Search
-
About the Author
-
William Schnack is a free thinking mutualist and a truth-seeking pantheist who writes about topics such as cosmology, biology, history, and social philosophy with an emphasis on the emerging capacity for humans to engage with one another voluntarily, consensually, and reciprocally. He considers his views to be non-political and Far Center, taking insight from the Far Left, the Far Right, and everything in between. That is, after all, the very nature of a truth-seeking free thinker.
Schnack has authored five books and a board game, all of which have been released with a Creative Commons license, being mostly free cultural works. Aside from this, William has been a drummer in hardcore punk rock bands and a part-time homesteader, otherwise working regular wage jobs at a vegan restaurant, a Vietnamese sandwich shop, a consumer-owned health food co-op, and a producer-owned urban farming co-op. He eats a majority-vegan diet and lives a near-vegan lifestyle, having had been fully vegan for 10 years but having since taken up raising his own egg-laying fowl and dairy animals, eating lacto-ovo sourced from his own livestock raised on his own smallhold. He continues to boycott the commercial meat, egg, and dairy industry, believing veganism to be the appropriate choice where ecology does not demand otherwise, such as in urban environments.
What is Ambiarchy?
Ambiarchy describes the symbiotic mutualism between anarchists and non-anarchists, and their resulting institutions, which can be equally and simultaneously regarded as models of good government and of anarchy de jure. It is a panarchy synarchically-led by anarchists; paleomutualism for the postmodern condition.
Ambiarchy is established upon the metaphysical premise of Ambitheism
NOTICE
There are different kinds of information on this blog:
- factual information
- speculative information
- visionary information
The proper applications correlate as follows:
- for independent confirmation by the reader
- for independent and concerted consideration by the reader and their associates
- for independent and concerted amusement of the reader and their associates
The purpose of the content of this blog is for the following:
- spiritual
- research
- philosophical
- civic
This content has been created with the following motives:
- sharing observations
- artful musing
- hypotheticals
- conjecture
- model-making
- conviviality
- scholarship
- peer education
- morality
- social progression
This blog uses the concept of anarchy. Anarchy, as used in this blog, does not refer to a condition of disorder, chaos, or disunity. Instead, anarchy refers to a condition of order, structure, and unity without the presence of a ruler, someone or a group of someones who establish(es) rules that others must follow without those others’ prior consent having been given. This is a colloquially uncommon definition, though many of the other definitions used on the site are also different from their colloquial one, while still more are in fact colloquial. This provides an example of the care that the reader should take in the interpretation of the words used on this site: a great deal of it. All definitions are those of the author and are to be construed in a manner appropriate to the context of the information on the rest of the blog.
DISCLAIMER
The author is a lifelong learner, who is perpetually continuing his education socially by engaging in conversation with other lifelong learners. The author’s education is not and never will be considered finalized.
The author is a self-educated autodidact. The author’s education is not in any way formal, the author having no degrees or certificates (excepting a GED and a Permaculture Teacher Certificate). The author is a lay learner, lay philosopher, and lay researcher.
The informational content of this blog is cross-disciplinary in nature. The cross-disciplinary nature of this content naturally impedes the author as a specialist in the various fields from which the information is derived. This being the case, the informational content is abstract and general in nature, and much of it represents the half-baked ideas of the author, the details having not been worked out.
The information used in this blog is the best of the author’s knowledge at the time of writing, but the author reserves the right to change his opinion and may do so without making an immediate change or any edits at all to his previously stated opinion.
The author does not condone any unlawful, illegal, vicious, or hateful behavior. No information on this blog is to be construed otherwise.
Nothing on this blog should be construed for legal, accounting, financial, relational, or living advice.
Any information used or derived from this blog is used under the reader’s own discretion and at the reader’s own risk. The reader, if sharing information derived from this blog with others, assumes all liability associated with sharing the information. The author cannot be held liable for any damages caused from the use or misuse of the information herein.
Dualist Pantheism: An Introduction
Geo-Mutualist Panarchism: An Introduction
William Schnack on Primo Nutmeg
Reversing the Thermoeconomic Arrow of Time
Please Keep an Open Mind and be Polite
While here, I ask that you maintain the proper etiquette of a free and critically-thinking truth seeker. This can be achieved by following this sequence:
- Actively Listen – Read, watch, or listen with the intentions of being able to paraphrase what has been said. This helps to ensure that what has been said is well understood, enough that one may repeat it.
- Suspend Judgment – Before criticizing or dismissing, grasp what is being said in its own context, and what is meant by the speaker. Don’t look immediately for flaws, but focus on comprehending what is being said and what the intentions of the speaker are.
- Critically Think – Consider what has been said, and whether or not it is in line with those things understood to be more fundamental. If so, decide where the adjustment should be made to your beliefs, whether the thing is truly fundamental or not, and if the other thing is right or wrong because of it.
- Constructively Criticize – If you think there is something wrong, criticize with the intentions to be constructive, and offer an alternative to the position you are criticizing. Ask yourself if you are fairly applying your criticism, and if it would also be true if used against you.
- Nonviolently Communicate – Communicate in manners that are not aggressive or attacking, but which are open, polite, and considerate.
Categories
- All (57)
- Ambiarchy (19)
- Anarchy (26)
- Decision-Making (13)
- Dualist Pantheism (11)
- Geo-Mutualism (27)
- Georgism (9)
- History (3)
- Macroblog (79)
- Metaphysics (20)
- Microblog (6)
- Mutual Banking (10)
- Mutualism (32)
- Natural Sciences (5)
- Natural Sciences (5)
- Panarchism (15)
- Pantheism (12)
- Revolution (15)
- Social Sciences (19)
- Social Sciences (14)
- Uncategorized (23)
-
Most Recent
- On Retrocausality and Idealism in Neutral Monism March 26, 2024
- If You Can’t Read Them Out, and Can’t Bleed Them Out, Breed Them Out! March 26, 2024
- Classical and Neo-Anarchism Compared and Considered with Regard to Synarchy March 26, 2024
- Mutualist Land Tenure, as Rooted in Anglo-Saxon Tradition March 25, 2024
- Elements of My Utopia March 10, 2024
Category Archives: Microblog
If You Can’t Read Them Out, and Can’t Bleed Them Out, Breed Them Out!
Difficulty It’s become more than obvious that the politics of statists and pseudoanarchists alike have become increasingly retarded. And this has had some serious affects on sexual selection. On the extremes of this mess are the ancaps and ancoms, … Continue reading
Anarchy: More or Less Government?
Difficulty Compared to monarchy, is democracy more or less government? It seems to depend on who is asked. Some will suggest that democracy is less government than monarchy is, because people have the ability to participate directly in the … Continue reading
Direct-Democracy or Philosopher Kings?
Difficulty The Masonic Philosophical Society recently posted a poll on Facebook, asking whether direct-democracy or philosopher kings were preferable. The results, when I saw them last, were about 60/40 with philosopher kings in the lead. Plato had famously posed … Continue reading
10 Simple Reasons to Stop Voting
Difficulty The United States was founded under a document called the Articles of Confederation, which, while being democratic for those who were allowed to vote, did not allow anyone but land-owning, white, protestant, males to vote. Considering that most … Continue reading