—“When something shocks and is too immoral for even Curt, it must be pretty damn bad. It’s like when Himmler wrote to fascist Croatia, asking them to tone down the ultraviolence as it was making the Axis look bad… when you’re too violent for the SS or CD, you really are fucked.”—Schlaam Alaam
Source date (UTC): 2019-07-12 00:55:51 UTC
Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/102425752455674333
@DanielandMegan we are just about there. no rush. just more skulls for the pyramid.
Source date (UTC): 2019-07-12 00:16:34 UTC
Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/102425598007819169
HE ANTI-LIBERAL ARGUMENT
(fresh weaponry for your use)
Do you know the difference between virtue, rule, and outcome ethics?
What about the difference between moral, normative, and outcome law?
What is the difference between your line of argument(Empathy, Care Taking), Noah Revoy’s line of argument(Psychology, Success), and my line of argument(Law, Limits)?
What is the genetic, institutional, traditional, normative, and psychological outcome of those three lines of argument?
We demonstrate approximately six general moral rules (foundations) over the use of capital-in-toto. We demonstrate a bias between specializing in them: consumption (caretaking, proportionality) and dysgenia, production (opportunity, reciprocity) and eugenia, and preservation( disgust/purity, loyalty) and eugenia, while only the preservationists practicing all six equally, the productionists dropping loyalty, and the consumptionism dropping all but care and proportionality.
These six moral rules roughly are divisible into private and common capital demands in exchange for our cooperation.
These capital demands and moral demands roughly correspond to the feminine, ascendent male, and established male distributions.
The structure of the human brain both physical, developmental, hormonal, and neurochemical corresponds to about the same distribution between female, beta male, and dominant male.
The distribution of mental illness psychotic < solipsistic to < feminine < to > masculine > to autistic > anti-social reflects these brain structures and distributions.
These developments appear to follow the general rule of 80% genetic and 20% something else (variation in developmental progress).
(continued…)
Source date (UTC): 2019-07-12 00:09:19 UTC
Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/102425569468533065
Source date (UTC): 2019-07-12 00:05:42 UTC
Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/102425555255953062
IF DAS KAPITAL CAN LEAD, PROPERTARIANISM CAN LEAD
Math can’t lead you. Physics can’t lead you. Chemistry, Economics, and Law can’t lead you. And so P can’t ‘lead’ you.
Can Das Kapital lead revolutions? Is Das Kapital less challenging than P? Were the founding father’s debates less complicated than p? Not at the time they weren’t.
However, evidence is that Empiricism, Constitutionalism, Marxism, postmodernism, all CAN lead people because of real incentives.
Policy can provide real incentives.
If you say my (our) solutions (constitution, policies) can’t lead people we’ll see but I’ll bet they can, because policy is actionable and fantasy moralizing can only SEDATE you.
You see, only SOME of you are sentimentally driven – and it’s because you feel outcast or left behind, while the vast body of the population simply wants policy that solves a problem and is actionable. You want people to ‘feel’ like you do. Most people want outcomes for themselves and their kin, and friends.
How has your talk of fascism or sentimental ideas done in the market for ideas? How will a P constitution set up as a Chinese menu do?
You know why? You want people to feel like you do and they dont, which is why you’re a minority in the first place.
I want to provide lotsa people across the spectrum with incentives.
Then all that matters is who shows up for practical ends, not shared “feelz”.
The evidence is that I am right.
I’m not selling ‘feelz’ or ‘wanna-be-dreams’ but actionable policy that will produce restorative ends, by adaptive means.
Source date (UTC): 2019-07-11 20:41:00 UTC
Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/102424750346227846
NFANTILE AUTHORITARIAN ECHO CHAMBERS
—“Fascism, racism and anti-semitism are doing pretty good in my FB feed tbh😆”—Arran Byrnes
Echo chambers echo precisely because they’re empty.
Miltants like (R)Fascists and (L)Communists mater because they will take up arms.
Conservatives, Libertarians, and Centrists matter because the eliminate the need to. (Or at least reduce the body count.)
I’m a universalist, ethnocentric, nationalist, by Rule of Law under Natural Law, fascist because its the optimum human condition that does not result in hyper-consumption, de-civilization, parasitism, predation, dysgenia, conquest, genocide, and endemic warfare.
In other words, there is no argument against this form of ‘fascism’ – intolerance for parasitic conquest of others – that is not reducible to lying as a means of engaging in parasitic conquest of others.
One cannot choose corporation over kinship for others without engaging in genocide. Therefore the only restitution for attempted genocide is the same by reciprocity. Ergo do not engage in such.
So war is necessary to correct the condition, but once correcting the condition one and one’s people must maintain competitive advantage sufficient to eliminate repetition of conquest by other means.
That is what I propose … because I am not ‘infantile’, ignorant, and lacking experience with incentives, organization, strategy, logistics, and scale.
Source date (UTC): 2019-07-11 20:40:37 UTC
Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/102424748798008982
Source date (UTC): 2019-07-11 20:36:24 UTC
Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/102424732277614485
Source date (UTC): 2019-07-11 20:35:01 UTC
Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/102424726863063874
–“You can lead a libertarian to content but you can’t make it based”– Via Thomas Norgate.
Source date (UTC): 2019-07-11 20:32:32 UTC
Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/102424717034055059
IT TAKES TWO YEARS
by John Mark
—“It’s laughable that somebody thinks they can just roll up, watch my vid & maybe read a few posts on the website, watch an interview or 2 with Curt, and then dive into a critique. This is why most of these “critiques” make elementary errors & strawman/misrepresent. They don’t really understand what they’re critiquing. … Heck, I followed Curt for close to 2yrs, reading daily, before opening my mouth. And I’m still hyper-aware of trying to make sure I don’t say something incorrect & still learn new things & angles of understanding frequently.
…. When they’re getting property-in-toto wrong you know they haven’t spent much time.”—
Source date (UTC): 2019-07-11 20:32:05 UTC
Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/102424715264061589