THE DISTILLATION OF WESTERN CIVILIZATION If you would be sovereign, you must fight. If you would be sovereign and win, you must equally confederate. If you would be sovereign and confederate, you must equally compromise. If you would be sovereign and equally compromise, you must equally forgo opportunities for gain at another’s loss. If you would be sovereign and equally forgo equal opportunities to gain at another’s loss, your actions are limited to those that are productive, fully informed, warrantied, and voluntary, and limited to productive externalities. If you limit your actions to those, then the ONLY possible rule is rule by Common, judge-discovered, Natural Law of Non Imposition of Costs, and therefore, voluntary markets in everything: association, cooperation, reproduction, production, production of commons, production of dispute resolution, production of institutions, productions of monuments, production of war, productions of generations, This is Western Civilization: the choice of Sovereignty once made produces all that we have done. Small things in large numbers have vast consequences. If you would be Sovereign, and reap the benefits of Sovereignty, you must fight – fight to deny others all possible alternatives. If you will not fight you cannot be sovereign. You may beg the Sovereigns for commercial liberty, or physical freedom, or charity, in exchange for compensation. But you may never be in fact sovereign. by William Butchman, Eli Harman, and Curt Doolittle
Category: Civilization, History, and Anthropology
-
As I Understand It This Is the Current Understanding of Regional and Now Tribal, Group Genetics.
As far as I know all human variation is demonstrably caused by little more than the intensity of expression of possibilities extant already in the genome. Despite partial speciation, we did did not complete sufficient physical speciation for typical classification because our primary means of speciation migrated from the physical to the conceptual, and the conceptual is highly affected by the distribution (norm) and therefore physical expression required little physical mutation in the genome, only substantial modification of the mind post birth. These changes have been consistently selected for whenever possible and they universally favor selection for youthfulness (fertility), which is achieved by delaying the intensity of maturity. A point which asians have unfortunately probably exceeded and whites have approached with dangerous proximity.
-
As I Understand It This Is the Current Understanding of Regional and Now Tribal, Group Genetics.
As far as I know all human variation is demonstrably caused by little more than the intensity of expression of possibilities extant already in the genome. Despite partial speciation, we did did not complete sufficient physical speciation for typical classification because our primary means of speciation migrated from the physical to the conceptual, and the conceptual is highly affected by the distribution (norm) and therefore physical expression required little physical mutation in the genome, only substantial modification of the mind post birth. These changes have been consistently selected for whenever possible and they universally favor selection for youthfulness (fertility), which is achieved by delaying the intensity of maturity. A point which asians have unfortunately probably exceeded and whites have approached with dangerous proximity.
-
Europe and East Asia ‘have Done Better’ Because of Territorial Advantage Within Geographic Fortresses
Fortress Europa obtained non-territorial advantage by: A COLLECTION of hypotheses that include: a) europeans have higher neuroticism (creativity) b) europeans have lower clannishness (dislike of outsiders) c) europeans have dramatically reduced the size of the underclass ( produced a higher distribution of Iq, and lower distribution of testosterone) d) there seems to be a longstanding IQ advantage in the north and an intellectual tradition into pre-history in the british isles (the ‘athens’ of pre-literate europe). e) the yamnaya brought aryanism (realism, sovereignty, martial rule, hierarchical organization, testimony, jury, common law ) to europe. And that this has been our most meaningful competitive advantage. f) that each wave of europeans out of Ukraine has been as much an ‘improvement’ over the prior as each wave out of Africa was an ‘improvement’ over the prior – for the same reason; africa and the steppe are brutal evolutionary furnaces. As far as I know all these hypotheses survive all possible scrutiny without requiring a particular genetic advantage other than perhaps reduced clannishness common among circumpolar peoples. This is why I adhere to this solution. Because it does not depend upon ‘magical’ genetics evolving by accidental mutation in the european genome, but merely adaptation to local conditions from a marginally indifferent set of homo sapiens in the past. As far as I know all human variation is in intensity of expression of possibilities extant already in the genome.
-
Europe and East Asia ‘have Done Better’ Because of Territorial Advantage Within Geographic Fortresses
Fortress Europa obtained non-territorial advantage by: A COLLECTION of hypotheses that include: a) europeans have higher neuroticism (creativity) b) europeans have lower clannishness (dislike of outsiders) c) europeans have dramatically reduced the size of the underclass ( produced a higher distribution of Iq, and lower distribution of testosterone) d) there seems to be a longstanding IQ advantage in the north and an intellectual tradition into pre-history in the british isles (the ‘athens’ of pre-literate europe). e) the yamnaya brought aryanism (realism, sovereignty, martial rule, hierarchical organization, testimony, jury, common law ) to europe. And that this has been our most meaningful competitive advantage. f) that each wave of europeans out of Ukraine has been as much an ‘improvement’ over the prior as each wave out of Africa was an ‘improvement’ over the prior – for the same reason; africa and the steppe are brutal evolutionary furnaces. As far as I know all these hypotheses survive all possible scrutiny without requiring a particular genetic advantage other than perhaps reduced clannishness common among circumpolar peoples. This is why I adhere to this solution. Because it does not depend upon ‘magical’ genetics evolving by accidental mutation in the european genome, but merely adaptation to local conditions from a marginally indifferent set of homo sapiens in the past. As far as I know all human variation is in intensity of expression of possibilities extant already in the genome.
-
Via Negativa (Evolutionary Argument) in Historial Explanation
by James Augustus My central argument is that Europe benefited by having an evolutionary environment that allowed for a high frequency of cultural, institutional and intellectual iterations, and that truth, sovereignty and natural law produce an existential advantage, so that what survived is what we call Western Civilization and its peoples. It is easy to look back at what survived and construct a rational narrative, but by doing so we are being fooled by randomness as Taleb is so succinct at pointing out. Evolutionary arguments are superior inasmuch as they point to what didn’t survive (via negativa) deterministically due to selection pressures.
-
Via Negativa (Evolutionary Argument) in Historial Explanation
by James Augustus My central argument is that Europe benefited by having an evolutionary environment that allowed for a high frequency of cultural, institutional and intellectual iterations, and that truth, sovereignty and natural law produce an existential advantage, so that what survived is what we call Western Civilization and its peoples. It is easy to look back at what survived and construct a rational narrative, but by doing so we are being fooled by randomness as Taleb is so succinct at pointing out. Evolutionary arguments are superior inasmuch as they point to what didn’t survive (via negativa) deterministically due to selection pressures.
-
Western Civilization and “Skin in The Game”
Your narrative is exceptional – as wisdom. But wisdom cannot be converted into law unless in a formal, deflationary argument. The west differs from the east. We never conflated law with other fields. And the skin of the loan IN put = the warranty OUT put. High trust civilization (the west) could use warranty rather than skin. So what happened that the west stopped demanding warranty? Without low trust SKIN IN -or- high trust WARRANTY OUT, western civ kept high trust population but low trust economics and policy. Now, if the west relied upon high trust warranty, how could we rely once again on high trust, or must we move to low trust Skin? When you discuss cultural deltas I hear (a) levantine low trust with (b) mathematical and literary platonism. Not Natural Law.
-
Western Civilization and “Skin in The Game”
Your narrative is exceptional – as wisdom. But wisdom cannot be converted into law unless in a formal, deflationary argument. The west differs from the east. We never conflated law with other fields. And the skin of the loan IN put = the warranty OUT put. High trust civilization (the west) could use warranty rather than skin. So what happened that the west stopped demanding warranty? Without low trust SKIN IN -or- high trust WARRANTY OUT, western civ kept high trust population but low trust economics and policy. Now, if the west relied upon high trust warranty, how could we rely once again on high trust, or must we move to low trust Skin? When you discuss cultural deltas I hear (a) levantine low trust with (b) mathematical and literary platonism. Not Natural Law.
-
Whose Side Are You On?
I am on my side. I am on my kin’s side I am on my extended kin’s side I am on my civilization’s side. Truth happens to be the weapon of choice in this battle, because it lets us build commons and compete via commons against those that cannot compete via commons. And because it is by cunning deceits sold to women and the underclass that we have been defeated in the ancient and modern worlds. I considered myself a classical liberal. I had the constitution and declaration and a map of the world on my bedroom walls, and a set of encyclopedias under that map. I stared at them a lot. Not romantically, and not ideologically, but in the context of what I learned from those and other encyclopedias. I considered my self a libertarian (a hayekian classical liberal) when I believed in the potential of mankind.. And current events have made me understand that such a fantasy was the product of european eugenics, and that the rest of humanity except for perhaps the Japanese and koreans is are still but animals, and we we must protect ourselves and our generations from them. I love sovereignty and will pay for it with my life. I love liberty for those who can pay for it. I love freedom for those who can wield it. For the rest, the best we can do is prevent them from harming us, our people, our civilization, and this planet.