YARVIN VERSION TWO PART THREE
Yarvin and Rothbard and Rand are Jewish, Hoppe german, Doolittle anglo. I don’t expect change in visions of the future. Mises, Popper, Hayek, Rothbard, Hoppe, and Doolittle, we solved social science in what, four generations? After how many centuries?
—“Eric Danelaw well you’re cringe too then hahah
seriously tho how his is method of argument “jewish”?
Also Hoppe is an ontological Liberal and Nick Land is too so they’re kinda silly”—Arrus Kacchi
Really, what form of argument do Yarvin, Land, and Hoppe rely upon? Do they use Hindu mythical analogy, abrahamic theological, Jewish Critique, Confucian Reason, Continental Rational, German Phenomenological, Kantian Rational, Anglo Analytic, Anglo Ratio-empirical? They are just as different as theology, philosophy, law, and science. They are just as different as physics, chemistry, biology, and sentience. Does his suggested social order of ‘freedom’ reflect jewish diasporic, german free cities, Anglo Rule of Law, European National Socialism, Russian Oligarchical, or Chinese hierarchical oligarchy, or Hindu communal?
I never disagree with nick, or curtis, or hans on criticism or goals – we all criticize using our cultural methods of analysis, we all propose solutions our culture is familiar with.
Hoppe identified property as the unit of measure of social science, but not commons as necessary for survival of a polity able to produce the institution of property. Hayek worked thru economics then finally identified law and commons, and extended commons to information. I took hoppe and hayek (and popperian falsification and united them) and in my understanding, I completed the project of a system of measurement for the social and political sciences.
Curtis identified the migration of the church state complex, to the military state industrial complex, to the academy, media, state complex. I identified the problems of law and economics.
What is different about these findings? Yarvin “talk and belief” (jewish or truthfully, female ‘words and belief’), Hoppe morality as empirical (german moral, ‘intuitions and norms’), I identified the operational problem (finance, economics and law ‘actions’. )
All of us come from gene pools and cultures or subcultures and we cannot escape them. Because we are raised on moral foundations in families that persist moral foundations, and those moral foundations contain metaphysical paradigms, goods, bads, orders, rights and wrongs.
This is why moral differences between cultures persist in the USA (and judaism and islam and christianity and every other religion) across generation.
No one is immune. Just as you and I are not. The only way to increase your immunity is through comparative analysis of the techniques of different civilizations to produce different arguments with different objectives.