My mother raised me properly.
I am friendly. I am kind. I am generous.
I am observant. I compliment often.
I try to be a gentleman. Chivalry lives.
But, don’t be flattered,
And no, I’m not flirting with you.
I’m like this with everyone. Really.
It just means my mother raised me properly.
And, it demonstrates my status.
Especially when you do not demonstrate yours. 😉
Chivalry is not an appeal for attention.
It’s a challenge to inferiors.
Source date (UTC): 2016-02-14 06:18:00 UTC
Like a rose:
Women are as beautiful.
They smell as heavenly.
They feel as soft as the petals.
But a man must be careful with them,
beceause they have thorns.
🙂
Source date (UTC): 2016-02-14 06:10:00 UTC
PSYCHOHISTORY vs NATURAL LAW and HUMAN LAW
(reposted for archival purposes)
Natural Law is that which is necessary for cooperation.
But there are other Human Laws of behavior. Whether we categorize these as natural laws as well is a matter of demarcation for the purpose of clarity.
I tend to avoid all psychologism, and I see psychohistory as damaged by freudianism.
But the concept that there are regular laws or cycles to human behavior seems a fertile ground for Human Laws.
I believe all these human laws can be expressed as property, acquisition, defense, and retaliation, and thereby escape the universalism, monopoly, and totalitarianism of freudian framing.
As such I see the basis of what is called psychohistory as correctable and arguable as objective and distributed, rather than subjective and divergent from fallacious monopoly norms.
When David introduced me to the subject I was only thinking in terms of incentives of each generation in the generational cycle.
But we can combine human, cultural, generational, and technological incentives into a hierarchical set of dependencies that should at some point of precision produce a predictable (within limits) set of trends in human behavior.
At present I think we are coalescing on the general theory that man’s behavior actually changes very little, that he adapts to incentives, and that all we have done is increase the information content of collective memory until we are able to produce general rules of action.
Curt
Source date (UTC): 2016-02-14 04:35:00 UTC
CULTURAL OBSERVATIONS
A friend says to me yesterday “I begin to understand how different we are from Americans. You have time to think of silly things. … there are many crazy americans. We have no time here. We work to survive. We are always busy.”
I say, “Yes, you are poor, but you still struggle. Americans have the luxury of time. Others have time but do not struggle. But I am not sure that your way is not better. People are not crazy and lonely here. Most americans by contrast seem crazy and lonely. And a lot of Japanese seem crazy and lonely. A lot of western europeans are crazy and lonely. Because wealth makes it possible to think ideologically rather than empirically – practically. This is why I am struggling with the question of redistribution and contribution to the commons. If all we buy is signals, and all we do with those signals is destroy mind, happiness and family, then how does that square with liberty?”
America’s favorite sport is status signaling by political moralism. Ukrainian’s favorite sport is simple celebration with family and friends.
I am sorry but these folk do it better. If they had better commons they would have a better world than we do. In no small part because they are homogenous as hell despite being from dozens of different balto-slavic-german tribes, they are one people.
After 60k income (5K per month) you do not get happier. It’s just what it is. the rest is buying retirement, affording a house too expensive for the underclasses, and a car to insulate yourself from them within.
So why don’t we just make it easier to insulate yourself from the underclasses? Would that increase tolerance for contribution to the commons?
I think so. Evidence sure looks like it.
Source date (UTC): 2016-02-14 02:22:00 UTC
ABSOLUTELY GOLDEN
—“Anyone can be “brothers” in the sense that they can make a reciprocal exchange of kinship trust, and/or kinship altruism.
But the less akin they actually are, the more difficult and costly it will be to authenticate, to certify, and to guarantee that this exchange is a worthwhile exchange to make, and so the less likely it is to occur.
The purpose of “anti-racist” rhetoric is to force this transaction, either without reciprocity, or without warranty, so that it becomes, not an exchange, but a parasitic imposition”— Eli Harman
You See. I don’t lay it out there. Eli Does. Beautifully. Damn.
Source date (UTC): 2016-02-13 11:16:00 UTC
Curt Doolittle shared a post.
Source date (UTC): 2016-02-13 09:00:00 UTC
( My next personal assistant is going to be male. Just gotta find the right guy. )
Source date (UTC): 2016-02-13 06:56:00 UTC
PHILOSOPHY = ADVERTISING AND MARKETING
I dunno. If you say your a political philosopher, I just assume you’re a crook. If you say your a political economist, then at least you’re starting from the right presupposition.
The philosophy of the west is law: common law, natural law, physical law, oath, and testimony.
Everything else is advertising and marketing.
Seriously.
Source date (UTC): 2016-02-13 06:49:00 UTC
Can we just buy our aircraft from Russia please? THey can’t afford to manufacture them, and we can. We can’t seem to design anything worth flying, and they can.
I mean. Kinda hard to beat the Abrams. But in general, you want Russian Arms and equipment whenever possible. Cheap and abundant, and free of bureaucratic meddling. The military is not a democratic thing. It never should be. And the last people that should be involved in it are congressmen.
Source date (UTC): 2016-02-13 06:46:00 UTC
THE BEGGAR LIBERTARIANISM, AND FREE RIDER LIBERTINISM ARE DEAD – ARISTOCRACY IS THE ONLY SOURCE OF LIBERTY.
I have come to understand this:
That Aristocracy imposes liberty by arms and law, and libertarianism begs for it like priestly cast, through gossip and shaming.
I consider Aristocratic Liberty logically and evidentially possible, and beggar-liberty logically and evidentially possible.
For this reason I consider the libertarian program an artifact of christianity, argued morally, reasonably, and sometimes rationally, but not empirically or scientifically.
And I consider Aristocratic program an artifact of pagan history, argued practically, logically, and scientifically, under truth, physical law, natural law, the common law, with universal standing, universal applicability (rule of law), and universal WARRANTY: every man a warrior, sheriff, judge, and legislator.
It was the absence of the necessary property of Warranty that let us fail. Without warranty (Taleb’s skin in the game), there is no contract for liberty.
And without that contract, no liberty can be brought into existence.
Whether we beg of it from gods, or we beg of it from men, if we beg, we are beggars. We cannot possess liberty by permission. We can only possess liberty if none can possibly take it from us. And none can possibly take it from us if we are too strong to resist them.
The beggardly-libertarian movement is dead. The Aristocratic Liberty is the only liberty ever possible, and the only that will ever be possible.
Warranty: Everyone fights. No one quits.
Curt Doolittle
The Philosophy of Aristocracy
The Propertarian Institute
Kiev, Ukraine
Source date (UTC): 2016-02-13 05:11:00 UTC