My Political Positions

Updated per April 2024



Abolitionism” is a concept propoposed by philosopher David Pearce, advocating the rationally and meaningfully abolition of the capacity to suffer in conscious beings. Prima Facia this sounds like an absolutely absurd idea, however it is a crucial philosophical position in how I look at the future of humanity. Human being suffer by virtue of their very core neurology. Suffering is an extremely effective evolutionarfy motivator, to the point we can’t even conceive of differently. There is however good reason to believe this mechanism is flawed and itself the source of absolute evil. 

Unpacking the mechanisms of consciousness and extrahering suffering, all without ending up with something objectively awful, is a challenge scarcely comprehensible by current standards. The challenge is to maintain some kind of meaningful consciousness, morality and sanity. If we were to become purely joyous beings we should not become insane, wicked, existential zombies or incapable of rational action. 

If I were to define a personal goal, I would gradually evolve to become an intelligence driven by wisdom, calculated forethought, unswayed by fear, neurosis, prejudice. I wouldn’t be cold – the goal would be an existence of pure pleasure, joy, sympathy, warmth where if I were subjected to ‘negative’ events I would act to remove or mitigate the negativity without experiencing suffering at any stage. 

No pain, no sadness, no despair – motivation emerging from consiousness and knowledge and wisdom. 

Can this be done? I hope so. Should it be done? I suspect it will be a massive improvement. 

Bear in mind I have suffered from Cluster Headaches all my life. I am DONE with suffering in any form. I recoil from it. I despise it. 

Importance: 7/10


There is a progressive transition from matter to human when a zygote grows into a human being. An early zygote of 1-3 months is an organic thing. At the last months of gestation an embryo grows into a baby, and can be awarded some level of personhood rights. As such I strongly advocate abortion in the early stages of pregnancy to be regarded as a private matter for the mother, since this gesation process is imposed upon her by natural processes. At the last stages of pregnancy the baby may be regarded as functionally a human being that could, in theory survive and thrive independently, and in those stages abortion should be incrementally more dissuaded, but at the end of the day the woman has the absolute freedom to “evict” the pregnancy prematurely from her body by means of Abortion.

The discussion around abortion is currently dominated by career political interests and certain factions in this dicussion, i.e. th socalled “right to life” factions are often lying. They are emphasizing that a zygote is a human upon conception, as they invoke the concept of a “soul”. This is a political trick  artificially foisted upon the discourse to serve conservative, religious, capitalist and anti-feminist interests. A lot of men want to actively see women made subsurvient and available as chattel servant. To force women to be procreative hosts is a serious act of aggression. I regard this political ideology implicitly as a human rights violation. 

Importance: 8/10


Human Beings have a nervous system which has ‘exploits’, i.e. – it is possible to immorally make money victimizing fellow human beings by “farming” these exploits. That is -arguably- what Facebook does. It is what companies that sell nicotine or sugary products do. That is -arguably- what certain predatory political movements do. Clearly, that is what drug dealers do. I might even argue that this is what religions do. These folks, to a stronger or lesser degree are using the cognitive imperfections of the human brain (mind, neurology, consciousness…) to enact strategies in the real world that allow them to syphon money from other people to their wallet, often at the detriment of their victims. Quite often this exploitative behavior creates considerable societal damage, creates a permanent victim class (i.e. “underdogs”) that will from then on by necessity be a vulnerable dependent of society. That’s why we call this “damage”. Above examples use the frailties of specific aspects of the brain to exploit folks and engender “dependence” – quite often a thing we acknowledge as addiction. This is a problem insofar we suspend the natural assumptions people are free. When we explore the serious pathologies stemming from addictive urges in people, we basically say that under certain circumstances people are frail and may need to be protected from themselves. 

Take for instance the example of allowing people to gamble. In most people having access to online gambling platforms should – theoretically – not be a concern. It should fall squarely within the right of folks to consume the freedom to gamble, ‘for whatever reason’. However is should be self-evident, the human often does not make good choices and in practice we find that having access to gambling gets a minority of people in massive financial problems – it turns some people into gambling addicts and from then on these people are to be considered a ‘damaged’ category of people that require help, get themselves in trouble over and over again, at the collective detriment of society. 

Examples of these are people that for some reason consume to much sugar, and develop serious health problems – and then society has to do the moral thing and solve these problems. Another example are people that smoke, become sick, get cancer and then society ahs to mop these major health problems up, costing society tons of money. Likewise people that are “manipulated” voting for bad populist political actors that “permanently damage” the capacity for moral thinking in major parts of the electorate by disseminating kneejerk ideas. Or religious movements or cults that instill massive trauma in children in order to terrify these children with stories of “everlasting torture” (or sexually abuse them for “grooming” or recruitment purposes), – or certain game companies that actively leverage the pathologies of their games as to make their users engage in deeply unhealthy gaming behaviors – as in spend lots of money on games that leave them deeply unsatisfied, not touching grass for weeks on end, etcetera.

A lot of people will be angry with me making these claims because I often tread on “personal responsibility” and I do agree with that assessment. Creating a “nanny state” mindset when it comes to natural free will of people, and overprotecting them is essentially the same exact pathological behavior of creating dependent, weakminded people.  So we must find a balance between protecting the vulnerable, and assuming the ability of people to make up their own minds -and for each particular type of enticing (additive) product society must make an honest analysis of how much objective damage a product or service inflicts, how much such a product can be leveraged to “predate” on the vulnerable, and to what degree we allow people to destroy their own lives. Examples of where we should intervene forcefully as a society would be – methamphetamine. But we do need to be honest and ask ourselves in many cases how many people we lose to the mental disease of addiction – dependency on society – and the answers could often prove to be highly uncomfortable. My thesis is there are many as yet mostly unacknowledged and quite serious exploitable frailties in the human mind, many actors that want to make money of them – and thus reasons for grave concern about the near future.

Also see – Petrochemicals, CO2 and Climate Change.

Importance: 8/10

Aging Crisis, The

In the western world we saw at one time high birth rates and high infant mortality. That was quite awful. Fortunately a range of scientific advancements allowed humanity to progress to a better state of affairs where we have low infant mortality, allowing people to do other stuff than spending incredible effort on raising kids (and being griefstricken when a bunch of them died). The problem that has however emerged is the transitional phase of this relative state of modernity (i.e. – good over-all) from a more native (i.e., bad over-all) state of primitivity where we had high birth rates, low infant morality and very rapid onset of population growth. This ballooned (and in many places continues to balloon) populations, and that rrapid population growth has creates all manner of deeply unpleasant states of scarcity in the world.

For example – I live all alone by myself in a 60 square meter apartment that was constructed around the 1880s in Amsterdam. Less than a half century ago two generations and often over to six kids lived in this apartment. I would label that as inhumane, extremely pathological and plain awful – and we still see these unhealthy living conditions in many parts of the world. 

Het rauwe leven in De Pijp - Gemeente Amsterdam

So as a result of this major societal phase shift we now have a demographic crisis, where in most parts of the world we have lower birth rates, a lot of rapidly aging people, serious imminent challenges generating enough workers and taxable income to feed these pensioners, great stress on societal safety nets (assuming these exist in the first place in some countries), massive institutional neglect of old people, a major electoral crisis of the old voting (rather angrily) to preserve their standards of living at any cost, to the point that in some countries pensioners are committing crimes in order to receive shelter, medical care and food in prison

This is where I state that the natural solution to above problems is to get our act together as a species and heavily invest in medical research to halt (and reverse) the onset of aging, as clearly this should be a lot cheaper and less traumatic for society. But we aren’t there yet. 

Other than that I have no easy answers. In some cases countries may break in a horrific manner over all aforementioned effects of these demographic transitions – prognosis are especially bad for places like Russia and China. Society may end function in a civilized manner there quite soon, if not already.

Should we stimulate birth rates? In some cases yes, but in most cases I would leave it up to the people who will have to do the giving birth. In fact, yelling meaninguless nonsense about this problem tends to be quite rude, as governments tends to have no workable policy solutions to boosting birth rates

My urgent suggestion – hurry up research in to reversing agingMight be the silver bullet we need.

Importance: 7/10



Importance: 5/10



Importance: 6/10

Animal Rights


Importance: 9/10

‘Apathization’ Policy


Importance: 8/10

Artificial Intelligence


Importance: 9/10


(see – Souvereign Movement)

What is the responsibility of The State? When should the The State use force? What level of competency or accountability should we demand from The State? 

Quite often answers to these questions provide us with deeply unsatisfactory answers, where the state proves a bad actor, full of hypocrites and incompetent and corrupt and judgemental bureaucrats. Quite often the State acts cruel and deeply arrogant. This practice crushes people’s spirits and leaves these people angry, bitter, cynical, in deep despair – or functionally insane

That is a bold statement. We should as people be able to avoid the violence of the state. But if we have a pandemic the state MUST take actions. If we end up in a war the state MUST make its populace fight in its wars. The state MUST collect taxes, and we expect from the state that it protects the weak and provides for the common good. But to collect taxes and to provide reasonable, civilized services the state often creates these legal constructs that large numbers of people instinctly don’t agree with. 

More people find themselves helpless, traumatized, nihilistic, cynical and in overwhelming despair. Twenty years ago I was there, so I have a lot of sympathy with Autonomous ideas. The tension between the power of The State, the capriciousness of the systems we are in, the haphazzard chaos of the world we live in, the incompetence of civil servants, the cruelty of bad people – some people juist give up and want to opt out. 

I qualify this as a traumatic response. To become a “Atonomous” or “Souvereign” person is essentially an act of insanity – quite often an insane response to an insane world. 

Importance: 7/10


Basic Income


Importance: 8/10


The existence of people who privately own or generate billions of euro (or dollars) per year is a policy failure. I am of the conviction the very existence of Billionaires is cartegorically unacceptable – not the people themselves but these people “owning” a monetary power which ikn  itself directly implies displacement of other people. 

How much is enough?I propose a maximum income and we should vote on what such a maximum should be. Nobody needs a private hoard of thousands of millions of euro. I am highly in favour of making this limited EU-wide, and to actively penalize individuals outside the EU that do business with the EU of which we know they are ‘billionaires’.  We see that these individuals will always contaminate the political process to their narcissist whims, extremist ideology, the agenda’s of hostile foreign states, prejudices and neurosis. Billionaires lobby Democracy to the point of systemic corruption.

My personal preference is to apply a 100% tax rate over private income more than 50 million (give or take) per year, and private property over 500 milion – and I propose we vote about this as soon as possible

Importance: 9/10

Black Lives Matter


Blue Sky Thinking


Brain Drain





Carbon Tax



I seek the abolition of a significant portion of automobile traffic and its replacement by public transportation and more amenable alternatives. 




Yes – I would never dream, of contesting that Cocaine is deeply unhealthy to use on a very regular basis. For some peopel at least… I know many people who use it and who suffer managable adverse health effects, function productively in society. I’d go on and insist vehemently that despite the arguable somewhat outdated judgementalness towards this substance (and other similar substances) I regard Cocaine as a prime example that the damage caused by the use of Cocaine in society is a fraction of the damage the illicit production and distribution rtight now inflicts.

I am for that Dutch societ immediately nationalizes the production, purity and commercial distribution of Cocaine on a national level – with a very specific system for protecting against a range of negative effects. 

Right now cocaine has proven remarkably well resistant to inflation. Amsterdam cocaine hovers around 50 euro per gram, and has for over a decade. The production cost of cocaine drives up the price thousandfold, so it can be assumed to produce this a lot cheaper, at 100% purity by Dutch nonprofits a gram can be sold for 20 euro. To just nilly-willy sell it would be stupid of course, so this product would be sold under very very strictly constrained conditions.

  1. Each package would be labelled, uniquely coded as to be able to be tied back to the person that received the package. The powder itself would contain “user-friendly” microparticles or other identiftying traits that would allow the powder to be somewhat able to be traced back to a unique code. 
  2. Users of this Dutch produced would be registering at a government managed service station, where they would be medically surveilled, would receive user training and would receive fairly limited dosages of the product. This product would be designated as tied to a unique user and would be subject to a somewhat liberal degree of rationing. Heavy users would be supplied with this product by a medical service worker and it would be insistently impressed upon that if this product were redistributed (especially to foreign people, kids or nonlicenced users) they would lose their licence until they were ‘recertified’ as “safe, accountable and responsible users”. There would be strong incentive with the licensed user crowd to keep their stash to themselves as much as possible. This would not be 100% failsafe but it would serve as a fairly compelling “redistribution” hurdle that would effectively cripple unconstrained marketization. 
  3. The product would be guaranteed to be at a price level and purity that would to a significant degree destroy black markets. The price would be determined by calculating negative societal costs, the costs of actively dissuading use to the public, law enforcement costs, health care costs, costs of addiction treatments, cost of lost economic potential because of use, etcetera. This price would be calculated to be significantly lower than the price of current Cocaine market rates – so let’s say 20 euro instead of 50 euro would hurt the black markets real badly.

The goal is to have a programmed accountable, verifiable, medically accessible user base that has a str9ong incentive to stay in the program and not get “too” addicted. The system would bar access to underage people and limit consumption. Users would have to do blood tests every few months or so to determine deterioative health effects. Crimes committed that can be linked to use (say, driving accidents or violence) would be penalized, requiring users to go through the hassle of re-certification again. 

The package would be a blanket guarantee – what’s in this package is the purest, most nontoxic theoretical product that exists on the market, period. People would want the powder to stay inside the packaging until consumption and the product would be resistent to tampering – once opened it can’t be closed again, and in the original blister you know you get the full 100% purity. The packaging would change each month and would contain an RIFD recognition device, in order to maintain optimal control and traceability.

I am certain more competent and experienced people can generate solutions to impede resale, abuse or other of the many undesirable characteristics of the current system. My ideas are at bnest just preliminary brainstorming concepts to argue that a product can be sold to somewhat accountable users that does in fact devastate the current festering wound comprized by black market cocaine kartels that’s corrupting Dutch society. A product like this would be at destroying criminal enterprises, keeping users subsantially more healthy and not conflicting with existing international treaties “too much”. Such a measure would not remove the many negative effects of mass cocaine consumption (as 2024 60 tons of cocaine was apprehended by customs) but it would make the Netherlands a very unsustainable market point for redistribution, as we would effectively sharply reduce local consumer markets. 

What we are doing right now doesn’t work, to such a degree of perfidity that one would almost suspect that current black markets were cultivated by politicians – and I could easily come up with some plausible narratives what would incentivize politicians to keep this fertile market intact wih legislation.  

I don’t use Cocaine. I don’t like it. We can never hope to implement a system like described above for methamphetamine, GHB or other similar very societally damaging products – but for products like Cocaine, Amphetamines, LSD, MDMA, certain designer drugs this would be monumentally much better than the mess we have right now. Ladling protestant judgement on users is at best intensely rude. In a perfect world it’s everyone’s own responsibility what they do to their own body, and I am personally less than enthusiastic over some moralist trying to force his policies down my throat. Even worse, I am inreasingly suspicious about what the secret agenda of such politicians might be, and who pays them to keep this game intact. 

I am keenly intertested in engaging in a productive dialogue over actual solutions – other than absolute nonsense of infantile simplists who will insist on trying the exact useless strategies for decades to come. My one priority – is to devastate the scum that becomes billionaires of selling toxic trash and ruins lives and the fabric of our society in doing so. And the one way to do so is to eliminate demand by a significant percentage. 





Climate Change






Copyrights (Patents, Intellectual Properties)




Conspiracy Theories






Covid Denial









Deep Future




Developmental Aid






Donald Trump









Elon Musk


Existential Risk








As a society we can no longer to any degree trust numerous “social” Network corporations. However we can’t expect people to walk away from these networks – they have great utility. So why not forcibly turn them into utilities?

I unambigiously regard these as predatory, parasitic and monopolistic garden systems for extracting valley from other people’s work and efforts in a proven toxic manner to modernity, progress, democracy, societal cohesion. Facebook is the “more equal” pig among a hard of especially antisocial pigs feeding at this trough and I insist that the measures taken by politics in the political system in Netherlands are completely inadequate. I strongly urger for substantialy more far-reaching surgical interventions.

My proposal – nay my demand – is to immediately nationalize as a domain and rip away the code of Meta’s Facebook and replicate it verbatim to create a seperated, walled off dutch facebook. Anyone would then be able go on this Dutch facebook using dutch-based DigID and create an account in 5 minutes. The Netherlands would then sue Facebook to release all user data and replicate all posts of users in the Netherlands for this dutch domain.

Netherlands users can after that use their NL domain newly generated account, link it to all previous historical posts, and would of course be free to keep using whatever international facebook if they so please – but dutch society would actively restrain the international version from the dutch internet with active policies. The international facebook wouldn’t be illegal as such, but there would be active policies to “escort” people living in the Netherlands to the local domain and domestic  IT infrastructure. The code and infrastructure required would be nationalized, with no reimbursement for Meta, when we the Netherlands implementing such a dutch “fork”. This newly created service would be organized away from state oversight by a foundation with a minimized profit objective, much as a NGO utility, with full transparancy and accountability.

The national NL facebook would easily generate enough revenue to keep researching better services, actively competing with the main facebook body, while keeping the platform completely free from exploitative data harvesting practices, conspiracy farming entities, hostile foreign interference, propaganda and privacy violation. Content moderation would be made consistent with dutch values, not having to conform to whatever esoteric value systems in whatever middle eastern country, all while moderated by some helpdesk peons who have no intrinsic understanding of dutch values. Any companies would have fair access to this facebook fork as to waylay accusations of market protectionism. This would generate local jobs. 

What’s more, the Netherlands would make this technological development free to also implement to any  governments in Europe that do not violate our democratic, liberal, inclusive values (Hungary comes to mind) so effectively this paradigm would spread quickly to other countries that deem Facebook’s business practices likewise criminal. In fact a network of these free and open countries, say,,,, (etc.) could open up access to each other’s subdomains. No doubt the original would sue this process up to the WHO and in turn it would be quite frivolously easy to countersue every step of the way. In fact they would have to open up their unsanitary business practices in such lawsuits, which would expose the most insidious and incontinent aspects of their internal corporate policies. 

Facebook should have never evolved into the sociopathic corporate IT monstrosity it has become today. Immediate actions must be taken to cut Facebook apart as prescribed here. Meta and Mark Zuckerberg have evidences at nauseum that their voracious hunger for more billions can never be trusted, can never be held accountable. We need to strike out an aggressive counterstrategy to stop this evident march of evil.

If necessary we should extend this strategy to Tiktok, Apple, Amazon, Twitter (X), Instagram, Snapchat, LinkedIn, etc. These horrid companies will soon be swayed to change their nefarious ways when confronted by utterly ruthless and instrumental nationalization.







Free Markets




Gender Theory


Genetic Therapies


Gun Laws




Health Care


Housing Rights

I propose a law where the government has the duty to at least offer every adult a minimum of quality 50m2 living space, as a hard law. I am not talking concrete boxes in a dismal suburb – I am talking pleasant neighborhoods, pleasany apartments with dignity and decent amenities. If people actively decline such living space rights, that’s OK. 

Humanity Plus


Human Nature


Human Rights









Human Rights




I have an opinion about J.K.Rowling, “the author” and I do not actually need to share this textually, since this is pretty much my opinion: 




Land Value Tax




Life Extension

Death is a disease that can and should be mostly overcome through medical treatments. Period, full stop.

I am specifically addressing aging. I am convinced that given sufficient investment we can develop affordable treatments (under 100.000 euro) that reverse aging. All this well before the year 2050, and probably a whole lot sooner.

I am proposing a Manhattan style approach of intenational research into treatments to slow aging and eventually treatments that reverse actual senescence. People will, sadly, always die – from risky lifestyles, from excess, from diseases, from accidents, from the effects of boredom and despair. My goal is to give anyone who wants it the freedom to live as a young person for at least several centuries. My goal is to make “indefinitude” the cultural norm eventually. 

People who live long and have healthy young bodies and minds are rational, wise, highly educated and care about the future. People who grow old want security, they actively hoard and displace other people out of existential fear, they become bitter, paranoid, scared, calcified and conservative. They have no cause to care much about the future a few decades away siknce they won’t be around. We need human populations who have a fair expectation to still be around in a century, as those people will care about what the planet wil be like in the future. 









Medical Care


Maximum Wealth Levels (Maximum Incomes)




Monetary Theory


Moon, “the”




Morphological Freedom


Murdering Animal for Food





Necro-Security (Necro-Politics)




Netherlands, “the”




Nuclear Energy







Parents have a great responsibility. There are too many people that just “get” a baby without sufficient forethought, raise the baby into a civilian that is for one reason or another a burden on society. I grew up myself as a child knowing I was blackmail material used to coerce a partner into docile compliance. If the one parent hadn’t properly served the other, I might very well have come to severe harm or have been killed. Consequently I am an excellent example of a person that came into this world emotionally and physically scarred on account of having two completely unequiped or even severely malignant parental figures. I would have greatly loved to have made a meaningful contribution to society. Both my parent were morally, emotionally and intellectually retarded to an almost clinical degree. One parent was a diagnosed psychopath, the other parent a sexual abuse survivor. It is my thesis that society should have prevented these people to become parents in the first place, or I should have been taken away as quickly as possible after birth and placed with responsible foster parents.

I am dedicated to see all parents receive parental certification – a license – to become parents, as part of a responsible and accountable process. I see a multitude of valid objections for certain couples to not become parents, and/or to not give birth. The odds of a parent being likely to transfer grave ailments to the infant is a consideration.  Parents who knowingly have children that turn out damaged for whatever reason – including knowingly passing on heredetary traits that induce suffering in the generation or considerable costs to society should be held accountable in some meaningful manner.







Public Transportation







Quality of Life









Refugee Crisis, “the”





The current Russian Federation is to be regarded as a criminal enterprise in the largest nation on Earth. This is not common – many nations are in a large part conucted with pervasive criminal aspects, but Russia currently does not serve the interests of its only consituents, and only serves to enrich a small elite. Russia is operating essentially as an explotative plantation with the moral character of a gangster syndicate. The aggressive invasion of Russia against Ukraine was a serious violation of international law and has the character of Genocide.  



Saudi Arabia




Science Denial






Singularity, “the”


Social Contract, “the”




Social Networks




Souvereign Movement, ‘The’


Space Colonization


Space Exploration


Space Industrialization


Surveillance Capitalism





Technological Unemployment






“The” Left


“The” (Nation) State











United States, “the”











If “Woke is an adjective derived from African-American Vernacular English (AAVE) meaning “affirming massive injustices in American society, alert to racial prejudice and discrimination” then I am Woke and Pro-Woke.

Having said that I am stating my sincerest conviction that there is a well-funded world wide far right initiative (conspiracy?) of contrived (fake) anger over ‘woke’. People are pretending to be viciously anti woke, anti-left, anti-socialist, anti-union, anti-feminist, anti-BLM, anti-LGBT, anti-climate change, anti-disparity, anti-fat, anti-sexpositive, anti-liberal (etc. etc. blah blah blah) … and consistantly spewing hatred against forementioned causes. Woke has become a slur word from the right, and many people are falling for it, assimilating the hatred, much like “witch” or “satan”. This is essentially sponsored McCarthyism.

Are there a few … excessive blue haired out of control elements to the left? Yes, a few, but less than people claim.

Work Week, The

5 days a week is too much. 8 hours working is too much. I advocate either (choice) 3 days at 7 hours or 4 days 6 hours – with legally guaranteed overtime, and a hard ban on companies bothering people in their free time. And then people should get solid vacation time as well. 

The current (dutch) work culture this is like sacrilege. To make this statement in pathological societies like Japan, China or the US this statement falls squarely off the overton window and is widely regarded as absurdism. But I simply do not care. I am a progressive. I want things in society to progress, i.e. improve. I squarely place the interest of the human central. I want to set the above as a hard norm. If individuals for some reason want to work more, longer, more often then that should be regarded as deviation of the norm, i.e. overtime – and thus these people should be significantly more renumerated, far above the norm. 




Amanda Stoel

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez –

David Pearce – 
David Shapiro – 
Giulio Prisco – 
Isaac Arthur – 
Jamais Cascio – 
James Hughes
Jason Slaughter – 
Leeja Miller – 
Marian Williamson – 
Martine Rothblatt – 
Mo Gawdat – 
Nathalie Wynn – 
Peter Zeihan – 
Robert Reich – 
Rollie Williams – 
Yuval Noah Harari
Willem Schinkel – 
Vlad Vexler – 
Yanis Varoufakis