Another insight: The elegant manners in the tradition of european philosophical

Another insight: The elegant manners in the tradition of european philosophical rhetoric are a tool for debate between intellectually honest people attempting to make their arguments before a jury of their peers.
Instead, I study incentives on one hand and ignorance, error, bias, and deceit on the other.
When debating the opposition (the parasitic and predatory classes) the science of incentives (everything is reducible to pursuit preservation and consumption of demonstrated interests (property being a primitive)) and the science of deceit are more useful means of debate.
This is why our libertarian arguments (whether jewish separatist or german free city or anglo imperial in foundation) are ineffective – because the left levies unfounded accusation and we fail to respond in kind, thus losing the argument most of the time.
I see the european philosophical tradition as debate among the aristocracy in pursuit of preservation of sovereignty on the one hand yet demand for the production of mutually beneficial commons on the other.
This is NOT the case of the left. The left relies on the feminine to abrahamic to marxist sequence of baitings into hazard by false promise in exchange for parasitism and predation.
You must defeat an enemy on his terms of defeat. Not on your own. And failing to do so has a long tradition in european history.
Why? europeans fight for control after which they seek cooperation. The opposition does not do so. Like female chickens they fight to death not to reorder the hierarchy.