“Anyone who does not practice a trade must eventually become a scoundrel” — Spinoza
I don’t really understand why intellectuals feel that their work products should provide them with a means of support. In fact, the older I get the more convinced I am that you cannot produce honest work if you are paid for it. Science and Truth are not profitable endeavors but luxuries and labors of love.
Source date (UTC): 2014-02-01 05:45:00 UTC
THIS IS WHAT GIVES CAPITALISTS A DIRTY NAME
http://blogs.wsj.com/moneybeat/2014/01/31/a-look-at-nine-goldman-trades-that-lost-libya-1-billion-in-one-year/
Source date (UTC): 2014-01-31 18:36:00 UTC
http://washex.am/1nwdQWv
Source date (UTC): 2014-01-31 17:49:00 UTC
LOVING THE PEOPLE YOU FEEL PRIVILEGED TO KNOW
Today is one of those days where, I just realize how lucky I am for the friends I have.
Do you ever just say to yourself “Wow, so and so, is just such an amazing human being, and I can’t believe I get to live on this planet with him (or her)”?
I do. All the time.
For me, these people that I just love to death arent famous or privileged – what they share is that they’re good souls and loyal. And they tend to have a craft, specialty, or particular insight. I would have to make a list of a hundred names just to scratch the surface of it. But about three dozen of them are people for whom I feel particular love and awe.
Source date (UTC): 2014-01-31 17:45:00 UTC
http://scienceblog.com/70048/study-shows-autistic-brains-create-more-information-at-rest/YES. AUTISM MEANS 40% MORE BRAIN ACTIVITY AT REST.
My mother, my grandmother, teachers, everyone would say “just relax and rest your mind”.
I would say “um… I can’t shut it off. Ever.” It was so exasperating. I thought adults were incredibly stupid, with insipid advice.
The only way to keep the machine happy is to work it to death. It’d drive me to exhaustion (and has) if I didn’t feed it something to work on.
The internal world is like an enormous magnet that ONLY SOCIAL CONTACT is a counter.
I love people. They’re anchors to reality.
I wonder what it’s like for totally autistic people – they can never get out… ever. I have a lot of trouble getting in and out (Something my mother, Allora and Amanda were masters of.)
But you can view fate as gift or curse. I can manage it most of the time, so I consider it a gift.
Source date (UTC): 2014-01-31 17:16:00 UTC
WHAT’S THE DEFINITION OF TERRORISM? IT”S NOT COMPLICATED. IT”S JUST ANOTHER POSTMODERN LIE
WHY IS TERRORISM USEFUL?
1 – It’s inexpensive.
2 – It only requires a small number of people.
3 – It doesn’t require coordination of activity.
4 – It gets a LOT of attention for very little effort.
5 – It both influences policy and modifies public perception.
6 – It encourages sympathizers and imitators by granting them a vehicle for self image, status, perception of power, and identity.
7 – It illustrates the inherent weakness of the state and state actors (it dispels the illusion of control)
8 – It creates intolerable political, public, and economic stress even if it causes little real damage to property.
“TERRORISM IS THE BEST ADVERTISING STRATEGY, EVER.”
Worse: And it’s fun. You have to grasp that it’s empowering. It’s exhilarating. Or you can’t understand the motivation for participating in it. Most of us walk through life feeling powerless. Radicals don’t.
Two guys, one car, and random shooting almost did almost as much damage to the economy as the spring 2008 rise in oil prices. Terrorism is effectively employed by revolutionaries and reactionaries internally, and terrorists and state sponsored terrorists.
PURVEYORS OF ORGANIZED VIOLENCE
– State Actors (War/Warriors/Soldiers)
– State Sponsored Private Actors (state sponsored terrorists)
– External (out-group) private actors (terrorists)
– Internal (in-group) private actors (radicals, revolutionaries)
THE USE OF POSTMODERN VERBAL OBSCURANTISM TO JUSTIFY THE CORPORATE STATE
1) It’s an abuse of the terms “terrorist” or “terrorism” to apply them to internal actors, because it grants the assumption of legitimacy to the state, and the pejorative illegitimacy of the actor.
I no case is an external (out group) actor a revolutionary. In no case is an in-group member a terrorist.
2) the problem of stating in-group and out-group members only emerges under state corporatism and it’s advocacy of multiculturalism as a means of importing low cost labor to support aging social systems. Or in the USA where racial divisions have been a source of conflict since the founding of the government.
The use of ‘terrorism’ for internal actors is another “postmodernism”: a linguistic contrivance to obscure the causal properties of a conflict, as the natural problems that arise when we attempt to launder causal properties from terms in order to … lie.
Postmodern obscurantism – the effort to justify the multi-cultural state and the socialist program – is the reason for this false dilemma. There is no difficulty in defining terrorism, as we can see above. Instead, there is an obvious falsehood in the definition of a corporate democratic state: it is impossible for groups with different reproductive strategies, the associated signals and mythos, the associated allocations of property rights, and the different capabilities those groups possess in organizing and conducting production, to cooperate in political systems under majority rule, since by definition such a system imposes a monopoly set of definitions of property rights and obligations – when property rights allocations must reflect the reproductive strategies of the groups.
As such, without the false assumption of the legitimacy of state corporatism, then the original definitions stand.
Source date (UTC): 2014-01-31 14:04:00 UTC
http://imgur.com/r/MapPorn/6ZFTC0VNOTE THAT THE MORE IN-FAMILY FREE-RIDING, THE MORE CORRUPTION IN SOCIETY.
TEACH YOUR CHILDREN: FREE RIDING, IN THE FAMILY OR OUT, IS CORRUPTION – THEFT.
Source date (UTC): 2014-01-31 10:28:00 UTC
ENVIRONMENT DOESN”T MATTER MUCH AT ALL
–“The bad habit of assuming that anything not classically genetic must be ‘environmental’ has blinkered behavioral geneticists (and those who interpret their findings) into the fool’s errand of looking for environmental effects for what may be randomness in developmental processes.”–
NURTURE ONLY MATTER IN SO FAR AS YOU DON”T HARM YOUR KIDS. THATS THE EXTENT OF IT.
Source date (UTC): 2014-01-31 10:27:00 UTC
THANK YOU -ALL- FOR LETTING ME TEST MY RECENT IDEAS ON YOU AND YOUR PATIENCE 🙂
It was necessary. It’s the only way to test ideas that I know of. I just construct arguments. They’re like little robot gladiators. If they succeed we learn, if they fail we learn. But the only way to test your own understanding is to argue your points, and see if they survive.
UNITING FACTIONS
I should, at this point, be able to achieve my goals, and unite the Conservative (normative and moral), Dark Enlightenment (scientific and political) and Anarcho Capitalist (economic and philosophical) movements in a common rational, political and moral language.
Each group is ‘right’ about something and ‘wrong’ about other things. This is because each group gives greater weight to some social properties and less to others.
POLITICAL IDENTITIES
The rough strategy involves giving each group an identity or specialization, and using propertarian language as a means of working together, so that each group does not have to master, or even value, the biases of the other.
Although the work of doing all that ought to be a bit daunting. Mostly because intellect is not evenly distributed across these groups. It’s hard enough to have a challenging talk with libertarians, but …. you know, having that talk with conservatives, and some DE folks, is an exercise in futility.
But reality is created by chanting. Repetition allows us to gradually connect the networks of neurons needed to understand associations.
The grammar of this language is pretty simple. It takes some getting used to. Because we’re linguistically lazy, and formal logic is linguistically burdensome, in exchange for argumentative clarity, and praxeological testability.
I HAD TO TEST MY ARGUMENTS AGAINST ROTHBARDIAN ETHICS TO REPLACE THEM WITH PROPERTARIAN ETHICS.
I’m sure that I frustrated some libertarians. No one likes the slaughter of their sacred cows. Even though, it’s pretty clear that I’ve forever dispatched Rothbardian ethics from rational consideration.
I put a bullet in the NAP/PrivateProperty that it cannot recover from. The wound is mortal. It just depends on how long it will take for the idea to die.
I’ve demonstrated that either the NAP is the wrong test of violation of property, OR that the definition of property is insufficient in scope for rational use in a polity.
In propertarianism I have taken the approach of extending the definition of property and maintaining the principle of aggression against it because I have based, correctly, the source of property rights on the organized use of violence, and aggression is consistent with that argumentative logic.
I HAD TO TEST OPERATIONALISM AS AN ATTACK ON PLATONISM IN ORDER TO CREATE UNIVERSAL ETHICS, AND CONVERT PRAXEOLOGY INTO THE MISSING BRANCH OF LOGIC.
It was actually fascinating to see people in math and science DESPERATELY cling to their platonic arealism with the same fervor that mystics justify their defense of a supernatural god.
I’m still …. really… awed, that anyone presented with constructive(intuitionist,realist,operational) arguments would even for a MOMENT question that platonism was merely a crutch for the weak mind.
But operationalism and the logic of cooperation (praxeology) form the missing logic with which we begin to see all philosophy as a theory of action.
SO THANK YOU FOR YOUR PATIENCE
I guess I have to get serious now about (a) contributing to the other political dialogs, (b) introducing them to these ideas, and (c) producing the grammar and (d) finishing the first book (at least).
Source date (UTC): 2014-01-31 03:54:00 UTC
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2014/01/30/9-questions-about-ukraine-you-were-too-embarrassed-to-ask/
Source date (UTC): 2014-01-30 16:11:00 UTC