Do You Think in Military or Moral Terms? https://propertarianism.com/2020/05/25/do-you-think-in-military-or-moral-terms/
Source date (UTC): 2020-05-25 18:30:35 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1264987243707617282
Do You Think in Military or Moral Terms? https://propertarianism.com/2020/05/25/do-you-think-in-military-or-moral-terms/
Source date (UTC): 2020-05-25 18:30:35 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1264987243707617282
Jan 25, 2020, 9:07 AM I studied history, military history, military technology, technological history, political history, engineering, drafting, and art history. I built businesses in art supplies, business supplies, legal research, and technology consulting, marketing consulting, strategy consulting, greenhouse gas measurement, product development, and I touched private and public organizations almost every sector of the state and economy – and built most of those businesses through about half acquisition and half organic growth. I ran those organizations as intelligence agencies. And I did that while being on the short side, being on the aspie spectrum, and battling cancer and its effects for most of my adult life. But lets be clear: I think in military (maneuver, logistics), and economic (incentive) terms, and like Napoleon who should be studied for his methods if not his character or ambitions – in intelligence terms. Sun Tzu and Machiavelli are not teaching you strategy or tactics. They’re giving you a warning that morality is the result of the domestication of warfare into productive ends – but that war outside of those ends is not moral whatsoever, and you must not become “submissive” to morality because the majority merely habituate rather than comprehend when moral internal and amoral external means of decision making apply.
Jan 25, 2020, 9:07 AM I studied history, military history, military technology, technological history, political history, engineering, drafting, and art history. I built businesses in art supplies, business supplies, legal research, and technology consulting, marketing consulting, strategy consulting, greenhouse gas measurement, product development, and I touched private and public organizations almost every sector of the state and economy – and built most of those businesses through about half acquisition and half organic growth. I ran those organizations as intelligence agencies. And I did that while being on the short side, being on the aspie spectrum, and battling cancer and its effects for most of my adult life. But lets be clear: I think in military (maneuver, logistics), and economic (incentive) terms, and like Napoleon who should be studied for his methods if not his character or ambitions – in intelligence terms. Sun Tzu and Machiavelli are not teaching you strategy or tactics. They’re giving you a warning that morality is the result of the domestication of warfare into productive ends – but that war outside of those ends is not moral whatsoever, and you must not become “submissive” to morality because the majority merely habituate rather than comprehend when moral internal and amoral external means of decision making apply.
Jan 25, 2020, 10:09 AM
—“I spent the next several years wandering the desert, so to speak, until I found your work. Just glad that, when one of your posts popped up, my “Let’s see what he’s got to say” curiosity overpowered my “oh god that guy again” reflex.”— Luke Jason Willis
(Curt: You know, I so completely understand. Especially because it’s so hard to get over the minimum required knowledge to understand what the f–k we’re talking about. Tat’s why it’s so much easier for ex-libertarians, and people with programming experience. You have the economics, the property as system of measurement, the rule of law, and the algorithmic method of thinking. That’s actually a lot to know for normie people.)
Jan 25, 2020, 10:09 AM
—“I spent the next several years wandering the desert, so to speak, until I found your work. Just glad that, when one of your posts popped up, my “Let’s see what he’s got to say” curiosity overpowered my “oh god that guy again” reflex.”— Luke Jason Willis
(Curt: You know, I so completely understand. Especially because it’s so hard to get over the minimum required knowledge to understand what the f–k we’re talking about. Tat’s why it’s so much easier for ex-libertarians, and people with programming experience. You have the economics, the property as system of measurement, the rule of law, and the algorithmic method of thinking. That’s actually a lot to know for normie people.)
Answers to Three Questions https://propertarianism.com/2020/05/25/answers-to-three-questions/
Source date (UTC): 2020-05-25 18:23:47 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1264985532616118274
Jan 26, 2020, 8:07 AM 1) —“Hi Curt, wondering what your thoughts are on ostracism as an effective way to discourage degenerate behaviour. It’s something Stef points to and I’m beginning to see it as a rather feminine method”— Well, I think both pre and post are valulable in the sense that I think it is very important to preserve both ostracism AND to require demonstraion of competence for inclusion. In other words, everyone may require via negativa protection under natural law, but fewer people are capable of via positiva exercise of political judgement, and there are some if not many people who must be ostracized (lose citizenship, benefits, liberty, or life) in defense of others – and that we have been far too tolerant by ending the general eugenic process provided by hanging a lot of malcontents every year. 2) —“Re: the successful march, important to be involved in such an historic moment. When shit goes down it will be remembered as “the first peaceful demonstration of American patriotism”, or some such. Year after year of Antifa antics are met by 20000 armed men. It’s beautiful”— The point is (a) we can show up in large numbers, even on a work day (b) antifa is always the source of violence, not us (c) c’ville was antifa not the right. So I think we succeeded in making our points: 1) we have to show up in large numbers, 2) we have to use the rights framework not the identity framework, even though the result is the same. 3) revolution comes. 3) —“I’m interested to know your thoughts on the cultural importance of cinema and the shift from written to visual communication”— Cinema combines the play and photography, to produce greater accessibility, and extraordinary beauty, but the era with which we produced cinematic “literature” ended by the 1960’s. And we are in full postmodern anti-civilizational decline in the arts just as the jews intended. Just as they destroyed the arts and literature of the ancient world. The most important feature of cinema otherwise has been the concentration of income in the cinema industry thereby depleting the rest of the arts of income and funding. So between the marxist, cultural marxist, postmodernist, feminist, denialist undermining of civilization; cinematic decline in post-lit screenwriting; collapse in funding of the arts; the use of panel products in construction of our buildings and therefore, incompatibility of art and architecture; and the perception of building spaces as temporary rather than intergenerational – cinema has been good and bad. But we are seeing the collapse of the income model. I have a fairly clear view of the future of the arts if we end the american empire and especially if we end copyright and substitute creative commons, then I think we will deprive the industry of any chance of funding, and this will force the correction we are looking for.
Jan 26, 2020, 8:07 AM 1) —“Hi Curt, wondering what your thoughts are on ostracism as an effective way to discourage degenerate behaviour. It’s something Stef points to and I’m beginning to see it as a rather feminine method”— Well, I think both pre and post are valulable in the sense that I think it is very important to preserve both ostracism AND to require demonstraion of competence for inclusion. In other words, everyone may require via negativa protection under natural law, but fewer people are capable of via positiva exercise of political judgement, and there are some if not many people who must be ostracized (lose citizenship, benefits, liberty, or life) in defense of others – and that we have been far too tolerant by ending the general eugenic process provided by hanging a lot of malcontents every year. 2) —“Re: the successful march, important to be involved in such an historic moment. When shit goes down it will be remembered as “the first peaceful demonstration of American patriotism”, or some such. Year after year of Antifa antics are met by 20000 armed men. It’s beautiful”— The point is (a) we can show up in large numbers, even on a work day (b) antifa is always the source of violence, not us (c) c’ville was antifa not the right. So I think we succeeded in making our points: 1) we have to show up in large numbers, 2) we have to use the rights framework not the identity framework, even though the result is the same. 3) revolution comes. 3) —“I’m interested to know your thoughts on the cultural importance of cinema and the shift from written to visual communication”— Cinema combines the play and photography, to produce greater accessibility, and extraordinary beauty, but the era with which we produced cinematic “literature” ended by the 1960’s. And we are in full postmodern anti-civilizational decline in the arts just as the jews intended. Just as they destroyed the arts and literature of the ancient world. The most important feature of cinema otherwise has been the concentration of income in the cinema industry thereby depleting the rest of the arts of income and funding. So between the marxist, cultural marxist, postmodernist, feminist, denialist undermining of civilization; cinematic decline in post-lit screenwriting; collapse in funding of the arts; the use of panel products in construction of our buildings and therefore, incompatibility of art and architecture; and the perception of building spaces as temporary rather than intergenerational – cinema has been good and bad. But we are seeing the collapse of the income model. I have a fairly clear view of the future of the arts if we end the american empire and especially if we end copyright and substitute creative commons, then I think we will deprive the industry of any chance of funding, and this will force the correction we are looking for.
Jan 28, 2020, 1:03 PM by James Dmitro Makienko The tools listed in GRRSM and the extended version can be all described as being “a part of” female cognitive manipulation. These techniques are also common to sociopaths and narcissists. Techniques not mentioned include framing – “if you are X therefore you must do Y (baiting into hazard) which is not in your interest (no full disclosure of costs), but in the interest of manipulator (irreciprocity)” – example “If you are a christian you must accept transsexuals because of compassion and sermon-of-the-mount christ saying judge ye not…” Another technique is derailing the topic, so that you are not stating your point clearly and not arguing what you are saying and respond emotionally – and people don’t remember your point but remember that you’re an angry person who had a really long argument with someone. The response to that is to call out the manipulator on manipulation, and restate your point. And keep doing this over and over until they stop.
(CD: ^Yep, state their technique, return to central argument, repeat, until you exhaust them.) Edit
A Loose Collection of Sociopaths and Narcissists https://propertarianism.com/2020/05/25/a-loose-collection-of-sociopaths-and-narcissists/
Source date (UTC): 2020-05-25 17:23:31 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1264970365769592832