October 27th, 2018 2:17 PM
SCHOOLING THE GHOST VAGINA SYNDROME ON ARGUMENT
(to: Damien Woodgate )
I don’t pre-prepare responses. I don’t have to. I work on the study of argument full time. And I use the same definitions (series) every time. Because they are constants (universals). And even if I did copy and paste, that would not undermine the argument – it would only illustrate (as it has) that you merely do as I said: engage in the extremely common tactic of feminine shaming as a substitute for argument and in doing so demonstrate you don’t know what you’re talking about. So again, just as I’ve stated, you’re just attempting to shame rather than argue the central point.
—“”we civilised the world using violence”< You said that mate”—- Damien Woodgate I’ve not only stated it once, I have stated the premise twice : 1) » “Violence is a precious resource. We civilised the
whole world using violence. Thatâ??s the history of
civilisation: the incremental suppression of parasitism
through the organised application of violence.”
-
“If you attempt to deny that the organized application fo violence in the systematic use of law, to incrementally suppress free riding, parasitism and predation ISN”T how we civilized mankind by forcing people into markets, that’s going to be very difficult. Because politics(legislation and regulation) and law(Findings of law of Tort) are merely proxies for violence. ”
And now a third time:
- we have used the law to create law (findings of parasitism and predation), legislation/command (prevention of free riding, parasitism, and predation), and regulation (prior constraint that enforces legislation and law), to incrementally suppress each evolutionary migration of free riding, parasitism, and predation
And you have not answered it, and that is because you can’t, because it can’t be falsified. The fact that you presume understanding when you lack the knowledge to even vaguely understand the argument.
And I have defended against your “GSRMS” (gossip, shaming, ridicule, moralism, and straw manning” in an attempt for reputation destruction as an alternative to answering the central argument.
Now here is your ‘simpleton’ understanding:
(a) “geez, the financial sector screws us. they’re parasites”
To which I answer “yes” because we have not yet used the organized application of violence via legislation, regulation, and law, to incrementally suppress the 19th-20th century innovation in rent seeking (free riding, predation, and parasitism) made possible by the failure to change from legislation, regulation and law under physical money distribution constraints under physical currency (note money substitutes), to legislation, regulation and law under fiat credit money, where money consists only of shares in the economy (Share Money Substitutes) needing no physical distribution. (Especially since all credit issuance is (a) determined my accumulated actuarial data, (b) insured by the state as the insurer of last resort, using the same assets (shares in the economy) – meaning we are insuring ourselves.
As I said, we have incrementally suppressed free riding(externality), parasitism(indirect) and predation(direct), upon one another by the incremental application of organized violence, (law/courts and legislation/command/state)across the spectrum from:
|HARM| Murder, VIolence, Theft, Fraud (in all its forms), free riding, socialization of losses, privatization of commons, conspiracy (in all its forms), Poisoning the Informational Well (propaganda and deceit), trade war, conversion, immigration, conquest, and genocide.
Under the options of:
|RELATIONS| Bocott < Avoidance < Risk <- RECIPROCITY -> Free Riding > Parasitism > Predation.
You know, I have a reputation as extremely patient with overconfident (arrogant) ignorant young men, trying to maintain face (status) while navigating a world they rarely succeed in.
And it’s because as a ‘teacher’ of young men I wish to turn that frustrated demand for dominance play into learning by playing king of the hill, where quite obviously, I play the king of the hill.
If teaching were still done this way (competitively) boys would not have fallen behind girls, and young men would nether check out of society, or PRACTICE FEMININE ARGUMENT.
Adolescent (undeveloped) males require a strong paternal competitor in order to learn.
That’s my role.
And that is why men follow me.
To learn. And to learn to argue as men.
Not ‘women’.
Curt Doolittle
The Philosophy of Aristocracy
The Propertarian Institute
Kiev, Ukraine.