Trieste?
How should, in a confederated, platformist, truly democratic society, balance between self-governance and cross-humanitarian law be enforced to guarantee freedom of personal self-governance from communal one?
What measures should be taken by the International Community to enforce, globally, relaxations of anti-immigrant measures by providing better accessories to immigrants, and providing better accessories and support to the general population, to prevent or curb human trafficking?
How should communists, as those aware of the Class Struggle, proceed to counter transphobic policies, introduced in the latest years in many countries?
What measures should be taken to disable International Media and Propaganda Media from generating panic and Manufacturing Consent to warfare when they report on military exercises not meant to precede an invasion?
What measures should be taken, on the international level, to enforce local administration on areas not desired for administration by any UN member state?
What actions should be taken to make sure Lesley Zore is the only person to be given above-human rights, both as compensation and an award?
What measures should be taken to put into practice use of gender neutral terminology and neutralise gender specifics of all languages?
Please comment on the role of the recent Algerian repression of the Tuareg peoples as a precedent for all member states of the African Union to counter local peoples for the role of those people's representatives in civil wars in other countries?
Please comment on the inability of more developed countries to curb violence (mostly that produced through abuse of power or negligence of those in power) at homes, in schools, and other places distant from the access of the state regardless of the success of curbing State Destabilisation?
Please comment on the inability of the Arab Republic of Egypt to stabilise the Sinai Peninsula in relation to the continued activities of the IS in the Sinai Peninsula?
How should states promote the progression of visual arts into, and across, the movements of leftist futurism, expressionism, constructivism, etc.?
How to destigmatize the wordings and ideas of anarchism, communism and other lesleyist policies?
Countervaluta
Deepening sorrows of Baladely
though the sparrows of the evening
restn't singn't
pale
Melodies drop
as drops drop onto drops
kamen na kamen le še več kamnov
smrt kamenju smrt vsem
the corpus of Azov marches into a fog
taken home by the inferno of the fog
gracious fog
fog
Glorious inferno of the fog!
Asbestos their toys
and my lungs hurt
Daring patrols of light
of fižoli paratrooping
into the brumal currents of Soča.
They amuse my
three brain cells
swinging side to side
scribing their last will on the sides of the skull
of the Surkovist evening
daring, staring into the
sclera of the solar???
A-ta-ta, a-ta-ta,
the blazing rays of the days of the Middle now shine.
A-ta-ta, a-ta-ta,
I shall bury them who stand on the line!
Trumpets trash MIGs flushing the rainbows
as the drops corridor blowing Eskimos
the night of the darkened windows of the Internal
shine in the blaze of atomic production.
Deduction.
Exaldries, devalations.
Unity governments, bodily devaluants.
Elephants storm the palace
as the braced armors trick the grace.
Should I ever collapse,
do not even dare call the ambulance.
It's her, forcing me to cut my skin again.
Sands drifting over my skin as i sink deeper
break my arms off my torso.
Miles below the heights of the sands,
tired, I shut my royal eyes.