Cut Russia out of the internet. Cut the hard wires. Cut the Satellites. Cut the SWIFT system. Let them die of their own follies.
Source date (UTC): 2015-04-04 06:05:00 UTC
Cut Russia out of the internet. Cut the hard wires. Cut the Satellites. Cut the SWIFT system. Let them die of their own follies.
Source date (UTC): 2015-04-04 06:05:00 UTC
Germans are objectively better. Sorry. Just how it is. They suck at philosophy. But at the production of cultural norms, no one does it better. And it’s likely no one ever will. ‘Cause no one ever really has.
Stoicism lives.
Source date (UTC): 2015-04-04 04:31:00 UTC
Can we get a facebook label for ‘Russian Troll”?
Source date (UTC): 2015-04-04 03:53:00 UTC
PINKER’S CRITICISM OF GROUP/MULTI-LEVEL SELECTION
First, both of them are making the enlightenment error of equality of individuals, and of individualism instead of a population of man as a division of intertemporal knowledge and labor. (See my video on the subject.) We evolve first under this inter-temporal distribution of biases, and second under cultural adaptation, and third under everything else. Genders, distribution of gender bias, and the fact that genders are constructed from a female base, guarantee that.
Second, as far as I know, Pinker is making an argument against the evolution by multi-level selection of altruism. This is the purpose of his article. And I agree with him. And in Propertarianism I explain why.
Third, (if you read the comments it’s obvious) is that group and multi-level selection are pretty rigorous mathematically described facts. Pinker isn’t saying that it isn’t. He’s saying that we can’t fantasize that altruism developed because of group selection (I argue that aggression defeats altruism and is currently doing so – high trust westerners are not aggressive enough.)
Fourth, (if you read the comments) the argument is partly a problem of verbalism. And to some degree, pinker is playing too much psychologist and telling us not to think in fuzzy terms, and not so much that multi-level selection doesn’t occur. It’s that it doesn’t occur the way we think it has. Now, it is this point I disagree with since as far as I know, the very great differences between the competing populations is determined by a wide variation in the distribution of only four things: (1) intelligence, (2) aggression, (3) impulsivity, and (4) fear of unfamiliar people. And that list may be in fact reducible to two: impulsivity and intelligence. Just as a wide variety of behavior is reducible to the solipsistic(female bias) and autistic(male bias) spectrum. Great complexity arises from the interaction of only two or three spectra. Emotions are a great example: as far as I know, we have only three, and our rich range of emotional experience is produced by combinations of levels of those emotions. And as I have written extensively, all of these emotions can be explained as reactions to change in state of property-en-toto (reactions to acquisition or loss).
Fifth, and I think this isn’t terribly complicated: norms are sticky and group strategy is sticky, and populations breed to take advantage of status under norms. This is just a mathematically describable problem and as far as I know it’s pretty solid:
Sixth, as far as I know, Haidt’s correct identification of moral intuitions, holds under Propertarianism. So whatever Haidt’s justification for these traits, it is immaterial. In my first few propertarian arguments I made the point that MY CONTRIBUTION was to tie haidt’s OBSERVATIONS and descriptions, to CAUSALITY. And that Propertarianism correctly describes that causality: acquisitiveness, and the utility of cooperation only in so far as it improved acquisition.
CLOSING
So the debate here is not concrete. Pinker is doing no more than making a cautionary argument against the development of altruism by selfish creatures, as anything other than yet another selfish act. And he is correct.
Everyone else is saying that cultural norms drive reproductive adaptation. And they are correct. And that multi-level selection is the product of cultural biases incorporated in genes.
So this whole argument is a lot of nonsense between geeks as to the effect of their as-yet-imprecise language on the non-scientific community. And it is not so much a debate about facts.
And furthermore, you have to look at these men as part of the REACTION to postmodern lies – they are all engaged in trying to overthrow the deceits of 150 years of postmodern reactionary thought. I am not sure that they have (As I have) joined The Dark Enlightenment, in trying to overthrow not just the postmoderns and the pseudoscientists, but the enlightenment fallacy of equality and democracy. They are concerned about the consequences of language because they are well aware of the consequences of language.
Source date (UTC): 2015-04-04 02:14:00 UTC
THE PUBLIC IS IGNORANT, TRUE. BUT….
(from elsewhere)
One minor correction.
The budget consists roughly of 1/3 defense, 1/3 mandatory payments (Social Security and Medicaid) and 1/3 discretionary payments (everything else).
We finance 1/3 (the military), and inflate it away. The world pays for our military through indirect taxation on the price of oil bought in dollars. This was the invention that the Nixon administration achieved with the Petro-Dollar and it was how we were able to run up the credit to defeat world communism under Regan.
So technically speaking, 1/2 is discretionary, 1/2 is for redistribution, and the remainder – the military – is effectively free.
Possessing this knowledge radically alters your perception of the world.
It is why Iran wants nuclear weapons – to control oil, and to create a bourse, and to capture that ability to tax currency for itself.
Sophisticated people in the world are not stupid, nor necessarily selfish. They merely take advantage of stupid people.
Source date (UTC): 2015-04-03 16:48:00 UTC
http://www.aei.org/publication/the-public-thinks-the-average-company-makes-a-36-profit-margin-which-is-about-5x-too-high/Painfully true.
Source date (UTC): 2015-04-03 16:33:00 UTC
http://gizmodo.com/what-its-like-to-work-for-putins-internet-troll-army-1695391818WORKING FOR RUSSIA’S TROLL ARMY
Source date (UTC): 2015-04-03 16:29:00 UTC
NO. THE WEST ISN’T ENGAGED IN DIVIDE-AND-CONQUER. IT’S ENGAGED IN PARENTING
THE POSTWAR STRATEGY: SMITH AND HUME
Americans have a very simple post-war strategy: constrain communism from destroying world trade, constrain authoritarianism from destroying world trade, constrain governments to borders, constraint governments to economic construction inside of their borders, so that governments have no possible choice OTHER than developing markets, and human rights.
The purpose of the post-war strategy has been to ensure we do not have another world war that focuses on territorial expansion in lieu of economic productivity, and instead, that governments must focus on the development of rule of law and diverse economies – and that they are punished if they attempt to settle disputes, or gain wealth, by force rather than commercial and cultural development.
This strategy was largely successful. It is the same strategy the west itself has followed: Adam Smith and David Hume’s vision of peace-through-trade brought to its fruition.
THE ERROR OF DEMOCRACY
But along with this error has come the fallacy of Democracy. Democracy without inviolable property rights and rule of law, results in the production of the very communism that the west sought to prevent – only by slower means. Democracy has been the cancer of the west, just as much as it has been a disease that the west has distributed to the rest of the world.
Democracy is and always has been an aristocratic practice, suitable for aristocratic classes, for the selection of investment priorities. The inclusion of non aristocratic classes has been employed largely as a veto provision to prevent parasitism and risk by an overambitious aristocracy.
The west alone – through the systematic application of manorialism and it’s predecessors, the systematic application of the absolute nuclear family, and the systematic expansion of property rights – managed to suppress the reproduction, cost and influence of the lower classes, and encourage the working and middle classes to adopt aristocratic values. The west created a nearly universal aristocracy. Until the era of democracy reversed it. And westerners then spread this era of regression around the world, assuming that the aristocracy of everyone was either possible or desirable.
The western working model of post-war global policy is this: citizens have the right to elect their own leaders, and to form democratic governments. However, if they elect leaders that violate the postwar consensus, then we must punish both the leaders, and the people who chose those leaders. And while western intellectuals and politicians advocate the carrot, they never mention the stick. Hence primitive cultures elect what they understand, not what they must have to construct a diverse economy, rule of law, property rights and an aristocracy of everyone. Instead, they elect their tribal and familial leaders, and elect to reinforce their primitive traditional cultures. Promoting their group’s primitive group evolutionary strategy.
WESTERN SELF IGNORANCE
Westerners cannot grasp that the rest of the world does not share our unique history. And that the rest of the world remains either familial or tribal. And only northern europeans – who just might possess different genetic instincts – are the only people who adopt the suicidal tendency of universalism and high trust that other cultures see as ‘naivety’.
The rest of the world never experienced greek philosophy, roman law, the manorialism of the middle ages, the reformation, the enlightenment refutation of mysticism, and the scientific revolution. And those that did, still fail to grasp (as westerners fail to grasp) that there is nothing physical about the discipline of ‘science’. Instead, ***science is a philosophical value system: the systematic application of truth telling***. Science consists of attempting to tell the truth. And in order to make use of it, one must forgo the comforting illusions that our traditions – and our instincts – counsel us. And truth-telling is a uniquely western value. And a uniquely western skill. For reasons that are likely more than 5000 years old.
So it is not that westerners seek to divide and conquer. It is that the west desires the slow, organized, peaceful maturity of primitive cultures into modern, scientific, wealthy, and peaceful members of the international community, of requiring truth telling, trust, and productivity – the forcible participation in the market by denying all other means of sustenance: deceit, corruption, theft, and conquest. The bible of the west consists of a small number of volumes: Smiths two great works, and Hume’s one great work. Of the two, it is smith that was more correct. Hume was merely running a defensive line against mysticism. (And Propertarianism corrects Hume – as well as Kant.)
BABYSITTING
This act of assisting the world into maturity requires ‘babysitting’. And that is precisely how the west treats the islamic world. As would a babysitter. As a parent. Not as an equal. That would be absurd.
Unfortunately, the economic inequality that allowed the west to afford babysitting is ending however, along with the demographic decline brought about by western democracy and it’s anti-family, high consumption, redistributionist policies. The inter-generational institutions that permit a people to persist, and their genes, norms and institutions to exist, has been destroyed by inter-temporal redistribution and Keynesian credit expansion, rather than Singapore’s forced and redistributive saving.
So the world will fall into a state of change in the next decade or two. And if we make it through that change, it will be the first time in history that such a shift in power has occurred without warfare.
So, expect warfare. We can afford babysitting no longer.
Curt Doolittle
The Propertarian Institute
Kiev, Ukraine.
Source date (UTC): 2015-04-03 16:12:00 UTC
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/apr/02/putin-kremlin-inside-russian-troll-houseTHE WELL PAID ARMY OF RUSSIAN TROLLS
Source date (UTC): 2015-04-03 15:56:00 UTC
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/eliot-borenstein/why-conspiracy-theories_b_5626149.htmlWHY RUSSIANS FALL FOR CONSPIRACY THEORIES
Source date (UTC): 2015-04-03 15:08:00 UTC