BUILDING A “TOTEM POLE” OF ARGUMENTS BY CLASS —“Eli? The dude who talks about

BUILDING A “TOTEM POLE” OF ARGUMENTS BY CLASS

—“Eli? The dude who talks about executing everyone that doesn’t share his beliefs?”— Emil Suric

Remember Eli’s audience is a different audience that expresses ideas in different terms. He is talking to people who want to revolt and fight. But if you are in his audience, by comparison to others who address his audience, we are talking miles apart.

My point in sharing is that no matter what your audience the use of propertarian methods has a profound effect on your arguments.

I mean, I could argue ANY position using propertarian arguments. And that means that I succeeded in developing a value neutral language of ethics and politics.

The fact that I argue for meritocratic natural law and the elimination of deception and conflict is a CHOICE.

I mean, he is open about speaking as “a working class man’s version of doolittle’. I sort of think of us as ‘master-blaster’ with me talking up at the intellectual level and he at the emotional and masculine level.( retaliatory morality – war.) (“it’s advantageous that it’s true, because we are at war, and we want advantages in war”)

What I would like to do is fill in the totem pole between us so to speak.

I see, for example, Joel speaking as a lower middle and middle class version of what I do. (optimistic moral rules,) (“Yes it’s true, but we must err heavily on the side of caution.”) My hope is that joel retains this position but that I can help him express it in increasingly sophisticated language. He is *extremely* talented so I suspect he can get there.

I see Bill taking the middle and upper middle class position and successfully arguing for it even though using fully aristocratic language (scientific) now. (pragmatic, but forgiving, moral law ) (“true is true, but we must be practical about it.”)

I see me, Daniel, Alexander, and James Augustus arguing the fully aristocratic position. (absolute law). (“true is true , and not only must we live with it, but it will make us and mankind better for doing so.”)

I want at some point to attract a few people who use it for purely redistributive purposes (we will find that person among the canadians or french or germans I assume).

I mean, if you look at my *solutions* they’re pretty ‘socialist’ in the sense that I favor pretty heavy redistribution to teammates (kin especially). And kin with the same moral-ethic bias as I do, (again, as bill has eloquently stated). I mean, my subconscious goal is to eliminate conflict by driving everyone to mutually beneficial cooperation and simply reducing the rate of reproduction of the underclasses until they incrementally disappear.

Anyway. The point is that all the classes argue a bit differently given their perception of *risk*. And that we need people to prosecute falsehood in every class by every means.

Then we can trade between the classes.

Rather than conduct a warfare of propaganda and lies.

-Curt