Category: Commentary, Critique, and Response

  • Becoming Real

    SEEING THE DICHOTOMY AND TEACHING IT
    by John Mark Now that I see this dichotomy between hopeful-moral-wishful thinking and resigned-legal-realistic thinking, I see it everywhere. Leftists, obviously moral/wishful. Libertardians, “principled conservatives”, classical liberal, and Civnats are still moral/wishful. Even my wife, after Dems took the House, was emotionally upset. I said, “I’ve been telling you democracy is false hope for a long time now. Even if we’d won the House it would mean nothing in the long run.” “Yeah, but it’s just so upsetting (moral rant as she works through the emotions).” It is hard to have your hopes shattered. High-openness right-wingers have it a bit easier because we immediately probe for outside the box solutions, that’s what we do. Low-openness folks have it harder because change is less comfortable for them in general. It’s amazing watching the Right catch up to us slowly in real time. TheConservativeTreehouse (boomer civnat site) comment section on midterms night had many people saying “this was the nonwhites”. A new dynamic for them, normally signal hard against any race talk. The site proprietor said he just wanted to go fishing. (Emotional/wishful/hopeful thinking being shattered into realism.) Becoming more aspie/scientific/realistic is emotionally difficult for most people, it usually only happens through the trauma of reality slapping them in the face brutally, and even then humans show a remarkable capacity to resist it. But any individual or group that embraces it (classic example Western Civ) to a greater extent than others has a tremendous advantage. So the question is vital: How do we train it? –John Mark (CD: The Law is Easy to Teach)

  • Launch Time

    BECOMING REAL
    by Bill Joslin
    (brilliant) You are not real, you don’t exist until you act in the world – until an impact has been catalyzed. Nothing else; morals, hope, intentions, thoughts, feelings; none of it exists, only the acts and consequences of acts exist – you are what you’ve done – realz over feels… When assessing the people around you, all that matters is what they’ve done and can do – not how nice they are, how moral they are, how amiable you find them, what they say – they are what they do. If they can’t do – there’s is nothing you can do with or for them- they are not equals and must be led. Likewise – if you can’t do (we all have our limits) then best to step aside. Your intentions, thoughts, feels, understanding is useless and pointless until you can act. Extrapolate this into larger scales – social norms, group identity, customs, are ghosts – not quite real until codified in law and law doesn’t exist until there is force to make it real (consequential)… Therefore – if you want your people to exist – you must rule and many of your people won’t be able to rule, so you must lead them – sheepdog rule or your people , you, aren’t real.

  • Becoming Real

    SEEING THE DICHOTOMY AND TEACHING IT
    by John Mark Now that I see this dichotomy between hopeful-moral-wishful thinking and resigned-legal-realistic thinking, I see it everywhere. Leftists, obviously moral/wishful. Libertardians, “principled conservatives”, classical liberal, and Civnats are still moral/wishful. Even my wife, after Dems took the House, was emotionally upset. I said, “I’ve been telling you democracy is false hope for a long time now. Even if we’d won the House it would mean nothing in the long run.” “Yeah, but it’s just so upsetting (moral rant as she works through the emotions).” It is hard to have your hopes shattered. High-openness right-wingers have it a bit easier because we immediately probe for outside the box solutions, that’s what we do. Low-openness folks have it harder because change is less comfortable for them in general. It’s amazing watching the Right catch up to us slowly in real time. TheConservativeTreehouse (boomer civnat site) comment section on midterms night had many people saying “this was the nonwhites”. A new dynamic for them, normally signal hard against any race talk. The site proprietor said he just wanted to go fishing. (Emotional/wishful/hopeful thinking being shattered into realism.) Becoming more aspie/scientific/realistic is emotionally difficult for most people, it usually only happens through the trauma of reality slapping them in the face brutally, and even then humans show a remarkable capacity to resist it. But any individual or group that embraces it (classic example Western Civ) to a greater extent than others has a tremendous advantage. So the question is vital: How do we train it? –John Mark (CD: The Law is Easy to Teach)

  • again, a moral play. I will be

    again, a moral play. I will be.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-11-08 20:51:34 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1060635963876167680

    Reply addressees: @readomain

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1060634721984700416


    IN REPLY TO:

    Original post on X

    Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1060634721984700416

  • I dunno what you’re doing. You’re on twitter. You want to ask me a question that

    I dunno what you’re doing. You’re on twitter. You want to ask me a question that requires precision do it on FB where long form is possible.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-11-08 20:05:00 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1060624246177755137

    Reply addressees: @readomain

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1060623688565952512


    IN REPLY TO:

    Original post on X

    Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1060623688565952512

  • GOOD CRITICISM: UTOPIANISM? BUT NO…. —“Propertarianism as far as I understan

    GOOD CRITICISM: UTOPIANISM? BUT NO….

    —“Propertarianism as far as I understand is an utopian vision of humanity as primarily rational. An implementation of such an utopian vision may have many unforeseen consequences, as micromanagement of human resources is not in Curt’ strategic vision. The general disapproval of Abrahamic cults within his system may lead to many improvised atrocities, created out of sheer escalation of violence. To conclude – this scene is possible and likely to happen, although Curt would probably disapprove of it.”—Igor Rogov

    –” … an utopian vision of humanity as primarily rational.”–

    No, but that law is conducted rationally empirically and tediously operationally. And the legal class is in fact, rational.

    Frames: Math, Science, Economics, Law, History, Literature, Philosophy, Religion(Theology), and the Occult and Magic. People.

    —“… An implementation of such an utopian vision may have many unforeseen consequences,…”—

    Hmmm…. All increases in the suppression of violence, theft, and fraud have predictable universal consequences, and that is raising the cost of doing so, and shifting people either into markets or into more advanced (indirect) means of parasitism.

    All decreases in superstition have produced extraordinary increases in quality of life. The problem we see is the inadequate suppression of pseudoscience(marxism and fiat monetarism), sophism(postmodernism and feminism), and supernaturalism (islam and judaism in particular).

    There is every reason to expect that increases in the ‘scientification’ of the social sciences will produce the same or better returns than the ‘scientification’ of the physical sciences.

    There is certainly every reason to expect that definancializing, de politicizing, and suppressing fraud, libel, and slander will produce windfalls that will restore the pre-72 middle class rates at the expense of financial class and bureaucratic and media rates.

    It’s not that there won’t be unexpected consequences, but that those unexpected consequences have historically been fantastic. It was the rollback of our laws to ‘tolerate’ consumer capitalism that has been the problem.

    THE CONFLICT

    Can you teach mindfulness, ethnonationalism, transcendence and create a non-supernatural religion? Absolutely. it was the hardest problem to solve. it is absolutely possible. if it is possible to teach reading, writing, and arithmetic, manners, ethics, morals and norms, it is possible to teach mindfulness – and we know so that the more desirable civilizations appear to do so. So the argument that we must have a ‘religion of nonsense’ is false.

    However….

    If people wanna make cults they will no matter what anyone does because it fills a need. That does not mean the need the cults fill is the only one possible.

    As today many means of framing the world exist in each culture with classes navigating to the most useful.

    I have been struggling to further understand, but as someone (possibly also Igor) helped me understand, Slavic civ does not have one other than the church. However, the west has all of those Frames listed above; India has at least the scientific, legal, political-philosophical, and traditional-religious. And china has the scientific, bureaucratic, wisdom lit, and buddhism. Japan has the the shinto and buddhist as well as feudal martial, and confucian and now scientific. I can go through most cultures but one of the things I have come to understand is that there are cultures that produced no wisdom lits of their own. And this is a bigger hurdle than I had originally imagined.

    So this is why it is easier for some western groups and harder than others, is longer periods under MORE LITERATURES, producing classes in each of the literatures over time. Thereby relying on a portfolio rather than a monopoly.

    PROPERTARIANISM’S CONTENTS:

    1) explain the cause of western uniqueness (Done)

    2) create a formal, value-independent, cross disciplinary, fully commensurable language sufficient for decidability of ALL conflicts in court, thereby restoring the market for common law in opposition to the market for goods services and information.. (Done)

    3) create a constitution restoring that uniqueness using that language (Done) within that constitution, ALSO provide a set of incentives for definancializing, de-propagandizing, de-politicizing the current era.( Done)

    4) Apply the method to all questions – literally all. Such that we demonstrate how these CAN be decided. In other words produce a canon of solved problems so that lies cannot be made as they were in the past.

    5) Produce advice on a “means of transition.”

    AS SUCH

    it is an evolutionary enhancement of law that extends the current tort constraint on goods and services and the speech regarding each to political speech in order to compensate for the industrialization of lying that has been made possible by the development of mass media.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-11-08 20:05:00 UTC

  • Compared to the civil war? Compared to the ukrianan revolution?

    Compared to the civil war? Compared to the ukrianan revolution?


    Source date (UTC): 2018-11-08 18:12:34 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1060595951725887488

    Reply addressees: @readomain

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1060593271167180800


    IN REPLY TO:

    Original post on X

    Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1060593271167180800

  • Um. YOu have a strange sense of plenty. Compared to what? Compared to NOT having

    Um. YOu have a strange sense of plenty. Compared to what? Compared to NOT having one?


    Source date (UTC): 2018-11-08 18:11:59 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1060595803654365186

    Reply addressees: @readomain

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1060593271167180800


    IN REPLY TO:

    Original post on X

    Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1060593271167180800

  • Sorry. -hugs

    Sorry. -hugs


    Source date (UTC): 2018-11-08 17:57:40 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1060592200910811136

    Reply addressees: @aldrichbyron_

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1060591970886782977


    IN REPLY TO:

    Original post on X

    Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1060591970886782977

  • suggest it. maybe they’ll invite me. I don’t ask for venues, but I rarely refuse

    suggest it. maybe they’ll invite me. I don’t ask for venues, but I rarely refuse them. and this is an interesting topic.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-11-08 17:47:50 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1060589725843685376

    Reply addressees: @dagmar_schmitt @TheBase_1

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1060587862943399936


    IN REPLY TO:

    @GudistGrug

    @curtdoolittle A good reference along these lines is the “4th Generation Warfare Handbook” by Thiele and Lind. It is short and a little incomplete, but has loads of good stuff in there. Would be interested to hear a podcast ep with you and @TheBase_1.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1060587862943399936