More of my philosophy about correctness and about the financial sector and more..

[Amine Moulay Ramdane]

Hello,



More of my philosophy about correctness and about the financial sector and more..

I am a white arab from Morocco, and i think i am smart since i have also
invented many scalable algorithms and algorithms..


I think i am smart and i have just looked at the following interesting video, and i invite you to look carefully at it:

Financial Market: What Would the Next Crisis Look Like

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WDUpqLT7NHw


So i have just explained, read below, what's the problem with the financial sector, and i just said that we have not to make again the mistakes in the financial sector from toxic assets and from "bad loans", so we have to "higher" the standards of the loans etc. in the financial sector, but by looking at the above video, i have just noticed that
the problem is that the financial sector is also internationally a competitive process of taking Risk so that to be successful,
so that means that currently the financial sectors of different regions
like in Asia and Europe and USA are looking at each others, and when
a region is taking more Risk than the others and it become successful
by taking this Risk, this forces the other financial sectors regions to be competitive by taking those kind of Risks so that to be successful, so then it is a like a software "bug" in the financial sector that can cause another crisis or big crisis, so i think that the financial sector has become a kind of "monopoly" that is having an important weight in the decision process and this makes politics unable to act and correct
the problem or the "bug".

And read my previous thoughts so that to understand more:

More of my philosophy about the financial sector and more..

I invite you to read the following interesting paper from the Journal of Economic Perspectives, that i have just read carefully, about "The Growth of Finance" by Robin Greenwood and David Scharfstein:

https://www.hbs.edu/ris/Publication%20Files/Growth%20of%20Finance_6ec86a21-8e68-4abc-bb09-45abaacd7be5.pdf

I think i am smart, and i say that i think there is a problem
with the financial sector and it is that in the first theoretical implementation of the financial sector was that a primary function of the financial sector is to dampen the effects of risk by reallocating it efficiently to parties that can bear risks the most easily (read about it on the paper of Merton and Bodie 1995), but there was some practical constraints in the reality and it was about the benefits of expanding access to mortgage credit, there are a number of societal costs from such an expansion, including instability from excessive household leverage. Moreover, the shadow banking system that facilitated this expansion made the financial system more fragile. And it was also the cause of the financial USA crisis of the 2007-2009 that began years earlier with cheap credit and lax lending standards that fueled a housing bubble, so i think that we have not to make again those mistakes in the financial sector from toxic assets and from "bad loans", so we have to "higher" the standards of the loans etc. in the financial sector.

And here is my other thoughts about the other problem of financial sector:

And here is how i will explain it more, look at Financial sector,
so you can understand more capitalism and the mechanism of diversity that brings "resilience" and that needs a good allocation of resources in capitalism by reading my following thoughts:

The biggest benefit of finance, is to provide opportunities to people,
in the sense that in a world where there is no finance, the only way to
start a company is to be born rich or to have saved for a long time. In
a world where finance works well, the people with talent can actually
start firms and reach their dreams without waiting to either have saved
the money, or be lucky and receive it from their parents, and once you
create this opportunity, you will have the most talented people take
advantage of those opportunities, which favors growth, which favors a
good allocation of resources and, ultimately, innovation. But we have to
know what is the problem with finance, and here it is, read the
following so that to understand:

One last chance to fix capitalism

Read more here:

https://hbr.org/2020/03/one-last-chance-to-fix-capitalism

So i invite you to look at the following video about capitalism:

How to Improve Capitalism

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YOaJe68C-bU

So as you notice in the above video that you can also fix capitalism by
giving voting rights and tax advantages to long-term shareholders and
not by raising taxes, and you need to have sovereign wealth funds and
national pension funds representative of the long term collective
interests etc, so i invite you to look the above video of "How to
improve capitalism" so that to understand more.

And if you want to know more about my views on capitalism,
read them here:

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.culture.morocco/c/cf3Wa4z8Xmc

More of my philosophy about Geopolitics and about USA and more..

So read the following:

"In 2019, exports of goods and services from the United States made up about 11.73 percent of its gross domestic product (GDP). This is an increase from 9.23 percent of the GDP of the United States in 1990.
Jun. 29, 2021"

So as you are noticing that the exports of USA are around 12% of GDP in 2021, and it is a standardized number, so if you say that the problem of USA is that it has to know how to protect its goods and services, i mean that USA has to know how to protect this 88% of goods and services by knowing how to be a smart "protectionism", i think that
it is not the good way and here is what i say about it:

More philosophy about protectionism and USA and more..

I think we have to be careful about protectionism, since read the following:

"Protectionist policies impose an additional cost and loss on all parties. First of all, domestic consumers must pay a higher price for goods. At the same time, importers face a decline in demand, so international jobs are lost. For instance, the US-China trade war meant that US consumers paid a higher price whilst demand for Chinese workers is reduced.

So the Chinese unemployment increases and US consumers pay more. However, the counter-argument is that it saves US jobs and businesses. Now there is some validity to that claim. If the money sent to China doesn’t come back in either demand for US goods, or FDI, then the argument can be validated.

However, the reality of the situation is that when a US consumer buys cheaper Chinese goods, that money goes to a Chinese exporter. That money doesn’t stay with them indefinitely. It makes its way back to the US through either demand for its goods or in FDI.

What we see as a result is that Chinese demand drives employment in other industries. So jobs that may have been lost in one industry, are being created in another. At the same time, the FDI inflows also create employment in the relevant industry.

Although there is disruption, there is a net positive gain in the long term. Employees will have to shift to new industries, but the average consumer benefits from lower prices. By contrast, the only winner under protectionism is specific domestic workers. However, they too are consumers and consequently lose out too.

Is Protectionism Good For The Economy?

In the long-run, protectionism is not good for the economy. It makes consumers and businesses pay more. And whilst it may protect jobs in the short-term, the economy as a whole would be better served in allowing cheaper imports in. Although this may temporarily destroy some jobs, consumers benefit from lower prices. In turn, the income that would have been spent on the goods before can now be spent in other markets. In turn, employment is stimulated elsewhere in the economy."

Read more here:

https://boycewire.com/protectionism-definition-and-types/

So what is the smart way of doing so that to not be protectionism?

Here it is:

First I think that protectionism is not good, and i think that Trade Adjustment Assistance etc. is a better way of solving problems, so
i invite you to read the following article to know more:

https://theconversation.com/international-trade-has-cost-americans-millions-of-jobs-investing-in-communities-might-offset-those-losses-143406

And read more here about Trade Adjustment Assistance:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trade_Adjustment_Assistance

And notice that i think that USA is economically in a good shape, since read my following thoughts so that to notice it

And about the US Debt Crisis, i think it is not so problematic, since USA economy is well diversified and powerful economy that is really resilient, and you can read more about it here in the following article:

The Surprising Truth About the US Debt Crisis

https://www.thebalance.com/us-debt-crisis-summary-timeline-and-solutions-3306288

Also I think that USA will still be a super power in the future, and i say that we can not compare USA to China, since China has many defects like the "productivity" of China is not good both qualitatively and quantitatively, and China has a debt problem, so China is constrained by this factor of its debt problem, so China can not attain the level of
productivity both quantitatively and qualitatively of that of USA in
the near to medium future. But the productivity of USA is good both qualitatively and quantitatively, and China has other problems such as
the quality of education of its workforce is much less than that of USA,
this is why China is also lacking much in productivity both qualitatively and quantitatively. And you can look at the following video so that to understand more:

Why won't China Surpass the United States? - VisualPolitik EN

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZqowS-hlZ3M

Also as I have just explained above, that Donald Trump protectionism
is not good, and i think that Donald Trump was not thinking correctly, since around 85% of jobs losses in the manufacturing sector in USA was caused by automation and not by China or such as were thinking it the people who elected Donald Trump, and you can look at the following video that make you understand that automation also has advantages:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D-rd3kW7Bc8

Following are some of the advantages of automation:

1. Automation is the key to the shorter workweek. Automation will allow
the average number of working hours per week to continue to decline,
thereby allowing greater leisure hours and a higher quality life.

2. Automation brings safer working conditions for the worker. Since
there is less direct physical participation by the worker in the
production process, there is less chance of personal injury to the worker.

3. Automated production results in lower prices and better products. It
has been estimated that the cost to machine one unit of product by
conventional general-purpose machine tools requiring human operators may
be 100 times the cost of manufacturing the same unit using automated
mass-production techniques. The electronics industry offers many
examples of improvements in manufacturing technology that have
significantly reduced costs while increasing product value (e.g., colour
TV sets, stereo equipment, calculators, and computers).

4. The growth of the automation industry will itself provide employment
opportunities. This has been especially true in the computer industry,
as the companies in this industry have grown (IBM, Digital Equipment
Corp., Honeywell, etc.), new jobs have been created.
These new jobs include not only workers directly employed by these
companies, but also computer programmers, systems engineers, and other
needed to use and operate the computers.

5. Automation is the only means of increasing standard of living. Only
through productivity increases brought about by new automated methods of
production, it is possible to advance standard of living. Granting wage
increases without a commensurate increase in productivity
will results in inflation. To afford a better society, it is a must to
increase productivity.

And the education system of USA is not so bad as we can think and you can read about it here:

America's Not-So-Broken Education System

Read more here:

https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2016/06/everything-in-american-education-is-broken/488189/

Also Let's look for example at USA, so read the following from Jonathan Wai that is a Ph.D., it says:

"Heiner Rindermann and James Thompson uncovered that the “smart
fraction” of a country is quite influential in impacting the performance
of that country, for example, its GDP."

And it also says the following:

"“According to recent population estimates, there are about eight
Chinese and Indians for every American in the top 1 percent in brains.”
But consider that the U.S. benefits from the smart fractions of every
other country in the world because it continues to serve as a magnet for
brainpower, something that is not even factored into these rankings.

What these rankings clearly show is America is likely still in the lead
in terms of brainpower. And this is despite the fact federal funding for
educating our smart fraction is currently zero. Everyone seems worried
Americans are falling behind, but this is because everyone is focusing
on average and below average people. Maybe it’s time we started taking a
closer look at the smartest people of our own country."

Read more here:

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/finding-the-next-einstein/201312/whats-the-smartest-country-in-the-world

So as you are noticing it's immigrants(and there are about eight Chinese
and Indians for every American in the top 1 percent in brains) that are
making USA a rich country.

And read also the following to understand more:

Why Silicon Valley Wouldn’t Work Without Immigrants

There are many theories for why immigrants find so much success in tech.
Many American-born tech workers point out that there is no shortage of
American-born employees to fill the roles at many tech companies.
Researchers have found that more than enough students graduate from
American colleges to fill available tech jobs. Critics of the industry’s
friendliness toward immigrants say it comes down to money — that
technology companies take advantage of visa programs, like the H-1B
system, to get foreign workers at lower prices than they would pay
American-born ones.

But if that criticism rings true in some parts of the tech industry, it
misses the picture among Silicon Valley’s top companies. One common
misperception of Silicon Valley is that it operates like a factory; in
that view, tech companies can hire just about anyone from anywhere in
the world to fill a particular role.

But today’s most ambitious tech companies are not like factories.
They’re more like athletic teams. They’re looking for the LeBrons and
Bradys — the best people in the world to come up with some brand-new,
never-before-seen widget, to completely reimagine what widgets should do
in the first place.

“It’s not about adding tens or hundreds of thousands of people into
manufacturing plants,” said Aaron Levie, the co-founder and chief
executive of the cloud-storage company Box. “It’s about the couple ideas
that are going to be invented that are going to change everything.”

Why do tech honchos believe that immigrants are better at coming up with
those inventions? It’s partly a numbers thing. As the tech venture
capitalist Paul Graham has pointed out, the United States has only 5
percent of the world’s population; it stands to reason that most of the
world’s best new ideas will be thought up by people who weren’t born here.

If you look at some of the most consequential ideas in tech, you find an
unusual number that were developed by immigrants. For instance, Google’s
entire advertising business — that is, the basis for the vast majority
of its revenues and profits, the engine that allows it to hire thousands
of people in the United States — was created by three immigrants: Salar
Kamangar and Omid Kordestani, who came to the United States from Iran,
and Eric Veach, from Canada.

But it’s not just a numbers thing. Another reason immigrants do so well
in tech is that people from outside bring new perspectives that lead to
new ideas.

Read more here:

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/08/technology/personaltech/why-silicon-valley-wouldnt-work-without-immigrants.html

More of my philosophy about the scalability of my form of digital or electronic book and more..

I think i am smart, and i think that my form of digital or electronic book is scalable since you can go from the a main sophisticated "Tree menu" to other childs of sophisticated "Tree menus" inside the left HTML frame of the digital book, so i think it is also a powerful and sophisticated kind of digital book, so i have thought fast this project of mine and i have designed it fast, but also you have to know that the sophisticated "Tree menu" that shows in the left HTML frame of the digital book has not to use the same CSS configuration as the right HTML frame with: "font-size: 1.3vw", since i think that the fonts of the sophisticated "Tree menu" must be fixed fonts size so that to permit to
scroll the left HTML frame correctly etc., so i invite you to read my previous thoughts so that to understand my way of doing:

More of my philosophy about digital or electronic books and more..

I think i am smart, and i have just finished my programming of a project that easy for you to make electronic or digital books with HTML and Javascript and CSS, now it consists of a sophisticated "Tree menu" that will show the indexes of the digital or electronic book that will appear on the left of the screen in a left HTML frame, also i have just thought about my design and i think that here is how i will show the HTML with CSS pages of the the digital or electronic book: First i have to include in the HTML pages of the digital book the following in HTML:

<head>
<link rel="stylesheet" href="mystyle.css">
</head>

And the mystyle.css "CSS" file will contain the following so that
the HTML pages of the digital book appears correctly in different screen resolutions:

mystyle.css file is:

body
{
font-size: 1.3vw;
}

So as you are noticing i am using "font-size: 1.3vw" , since the
right HTML frame that contains the HTML pages of the book is 3/4 the size,and here is how i am constructing the HTML frames of the digital book so that to notice it:

<!DOCTYPE html>
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<TITLE>A frameset document</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<FRAMESET>
<FRAMESET cols="25%,*" frameborder="yes" framespacing=1>
<FRAME name="frame1" src="example01.html" scrolling="auto">
<FRAME name="frame2" src="poems1.html" scrolling="auto">
<Frame scrolling="auto">
</FRAMESET>
</FRAMESET>
</HTML>


So notice that it is: "FRAMESET cols="25%,*", so it means that
the left HTML frame of the digital book is 1/4 of the size and
the right HTML frame is 3/4 of the size.

And i will show you more the sophisticated "Tree menu" that will show the indexes of the digital book, so stay tuned since i will start to organize my thoughts of my philosophy and my other thoughts
of software computing etc. into my above form of a digital book.

And here is my philosophy of why i am organizing my thoughts in
a digital book:

More of my philosophy about making paper from trees and about deforestation and more..

I invite you to read the following article about the environmental footprint of paper vs. electronic books:

https://www.anthropocenemagazine.org/2020/08/the-environmental-footprint-of-paper-vs-electronic-books/

And as you notice that the above article is just speaking about
how much green house emissions we have with footprint of paper vs. electronic books, but i think that deforestation does not only
cause green house emissions, but i think we have to take into account the the other following disadvantages:

The disadvantages to deforestation are an increased amount of carbon dioxide emissions and soil erosion as well as the destruction of forest habitat and the loss of biological diversity of both plants and animals.

Also 24 trees makes around one ton of paper, which is about around 200,000 sheets, and you may use a piece of paper one or two times, but it can be recycled five to seven times. Recycling one ton of paper saves 17 trees. If it’s recycled seven times, it saves 117 trees, but i think that it is not enough and it is not enough to recycle (Read in the following article so that to notice it: https://www.sciencefocus.com/science/is-recycling-paper-bad-for-the-environment/), so it is why i think that reading digital or electronic books on computers is better than using paper books.

And i invite you to read the following articles:

How Useful Is Recycling, Really?

Read more here:

https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2021/01/recycling-wont-solve-climate-change/617851/

How do people make paper out of trees, and why not use something else?

Read more here:

https://theconversation.com/how-do-people-make-paper-out-of-trees-and-why-not-use-something-else-156625


Your Web Use Leaves A Carbon Footprint, Here's How You Can Reduce It

Read more here:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/neilyeoh/2017/07/26/your-web-use-leaves-a-carbon-footprint-heres-how-you-can-reduce-it/?sh=414bea159401

More of my philosophy about standardization of education and about the homogenized way of doing and more..

I think i am really smart, so i will invite you to look again at the following video:

Communist Professor Defends Stalin & Mao’s Legacy - Heated Debate

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iov6jyfKtRc

If you have like a Mensa IQ, you will quickly notice by looking
at the above video that there is an important pattern that you can
infer from the above video that makes you understand much more and i think i am smart and i will say that the pattern that i have quickly found with my fluid intelligence in the above video is the following:

You will notice in the above video that the Patrick Bet-David the capitalistic has a tendency and it is that capitalism has a tendency to like homogenize by saying that people are capable of being successful or are capable of being rich by working "hard", and it is the way of capitalism and it is the way of Patrick Bet-David in the above video, but the being capable of working hard is also a "genetical" characteristic, so then it is a mistake to say so, and president John F. Kennedy the american capitalist was also saying the same by saying: "My fellow Americans, ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country.", so what he means is that we have to "neglect" or be much less the Social Assistance and Social Solidarity from the government, but i think that it is not an objective and realistic way of doing since you have to read my below thoughts of my philosophy about Class Struggle so that to know how i am logically inferring that we have to be a kind of Social Assistance and Social Solidarity and we have to have social programs that help the weakest members of the society or the poors of the society in a kind of way, and we have also to have a level of Class Struggle that is like a competition that ensure that those kind of rights of providing some kind of social programs that helps the weakest members and the poors of the society are fought for in a civilized way inside such places as the congress and in Democracy.

Look at how John F. Kennedy the capitalist is not correctly thinking in this video:

President John F. Kennedy Inaugural Address "Ask Not What Your Country Can Do For You"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P1PbQlVMp98

More of my philosophy about capitalism and about Marxism and communism and more..

I invite you to look at the following video:

Communist Professor Defends Stalin & Mao’s Legacy - Heated Debate

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iov6jyfKtRc


So i have just looked at the above video and i will talk more about capitalism:

I think the mistake is to call our system capitalism, since i think our
system is not capitalism, since it requires also a kind of of Social Assistance and Social Solidarity and we have to have social programs that help the weakest members of the society or the poors of the society in a kind of way, and read below my philosophy about Class Struggle
so that to notice it, so i think that saying that USA is capitalism
is not correct thinking, since capitalism only as a system is a stupid
system, so this is why we can not compare as in the above video between
capitalism and communism, so we need to take into account all the
variables such as the kind of of Social Assistance and Social Solidarity
that we have inside for example the USA system so that to compare with communism, other than that i have also discussed more about the
advantages of capitalism, you can read them in the following
web link:

And if you want to know more about my views on capitalism,
read them here:

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.culture.morocco/c/cf3Wa4z8Xmc

Also you have to read carefully my philosophy about Class Struggle so
that to notice from where i am logically inferring that we require
a kind of of Social Assistance and Social Solidarity and that we have to have social programs that help the weakest members of the society or the poors of the society in a kind of way, here it is:

And today i will talk about Class struggle of Communism and Marxism,
so i will first ask a philosophical question of:

Is Class struggle "valid" and a good thing to have ?

I will say that there is not one type of Class struggle, because
we can have "levels" of Class Struggle, such as the Class Struggle of Communism and Marxism under Mao Zedong in China, and i think it is logically inferred in Marxism from the fact that there is antagonistic contradictions that are contradiction between the Chinese communists and Chinese bourgeoisie and between the imperialist camp and the socialist camp, so we can also consider that this antagonistic contradictions also comes from the fact that we can be genetically predisposed to being smart or having a good memory efficiency and such genetical characteristics, so this gives much more "chance" to those that have this kind of genetical predispositions to become rich and successful, so this is why Communism and Marxism says that we have to equalize much more between people, so this is why i think it is also a kind of competition that gives this kind of Class Struggle, but i will say that the fact that we equalize much more between people in a society is not good for "diversity" inside the society and it is not good for efficiency, since we have to have a level of diversity that brings "resilience" to the organization of a society, and even in economy we have to have a level of diversification of economy that brings resilience, so this is why i think that the level of Class struggle that we have to have doesn't look like archaism of Communism or Marxism, since i think we have to have some kind of Social Assistance and Social Solidarity and we have to have social programs that help the weakest members of the society or the poors of the society in a kind of way, so we have also to have a level of Class Struggle that is like a competition that ensure that those kind of rights of providing some kind of social programs that helps the weakest members and the poors of the society are fought for in a civilized way inside such places as the congress and in Democracy. Now there is also other antagonist contradictions between the government and the people under Democracy or the communist regime, and inside two groups or more inside a political party or within a communist Party, and i think that we have to have civilized ways and manners like by vigorous criticism and self-criticism so that to resolve those kind of antagonist contradictions.

Also i have just corrected some typos in my below thoughts of my philosophy, since i have just written: "jewish famillies", but i have just corrected it by writing it as: "jewish families", so read again:

More of my philosophy about anti-semitism and about the jewish families in Germany and in Europe and more..

I have just looked to the following video of the Rise
of the Rothschilds and i think that they are jews:

Rise of the Rothschilds: The World's Richest Family

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6sM3KOYPL_A


As you notice in the above video that jews were not treated correctly
in Germany and other european countries, and i think that anti-semitism in that time, and i think even in our today, against jews from neo-nazis and such people comes from the fact that most of the jewish families were living by lending money with interests, but if objectively we follow "technicality" of conventional economic theory, we can say that most jewish families in Germany and other countries of Europe were by lending money with interests doing what we call "Finance", so there jobs were that they were working in the Financial sector as we know it today, so i think that most jewish families in Germany and other European countries were bringing a kind of "resilience" to the economy Germany and other European countries, and read about this kind of economic resilience that i am talking about below by talking about the biggest benefit of finance, read it in my thoughts below, and of course the interest rates in Finance of the banking system and such financial institutions and even for those jewish families that were living in Germany and other countries in Europe "depends" on the Risk of the transaction of lending money, since we can say in french: Que l'argent ne tombe pas du ciel et même pour les banques !, and it means in english: That money does not fall from the sky and even for banking system ! so there must be some kind of Financial discipline even for banking system and such financial institutions !, so as you notice that we have not to be too pessimistic about the jews, also here is what i said about Finance, and notice again that it is Finance that were doing the jewish families in Germany and other European countries in that time:

The biggest benefit of finance, is to provide opportunities to people,
in the sense that in a world where there is no finance, the only way to
start a company is to be born rich or to have saved for a long time. In
a world where finance works well, the people with talent can actually
start firms and reach their dreams without waiting to either have saved
the money, or be lucky and receive it from their parents, and once you
create this opportunity, you will have the most talented people take
advantage of those opportunities, which favors growth, which favors a
good allocation of resources and, ultimately, innovation. But we have to
know what is the problem with finance

More of my philosophy about my personality and more..

So now i will talk more about me so that you understand my personality,
so i am not too narcissistic, but of course i genetically have a characteristic that looks like a level of narcissism but in a positive way, since i am genetically a person that wants to "show" to the others that he is smart and that he is capable and that he is helpful to the others, since you can notice it that i am also thinking in my below thoughts of my philosophy about the poors and the weakest members of the society..., and this genetical characteristic of me is like my "engine", since you have to know that without this kind of genetical characteristic that is an engine you can not advance "much" and be efficient in real life, and i can say in french: Il faudrait savoir jouer au malin dans la vie, mais pas dans le sens péjoratif comme je viens de l'expliquer ici avec même mon nouveau poème, lisez ici pour vous en rendre compte: https://groups.google.com/g/alt.culture.morocco/c/Ee1dxgUrhy0, but not only that, but i am like a super soldier that is highly smart, since i am inventing the "tools" that permit me to be much more smart and that permit me to adapt efficiently, so this is why you are seeing me inventing quickly my thoughts of my philosophy and i am posting it in front of you and you are seeing me inventing quickly my proverbs and posting them here and you are seeing me inventing quickly my poems of Love and and posting them here and i am inventing quickly my monotheistic religion and i am posting it here and i am "truthful" and "honest" in my thoughts of my new monotheistic religion, and this way of doing is like inventing quickly the much more sophisticated tools that permit you to be much more smart and that permit you to adapt efficiently, and i think that it is a sign of being a smart person and a wise type of person, and why i am considering myself as a wise type of person? since you can read how i am quickly talking to you in my below thoughts of my philosophy, and it is how i look like in real life, since i am like a wise type of person, also i have invented sophisticated software tools and i have invented many interesting software scalable algorithms and algorithms and i am still inventing interesting software scalable algorithms, and here is also what i have just said about it:

More of my philosophy about the inventors and about algorithms and more..

If you ask me the following question:

What are you, Amine Moulay Ramdane, doing right now ?


I will say that the most important thing that i am doing
is that i have just today invented two software scalable
algorithms that i think are breakthroughs, but i am not
thinking too much about money since what i have done
is that i have invented many software scalable algorithms
and algorithms to better our humanity and our world, so as you notice
that my personality is also that i am an "inventor" that have invented
really interesting things. Also i am right now implementing some
interesting software projects from the ground up with artificial
intelligence, So i invite you to read all my following thoughts so that
to know more about my personality:

More of my philosophy about mathematics and the Minimizers that fit models..

I have just read the following web pages about comparing Minimizers that
fit models, and i invite you to read them here:

https://docs.mantidproject.org/v3.7.1/concepts/FittingMinimizers.html

And i am working with some software projects now that need good
Minimizers that fit models, and i have implemented two of them with the
simplex method and with Levenberg-Marquardt, but i am not satisfied
since i think that the Simplex method is better in convergence than
Levenberg-Marquardt since it rarely converges to a local minimum, but i
will implement or build a minimizer from the ground up with artificial
intelligence that fits Models and that is much more sophisticated and
much more efficient than the Simplex or Levenberg-Marquardt, so stay
tuned since i am actually implementing it !

More about simulation and about prediction and more..

So as you have just noticed that i just said that i have just
invented two software scalable algorithms that i think are
breakthroughs, but you have to know that one of them has needed from
me to simulate it, so i have abstracted the real world behavior
of one of this new scalable algorithms as a model that i have simulated
by software and this has permitted me to "ensure" that this new scalable
algorithm of mine, that i think is a breakthrough, is "reliable" and is
working perfectly, also simulation in general also permits
to not only ensure the "reliability" but also to "predict" the behavior
of the real world systems.

More of my philosophy about wealth and richness and capitalism and more..

I invite you to look at the following video about the Ultra-Rich:

Levels of Wealth: Inside The Secret Lives of The Ultra-Rich

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B8d4uqQjk6o&t

But as you have noticed i have also just quickly written about
how you can be much more rich, so i invite you to read it in
my following thoughts in the following web link, and you can look carefully at how i am talking quickly about how to invest for my or your retirement etc., so read my following thoughts so that to understand my way of doing it:

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.culture.morocco/c/h4FblBWnNHk

Also i have just corrected a typo below, since i have just written
a word as "evolved", but i mean "involved", so i have just corrected this word in my below thoughts, so i invite you to read again my thoughts below so that to understand how i am quickly thinking and inventing and writing my thoughts of my philosophy so that to know much more about my kind of personality:

More of my philosophy about the meaning and purpose of human life and more..

I think i am smart and i think i am a philosopher, and now i will talk
as a philosopher about from where comes the meaning and purpose of human life:

I think the meaning and purpose of human life can not come from the
morality of the master as have said the philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche,
since the morality of the master also has a weakness and a problem and it needs Democracy so that to avoid it or prevent it, and read about it in my below thoughts of my philosophy about the philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche and about morality so that to understand it, so i think that the meaning and purpose of human life comes from morality that is like a "mixture" from a kind of Democracy that also permits to to avoid the above problem of the morality of the master and from a kind of of Social Assistance and Social Solidarity and we have to have social programs that help the weakest members of the society or the poors of the society in a kind of way, so we have also to have a level of Class Struggle that is like a competition that ensure that those kind of rights of providing some kind of social programs that helps the weakest members and the poors of the society are fought for in a civilized way inside such places as the congress and in Democracy, and read my following thoughts of my philosophy about Class Struggle so that to understand correctly from where i am logically inferring it, and the meaning and purpose of human life come also from the moving forward of morality with this better and better perfection and with a kind of positive energy that i am talking about as following:

More of my philosophy of from where comes the positive human energy..

I think i am a wise type of person, and i will say that the positive
energy that makes us be a much better world comes from the way you are
moving, so you have to be careful about the way you are moving, so i
think that the efficient way of moving is that you have to make
your personality better and better by making or constructing better and
better things, and i think that it is the best positive energy that
makes us be a much better world, it is why i am talking as i am talking
so that to make you better "adapt" and be better and better humans, and
this is why i have also invented the following proverb that abstract
much more correctly this way of doing by positive energy, here it is:

And here is my new proverb in french and english:

"When you walk towards a goal in life it's like you walk down a forest
path towards a goal, but when you walk this forest path you can look at
flowers and pretty trees and be happier or you can also learn more and
have more experience which is useful while walking in the forest, then
life is like this, you can go through it towards goals, but going
through it you can also have pleasures that make you happier and you can
learn more and have more experience and that is useful to you, and i
think this conception of life makes you more positive."

"Quand tu marches vers un objectif dans la vie, c'est comme tu marches
dans un chemin de forêt vers un objectif, mais quand tu marches dans ce
chemin de forêt tu peux regarder des fleurs et de jolis arbres et être
plus joyeux ou tu peux aussi en apprendre plus et avoir plus
d'expérience qui est utile en marchant dans la forêt, alors la vie
ressemble à cela, tu peux la traverser vers des objectifs, mais en la
traversant tu peux avoir aussi des plaisirs qui te rendent plus heureux
et tu peux apprendre plus et avoir plus d'experience et cela t'est
utile, et je pense que cette conception de la vie te rend plus positif."

So you have to understand that my proverb above is like
trying to well balance between, in one side, our strong human desire for
success and the fear or the disliking of failure to attain the goal,
and, in the other side, i am showing in my new proverb the good sides or
advantages or the pros of walking our lives towards the goal or goals
even if failure or failures happen(s), and i think this conception of
life of my proverb permits to be more positive, also you have to align
the usefulness of the utility with the global mission of the country or
global world.

More of my philosophy about the study that reveals the Richest people are never the most talented and more..

I invite you to read the following interesting article:

A 40-Year Scientific Study Reveals the Richest People Are Never the Most Talented (and Why That's a Really Good Thing)Yep: The smartest, most talented people almost never reach the highest peaks of success.

Read more here:

https://www.inc.com/jeff-haden/a-40-year-scientific-study-reveals-richest-people-are-never-most-talented-and-why-thats-a-really-good-thing.html

So as you have just noticed by reading the above interesting article that a 40-Year scientific study reveals the Richest people are never the most talented, but it says more precisely that intelligence, skill, and hard work will certainly get you far in richness and success, but the most successful people are never the most talented, since an element of luck is involved, and this element of luck is mostly seizing a "lucky" opportunity, like being at the right place at the right time, meeting the right person, reacting to an opportunity in the right way.

More of my philosophy about capitalism and about the rich and more..

I invite you to look at the following french video that is
talking about capitalism and the rich:

Deviens riche ! | Streetphilosophy | ARTE

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R4I5bFIK6Go

I think i am smart, and i have just looked at the above video,
and i think that the women in the above video is not talking correctly,
since she is saying that when a person possess billions of dollars, in a world where many people struggle because they do not have much money, it is an immoral person, and she is talking like the following article,
so i invite you to read it:

It’s basically just immoral to be rich

https://www.currentaffairs.org/2017/06/its-basically-just-immoral-to-be-rich

So now i will answer this philosophical question, so i think the
defects of the above article is that he is wanting to manage money
and wealth of the rich by much more equalizing in a society, but i think that it is not the correct way, since you can understand capitalism by looking at for example the Financial sector, so you can understand more capitalism and the mechanism of diversity that brings "resilience" and that needs a good allocation of resources in capitalism by reading my following thoughts:

The biggest benefit of finance, is to provide opportunities to people,
in the sense that in a world where there is no finance, the only way to
start a company is to be born rich or to have saved for a long time. In
a world where finance works well, the people with talent can actually
start firms and reach their dreams without waiting to either have saved
the money, or be lucky and receive it from their parents, and once you
create this opportunity, you will have the most talented people take
advantage of those opportunities, which favors growth, which favors a
good allocation of resources and, ultimately, innovation. But we have to
know what is the problem with finance, and here it is

So then you are understanding from the above that capitalism needs
a good allocation of resources, since efficiency also says that giving
much more money or making rich the talented people that want to efficiently invest in projects an ideas such as in capitalism is also an efficient allocation of resources, since also the talented people know how to efficiently distribute again and invest again efficiently there big money and richness in other projects and good ideas, so capitalism brings this kind of efficiency, so then this means that it is not correct to say that when a person possess billions of dollars, in a world where many people struggle because they do not have much money, it is an immoral person, since saying so is also extremism and archaism of Class Struggle, and talking about Class Struggle here is my thoughts about Class Struggle:

And today i will talk about Class struggle of Communism and Marxism,
so i will first ask a philosophical question of:

Is Class struggle "valid" and a good thing to have ?

I will say that there is not one type of Class struggle, because
we can have "levels" of Class Struggle, such as the Class Struggle of Communism and Marxism under Mao Zedong in China, and i think it is logically inferred in Marxism from the fact that there is antagonistic contradictions that are contradiction between the Chinese communists and Chinese bourgeoisie and between the imperialist camp and the socialist camp, so we can also consider that this antagonistic contradictions also comes from the fact that we can be genetically predisposed to being smart or having a good memory efficiency and such genetical characteristics, so this gives much more "chance" to those that have this kind of genetical predispositions to become rich and successful, so this is why Communism and Marxism says that we have to equalize much more between people, so this is why i think it is also a kind of competition that gives this kind of Class Struggle, but i will say that the fact that we equalize much more between people in a society is not good for "diversity" inside the society and it is not good for efficiency, since we have to have a level of diversity that brings "resilience" to the organization of a society, and even in economy we have to have a level of diversification of economy that brings resilience, so this is why i think that the level of Class struggle that we have to have doesn't look like archaism of Communism or Marxism, since i think we have to have some kind of Social Assistance and Social Solidarity and we have to have social programs that help the weakest members of the society or the poors of the society in a kind of way, so we have also to have a level of Class Struggle that is like a competition that ensure that those kind of rights of providing some kind of social programs that helps the weakest members and the poors of the society are fought for in a civilized way inside such places as the congress and in Democracy. Now there is also other antagonist contradictions between the government and the people under Democracy or the communist regime, and inside two groups or more inside a political party or within a communist Party, and i think that we have to have civilized ways and manners like by vigorous criticism and self-criticism so that to resolve those kind of antagonist contradictions. And of course i have also just invented quickly a proverb and a poem so that to make you understand this way of doing, and here they are:

More of my philosophy about my new proverb about Democracy and more..

As you have just noticed, i have just invented a proverb about Democracy, read it below and read all my other proverbs below, and as you notice in this new proverb that i am saying:

"Since the basis of Democracy is to better and better discuss so that to bring good sageness and good soundness"

So this "better and better discuss" means that it is "inherent" to it that we have to also be well educated and that it needs Elitism, and as you are noticing in my new proverb that i am saying that Democracy needs Elitism that is existence of an elite as a dominating element in a system or society such as congressmen and congresswomen of the USA congress. So i invite you to read my new proverb and all my following thoughts so that to understand:

Here is my new proverb:

"The basis of Democracy is not that people have to govern, since it is
inferiority of Democracy, since the basis of Democracy is to better and better discuss so that to bring good sageness and good soundness, and after bringing this good sageness and good soundness, we can govern correctly with this good sageness and good soundness, this is why Democracy needs Elitism such as the congressmen and congresswomen of the USA congress so that to bring good sageness and good soundness."

And of course you can read my just new poem below that also speaks
about the basis of Democracy:

And read my other new proverbs below that i have written quickly..

Here is my just new poem, and notice that the lightness in
my new poem means: The state of having a sufficient or considerable amount of natural light.


So here is my new poem:

---
Darkness for me is not madness

Since darkness is also a "mechanism" that brings better lightness

Darkness for me is not madness

Since better lightness is not coming just from U.S. state of Kansas

Darkness for me is not madness

Since better lightness is also coming from the USA congress

Darkness for me is not madness

Since the USA congress is also a place where to better discuss

Darkness for me is not madness

Since the better discuss is not loneliness and is not being novice

Darkness for me is not madness

Since to better discuss is also like our beautiful princess

Darkness for me is not madness

Since the better discuss brings better Sageness and better soundness
---

More of my philosophy about Freedom of Speech and about Turkey and more..

I have just looked at the following video, and i invite you to look at it:

Erdogan: 'We shouldn't confuse criticism with i...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4-0TlT4hnCg

I will ask a philosophical question of:

Do we have to have a full freedom of speech ?

So as you are noticing in the above video that the american jounalist
is saying to president Erdogan of Turkey that he has to respect freedom of speech in his country since it is the requirement for Turkey to be accepted as a member of European Union, so i think that this journalist is not thinking correctly, since Freedom of speech has also to be contextualized, since Freedom of speech in Turkey is much more difficult since you have to know that Turkey is living in an unstable region where there is many wars and too much violence, so then being Freedom of speech in Turkey can for example engender violence inside Turkey,
this is why we have to contextualize and be objective, and look for example at USA, you have just noticed that in USA Freedom of speech of Donald Trump have caused too much violence against the USA congress, so this is why i think that we have to analyse it like i am analysing it and say that we can not always have Freedom of speech, this is why i think that there can be constraints in reality that make us be not Freedom of speech, so then i think that the requirements of European Union that asks Turkey to be Freedom of speech so that to be accepted as a member of European Union is not a realistic and objective way of doing.

More of my philosophy about making paper from trees and about deforestation and more..

I invite you to read the following article about the environmental footprint of paper vs. electronic books:

https://www.anthropocenemagazine.org/2020/08/the-environmental-footprint-of-paper-vs-electronic-books/

And as you notice that the above article is just speaking about
how much green house emissions we have with footprint of paper vs. electronic books, but i think that deforestation does not only
cause green house emissions, but i think we have to take into account the the other following disadvantages:

The disadvantages to deforestation are an increased amount of carbon dioxide emissions and soil erosion as well as the destruction of forest habitat and the loss of biological diversity of both plants and animals.

Also 24 trees makes around one ton of paper, which is about around 200,000 sheets, and you may use a piece of paper one or two times, but it can be recycled five to seven times. Recycling one ton of paper saves 17 trees. If it’s recycled seven times, it saves 117 trees, but i think that it is not enough and it is not enough to recycle (Read in the following article so that to notice it: https://www.sciencefocus.com/science/is-recycling-paper-bad-for-the-environment/), so it is why i think that reading digital or electronic books on computers is better than using paper books, and of course i am actually programming with HTML and CSS and Javascript so that to easy the job of creating a sophisticated digital or electronic books with HTML and CSS and Javascript with dynamically configurable HTML and CSS fonts.

And i invite you to read the following articles:

How Useful Is Recycling, Really?

Read more here:

https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2021/01/recycling-wont-solve-climate-change/617851/

How do people make paper out of trees, and why not use something else?

Read more here:

https://theconversation.com/how-do-people-make-paper-out-of-trees-and-why-not-use-something-else-156625


Your Web Use Leaves A Carbon Footprint, Here's How You Can Reduce It

Read more here:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/neilyeoh/2017/07/26/your-web-use-leaves-a-carbon-footprint-heres-how-you-can-reduce-it/?sh=414bea159401


More of my philosophy about relativism and about morality and more..

I have just read the following article of white supremacists and neo-nazis of a white supremacist website called National Vanguard:

Ancient Admixture: Death Blow to Racialism? — part 1

https://nationalvanguard.org/2021/12/ancient-admixture-death-blow-to-racialism-part-1/


So notice carefully on the above article how it is starting by saying:

"And some of these discoveries do undermine old-fashioned racialism. But they do not undermine the higher racialism — the true understanding — held by us in the National Alliance.."

So notice how it is saying:

"The true understanding — held by us in the National Alliance"

So as you are noticing it is not correct thinking, since I will say that "relativism" is a major disruptor of our mental immune system, but objective standards of right and wrong are our main defences against bad ideas. If we lose those standards, then anything goes, so this is why i say that saying in the above article of white supremacists: "the true understanding held by us in the National Alliance..." is too much certainty, since by reading the above article you will notice that it tries to prove that there is human genetical differences between ethnic groups like the ethnic groups of white and blacks etc., but notice that i am not saying races, since there is only one human race called the human race, but notice carefully that the above certainty of those white supremacists doesn't understand correctly how to introduce the right "randomness" like in Evolutionary algorithms so that to not get stuck in a local minimum and so that to converge towards the global optimum, so i think that this randomness like in Evolutionary algorithms that must be introduced is also allowing a certain level of Genetic mixture to happen inside a group or population, like 25% or so, like allowing Genetic mixture between arabs and white europeans etc. so that to ensure a kind of "diversity" that ensures genetical resilience or resilience. So this why i just said the following:

I think i am a wise type of person, and from my thoughts below about morality, i will say that morality is like mathematics, since morality
is universal as i am explaining below, but so that to be this abstraction of morality that i call "perfection at best", it must be thought really efficiently systemically, so then you notice that it must come with a kind of right patience or right tolerance so that to not be mistakes in the process codification of morality, so morality is in abstraction universal, but so that to be universal in reality it must be thought really efficiently and systemically.

Also the white supremacists and others have to take into account my following thoughts so that to understand correctly:

And read carefully my following thoughts about Nanotechnology and about Exponential Progress and about genetics:

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.culture.morocco/c/mjE_2AG1TKQ

And read my following thoughts:

More of my philosophy about capitalism and about Class Struggle and more..

Today i will discuss more about an important subject, so first i invite
you to read my following previous thoughts:

--

"Is Class struggle "valid" and a good thing to have ?

I will say that there is not one type of Class struggle, because
we can have "levels" of Class Struggle, such as the Class Struggle of Communism and Marxism under Mao Zedong in China, and i think it is logically inferred in Marxism from the fact that there is antagonistic contradictions that are contradiction between the Chinese communists and Chinese bourgeoisie and between the imperialist camp and the socialist camp, so we can also consider that this antagonistic contradictions also comes from the fact that we can be genetically predisposed to being smart or having a good memory efficiency and such genetical characteristics, so this gives much more "chance" to those that have this kind of genetical predispositions to become rich and successful, so this is why Communism and Marxism says that we have to equalize much more between people, so this is why i think it is also a kind of competition that gives this kind of Class Struggle, but i will say that the fact that we equalize much more between people in a society is not good for "diversity" inside the society and it is not good for efficiency, since we have to have a level of diversity that brings "resilience" to the organization of a society, and even in economy we have to have a level of diversification of economy that brings resilience, so this is why i think that the level of Class struggle that we have to have doesn't look like archaism of Communism or Marxism, since i think we have to have some kind of Social Assistance and Social Solidarity and we have to have social programs that help the weakest members of the society or the poors of the society in a kind of way, so we have also to have a level of Class Struggle that is like a competition that ensure that those kind of rights of providing some kind of social programs that helps the weakest members and the poors of the society are fought for in a civilized way inside such places as the congress and in Democracy. Now there is also other antagonist contradictions between the government and the people under Democracy or the communist regime, and inside two groups or more inside a political party or within a communist Party, and i think that we have to have civilized ways and manners like by vigorous criticism and self-criticism so that to resolve those kind of antagonist contradictions. "

--

So as you are noticing in my above thoughts that i just said the following:

"But i will say that the fact that we equalize much more between people in a society is not good for "diversity" inside the society and it is not good for efficiency, since we have to have a level of diversity that brings "resilience" to the organization of a society, and even in economy we have to have a level of diversification of economy that brings resilience"

And here is how i will explain it more, look at Financial sector,
so you can understand more capitalism and the mechanism of diversity that brings "resilience" and that needs a good allocation of resources in capitalism by reading my following thoughts:

The biggest benefit of finance, is to provide opportunities to people,
in the sense that in a world where there is no finance, the only way to
start a company is to be born rich or to have saved for a long time. In
a world where finance works well, the people with talent can actually
start firms and reach their dreams without waiting to either have saved
the money, or be lucky and receive it from their parents, and once you
create this opportunity, you will have the most talented people take
advantage of those opportunities, which favors growth, which favors a
good allocation of resources and, ultimately, innovation. But we have to
know what is the problem with finance, and here it is, read the
following so that to understand:

One last chance to fix capitalism

Read more here:

https://hbr.org/2020/03/one-last-chance-to-fix-capitalism

So i invite you to look at the following video about capitalism:

How to Improve Capitalism

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YOaJe68C-bU

So as you notice in the above video that you can also fix capitalism by
giving voting rights and tax advantages to long-term shareholders and
not by raising taxes, and you need to have sovereign wealth funds and
national pension funds representative of the long term collective
interests etc, so i invite you to look the above video of "How to
improve capitalism" so that to understand more.

And if you want to know more about my views on capitalism,
read them here:

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.culture.morocco/c/cf3Wa4z8Xmc


More of my philosophy about the "assets" of the central Bank of European Union and more..

I have just looked at the following video of Olivier Berruyer , born on October 26 , 1975 in Bron that is a French blogger and actuary by profession, and you can read about him more here:

https://fr-m-wikipedia-org.translate.goog/wiki/Olivier_Berruyer?_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en

And here is the video of him:

NOTRE SYSTÈME FINANCIER VA S'EFFONDRER

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BknDh30qnTI


So i think i am smart and i will say that Olivier Berruyer the actuary by profession in the above video is not so smart, since he is for example giving a graphic of the "assets" of the central Bank of European Union between years 1999 and 2021, and he is also explaining why it is problematic and he is also saying that the negative interest rate of the central Bank of European Union is something really problematic and that it must not be so, but i think that he is not so smart, since you can look at the graphic in the above video of the "assets" of the central of the Bank of European Union between years 1999 and 2021, and you can notice that it is not so problematic, since the time where this fast growth has happened is not too long and he is not saying that the very important thing to know is that this fast growth of the assets of central Bank of European Union also "coincides" with the crisis of Covid-19 and we have to know that negative interest rates are typically seen during weak economies and/or periods of deflation such as in period of the crisis of Covid-19, and you can read that even in Canada there can also be negative interest rates, read here so that to notice it:

What would negative interest rates mean for Canadians?

https://financialpost.com/moneywise/what-would-negative-interest-rates-mean-for-canadians-3

And it is also related to my following thoughts:

And here is also how i have just explained why the governments of Europe and USA are "spending" more in the economy and are following the Keynesian economics in this period of economic Crisis of Covid-19:

More of my philosophy about the Keynesian economics and more..

I invite you to look at the following new video about how the
governments of Europe and USA are "spending" more in the economy
and are following the Keynesian economics in this period of economic
Crisis of Covid-19, since i think that Keynesian economics even if not
followed all the time, has still its "advantage" in this kind of
economic crisis, and the macroeconomic theories and models of Keynesian
economics is about how aggregate demand (total spending in the economy)
strongly influences economic output and inflations, so i invite you to
look at the following new video so that to understand the how of it:

The EU's New Plan to Transform the Economy - VisualPolitik EN

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N2-HqLZJIhU

More of my philosophy about the philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche and about my philosophy..

You have to understand my contributions as a philosopher by reading my
philosophy, but one of my contribution of my philosophy is also related
to the philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche, since the philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche articulated ethical dilemma as a tension between the master vs. slave morality; the former in which we make decisions based on the assessment of consequences, and the latter in which we make decisions based on our conception of good vs. evil, but you have to understand my
contribution of my philosophy about morality, since the first of my contribution about morality is that i am giving a kind of logical proof that morality is "universal", but not only that but i have invented quickly a proverb that abstract much more correctly morality so that you understand more, so read it below, so i think from my thoughts below of my contribution to philosophy, that the philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche is not so smart, since you will understand from my thoughts below of my philosophy that morality of the philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche is an Elitist morality called in his philosophy the morality of the master, but notice that he is not so smart, since the morality of the master in his philosophy has the "tendency" to be great "performance" of perfection, so this is why it can be morality that oppresses people,
so we can then say that morality of philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche is
the not correct morality, since here again you are noticing that Democracy is a tool that permit to avoid such oppression of the morality
of the master of the philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche, so i invite you to read again some of my contributions to philosophy about morality in my following thoughts, but first i invite you to read my following thoughts
of my philosophy about Utilitrianism so that to understand more that morality of the master of the philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche is not the correct one:

More of my philosophy about Democracy and Utilitarianism and more..

I think i am a wise type of person, and i will also make you understand
another very important thing, and it is that my redefinition of
Utilitarianism below make the rule of Utilitarianism "valid" and "true",
since the rule of Utilitarianism that is maximizing happiness and
well-being for all affected individuals is also ruled by the future
consequences, so since our future consequences must be that we have to
be a kind of order in a Democracy that permits Democracy to work, so
then we have to "introduce" like a kind of randomness such by logical
analogy as randomness of Evolutionary algorithms in artificial
intelligence, since to not get stuck in a local minimum we have to not
to "homogenize" in the society the rule of Utilitarianism since there is
also the weakest members of the society that can not be able to be this
maximizing happiness and well-being for all affected individuals, so i
think that it is like evolutionary algorithms in artificial
intelligence, so we have to be smart when managing and ruling in
Democracy. So notice that i have first talked in my below thoughts about
the definition of Utilitarianism that doesn't take into account my
redefinition below of Utilitarianism that make the rule of
Utilitarianism "valid" and "true", and i am after that giving my
redefinition of Utilitarianism, so read it again:

More of my philosophy about Utilitarianism and more..

So as you are noticing that in my previous post i have talked about what
is the best positive energy that make us a much better world, read it
below, but am i for Utilitarianism 100% by talking as i am talking about
this positive energy ? i will answer that you have to know that
Utilitarianism prescribes actions that maximise happiness and well-being
for all affected individuals, so i think this "prescribes" means like
"recommend", since we are also ruled by Democracy that makes the rule
of Utilitarianism compatible with Democracy, so this prescribes is not
dictatorship, and this maximize of Utilitarianism is the best way, and
you have to also understand my redefinition of Utilitarianism that
abstract much more correctly, and here is my redefinition of Utilitarianism:

More of my philosophy about why the definition of Utilitarianism is like
an IQ test..

Notice that i think i am smart, since when i just looked rapidly at the
definition below of Utilitarianism, i have rapidly discovered a pattern
with my fluid intelligence and it is that even if the definition
of Utilitarianism is: That Utilitarianism prescribes actions that
maximise happiness and well-being for all affected individuals,
i can easily see a pattern with my fluid intelligence since i am
smart, since the pattern is that Utilitarianism maximises happiness and
well-being by well balancing taking into account not
only the present but also the future, i mean that responability
is inherent to the definition since the well balancing forces us
to be responsability in the present or today so that to maximize
correctly happiness and well being tomorrow or in the future.

I can give you another IQ test that i have rapidly invented and
here it is:

So i will give my example of pattern recognition with my fluid
intelligence that permits to understand, here it is:

So if you want to go fast from my country Morocco to another country
called USA , how will you do it ? or what will you do ?

It is like my IQ test..

So if you answer that you need for example to use a fast airplane to go
fast from Morocco to USA, your answer is a stupid answer, so you need
the smart answer, so i will answer that the fast airplane too has to be
"reliable" and your "health" has too to permit it and the "weather" has
too to permit it, so now you are clearly noticing that you need to take
into account many "factors" so that to go fast from Morocco to USA, so
you are clearly noticing that being smart needs also a good plan.

More precision of my philosophy about Utilitarianism..

I invite you to read the following definition of what is Utilitarianism:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utilitarianism

So as you are noticing, it says that Utilitarianism prescribes actions
that maximise happiness and well-being for all affected individuals,
but i think that Utilitarianism is not idiotic since it maximises
happiness and well-being by well balancing taking into account not
only the present but also the future.

And read my following other proverbs that i think are flexible from the
start and that i have just invented quickly, here they are and read them
carefully:

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.culture.morocco/c/ZyUvFt_nix8


And here is my contributions of my philosophy about morality:

More of my philosophy about morality and more..

I think i am smart, and as you have just noticed i have also just
invented a proverb that abstract morality, and i invite you to
read it again, and i invite you to read my below thoughts
so that you understand more my logical proof of what is morality and
why it is universal:

And here is my other new proverb:

Note that the English dictionary defines "perfection" as: "the act or
process of perfecting"

Read here:

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/perfection


This is the definition of perfection above that I use below in my
explanation of my new proverb.


Here is all my explanation of my new proverb below:


My new proverb comes to me from the essence of morality that I explained
to you in my political philosophy that I wrote in English, since in
morality we are pushed towards the pretty tomorrow because we are aware
of this pretty perfume that is the perfection that pushes us or
encourages us to be or allows us to become perfect or greatly perfect.


Read about it here on my thoughts of my political philosophy about morality:


https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/alt.culture.morocco/7UmkfURwoU4


So here is my new proverb:


"Life is like the pretty perfume that calls us to be a pretty tomorrow!"


So notice carefully my smart play on words in my new proverb, i think
it's smart, and you have to know that the future perfection depends on
the present perfection, so when today we are responsibility to be the
pretty perfection so that to build the pretty tomorrow, then the pretty
perfection of today is part of the pretty tomorrow, and the "pretty
perfume" in my new proverb is also the today pretty perfection, but you
have to understand the symbolic which allows us to say that being this
part of the pretty tomorrow is also like being the pretty tomorrow. It
is what makes it a smart proverb.

More of my philosophy about entropy and about how morality is universal..

I think i am smart, and i am explaining below why morality is universal,
but as you have just noticed i have just said that so that to say
that morality is universal, it requires from us to know about the
requirements such as why to be a global world etc., so there must be a
level of consciousness, other than that i will make you feel and see
much more that morality is universal since i am seeing it:

So take for example the human imperfections or world imperfections,
i say that it is because we have those imperfections that also we have
morality, and those imperfections causes entropy(A state of disorder and
disorganization), this is why we have to be more and more perfection so
that to maintain order and so that to attain perfection of being much
more perfect or perfect, for example humans are working in there
everyday life so that to also maintain order or so that to become
perfection or much more perfection, and maintaining order is also that
we are perfectioning so that to not to become disorder.

More of my philosophy about why morality is universal..

I think i am a smart philosopher, and i will now explain why
morality is universal:

So take a look at the thing that we call "time", so you can naively look
at our everyday life and say that time is not relative, but
you can like Einstein analyse it and prove that time is relative,
and morality is the same, so when you naively look at it you will
think that morality is relative, since you can notice that for example
there is many countries with many laws and rules, but when you analyse
it you will notice that the goal of morality that we become perfect or
much more perfect pushes us forward towards more and more perfection
since we have to solve our problems such as our many imperfections, it
is also why morality is "progressive", so then the essence of morality
become that morality is progressing towards the goal that is that we
become perfect or much more perfect, so then the other details of
morality are abstracted, so then those acts of humans perfectioning or
perfecting towards a much more perfect world or perfect world and that
are also codified as morality become that morality is universal, since
also we can take this essence of morality as the most important thing.

More of my philosophy about Class struggle of Communism and Marxism and more..

I think i am a wise type of person and i think i am a philosopher, and first, i invite you to read my following new thoughts about Utilitarianism and more here:

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.culture.morocco/c/wgPJkwdGrqc

And today i will talk about Class struggle of Communism and Marxism,
so i will first ask a philosophical question of:

Is Class struggle "valid" and a good thing to have ?

I will say that there is not one type of Class struggle, because
we can have "levels" of Class Struggle, such as the Class Struggle of Communism and Marxism under Mao Zedong in China, and i think it is logically inferred in Marxism from the fact that there is antagonistic contradictions that are contradiction between the Chinese communists and Chinese bourgeoisie and between the imperialist camp and the socialist camp, so we can also consider that this antagonistic contradictions also comes from the fact that we are genetically predisposed to being smart or having a good memory efficiency etc. so this gives much more "chance" to those that have this kind of genetical predispositions to become rich
and successful, so this is why Communism and Marxism says that we have to equalize much more between people, so this is why i think it is also a kind of competition that gives this kind of Class Struggle, but i will say that the fact that we equalize much more between people in a society is not good for "diversity" inside the society and it is not good for efficiency, since we have to have a level of diversity that brings "resilience" to the organization of a society, and even in economy we have to have a level of diversification of economy that brings resilience, so this is why i think that the level of Class struggle that we have to have doesn't look like archaism of Communism or Marxism,
since i think we have to have some kind Social Assistance and Social Solidarity and we have to have social programs that help
the weakest members of the society or the poors of the society in a kind of way, so we have also to have a level of Class Struggle that is like a competition that ensure that those kind of rights of providing
some kind of social programs that helps the weakest members and the poors of the society are fought for in a civilized way inside such places as the congress and in Democracy. Now there is also other antagonist contradictions between the government and the people under Democracy or the communist regime, and inside two groups or more inside a political party or within a communist Party, and i think that we have to have civilized ways and manners like by vigorous criticism and self-criticism so that to resolve those kind of antagonist contradictions. And of course i have also just invented quickly a proverb and a poem so that to make you understand this way of doing, and here they are:

More of my philosophy about my new proverb about Democracy and more..

As you have just noticed, i have just invented a proverb about Democracy, read it below and read all my other proverbs below, and as you notice in this new proverb that i am saying:

"Since the basis of Democracy is to better and better discuss so that to bring good sageness and good soundness"

So this "better and better discuss" means that it is "inherent" to it that we have to also be well educated and that it needs Elitism, and as you are noticing in my new proverb that i am saying that Democracy needs Elitism that is existence of an elite as a dominating element in a system or society such as congressmen and congresswomen of the USA congress. So i invite you to read my new proverb and all my following thoughts so that to understand:

Here is my new proverb:

"The basis of Democracy is not that people have to govern, since it is
inferiority of Democracy, since the basis of Democracy is to better and better discuss so that to bring good sageness and good soundness, and after bringing this good sageness and good soundness, we can govern correctly with this good sageness and good soundness, this is why Democracy needs Elitism such as the congressmen and congresswomen of the USA congress so that to bring good sageness and good soundness."

And of course you can read my just new poem below that also speaks
about the basis of Democracy:

And read my other new proverbs below that i have written quickly..

Here is my just new poem, and notice that the lightness in
my new poem means: The state of having a sufficient or considerable amount of natural light.


So here is my new poem:


Darkness for me is not madness

Since darkness is also a "mechanism" that brings better lightness

Darkness for me is not madness

Since better lightness is not coming just from U.S. state of Kansas

Darkness for me is not madness

Since better lightness is also coming from the USA congress

Darkness for me is not madness

Since the USA congress is also a place where to better discuss

Darkness for me is not madness

Since the better discuss is not loneliness and is not being novice

Darkness for me is not madness

Since to better discuss is also like our beautiful princess

Darkness for me is not madness

Since the better discuss brings better Sageness and better soundness


Thank you,
Amine Moulay Ramdane.