OK, What podcasters, and ‘radio sites’, websites, youtuber’s, tweeters, ‘personalities’ and authors are discussing the pseudo intellectual, the supernatural, pseudoscience, and who are tinfoil-hatter’s, borderline schizophrenic conspiracy theorists, and losers?
Source date (UTC): 2017-08-04 21:04:00 UTC
—“Verbosity is no crime where integrity is concerned.”—Dmitry Chernov
Source date (UTC): 2017-08-04 13:40:00 UTC
—“You can’t make a deal with the devil. You have to kill them all.”—Robert Reidle
Source date (UTC): 2017-08-03 09:25:00 UTC
—“Westerners struggle to define even the most basic forms of deception, let alone the sort of complexity that the Kremlin has been skull fucking you with for the past half-century.”—Emil Prelic
Source date (UTC): 2017-08-03 09:04:00 UTC
—“The alt right’s coalition crosses multiple classes. The manosphere is right about the nature of women, the HBD people are right about the difference in Race, the identitarians are right about the necessity of tribe and scale, the traditionalists are empiricists, going with what has worked. We need some combination of all these disparate groups’ differing solutions, to get ourselves out of the Marxian problems.”– Ryan Williams
Source date (UTC): 2017-08-02 16:41:00 UTC
—“The black conservatives’ critiques of leftism are correct: leftists are emotional children mentally dominated by the desire for the state to make up for their own lack of capital(of all kinds). What the conventional color blind right fails to see is that while not all members of group x utilize the group evolutionary strategy as is the norm in group x, the vast majority DO use that strategy. If group X’s strategy is parasitic, it becomes necessary to exclude members of group x, regardless of personal merit. People are both individuals AND members of groups.”— Ryan Williams
Source date (UTC): 2017-08-02 16:27:00 UTC
REFORM LIBERTARIANISM ONE BRICK AT A TIME: FROM FEBRUARY 2012 – BY IMITATING LEW ROCKWELL: VOLUMINOUS CRITICISM
(snip)
Languages are necessary in order to articulate political preferences. Political preferences are the result of metaphysical value judgements. Value judgements are social strategies.
The Libertarians have developed a language for universal political speech. Unfortunately, that language is grounded in a moralistic assumption about the very nature, cause and necessity of ethics.
One brick at a time, one day at a time, Iām trying to reform the libertarian language into aristocratic language, so that conservative sentiments, values, and social strategy can be articulated in the public debate ā so that we may conduct a battle of social models against encroaching totalitarianism brought about by Shumpeterian intellectuals.
(snip)
https://propertarianism.com/2012/02/21/what-i-learned-from-lew-rockwell/
Source date (UTC): 2017-08-02 13:26:00 UTC
https://mises.org/blog/new-libertarianTHE MISES INSTITUTE BEGINS TO RETURN TO WESTERN CIVILIZATION
(thanks for the alert to the post via @Kier Martland)
Jeff,
Very Inspiring. Congratulations. Thank you for what you’re doing. It’s profoundly important for lovers of liberty everywhere.
Thank you for bringing the reformation to the Mises Institute and the restoration of liberty to the western rule of law. You are taking the first steps toward producing a necessary reformation of libertarianism – the one I have been aggressively working to force by criticism, and the one I hoped the Mises Institute would finally – against all institutional memory, embrace.
I realize that reformation is challenging, and that it has taken time to change from radical individualism advocating separatism and hostility to commons, to radical civil society that preserves individualism by the production of commons. That was a hard transition to make. It restores liberty to the western and specifically anglo-germanic and greco-roman tradition of civil society. It’s important because separatism in the absence of institutions, commons, and territory means one ends up a diasporic people at the mercy of host civilizations, or survivors on a borderland in an age of man where no more borderlands exist.
And while changing values from individual separatism to community membership is difficult, I also realize that completing that restoration of liberty to the argumentative western tradition is even more challenging, and that it will take time to correct the Institute’s accumulated overinvestment in anti-western philosophy: (a) Rothbardian ethics of volition (allowing blackmail and externalities) instead of the natural law of reciprocity (not provoking retaliation), (b) The test of reciprocity using the NAP against intersubjectively verifiable property instead of non-imposition against demonstrated investment in homesteading or exchange (property-in-toto), (c) praxeology as a conflation of science and logic, instead of a logic within the scientific method by which we test rationality and reciprocity(morality) of transfers:, (d) argument by Rabbinical and Kantian Hermeneutic Justification (law and morality post agreement to cooperate) instead of Darwinian Survival from Scientific Criticism (continuous rational choice between predation, cooperation, and boycott prior to agreement to cooperate).
And I expect it will be even harder to swallow that western aristocracies profited from the domestication of the animal man by millennia of normative (access to opportunity), reproductive(access to reproduction), manorial (access to property and therefore food), and prosecutorial (legal), suppression of impulsive, immoral, unethical, and criminal behavior, and thereby applying the same aggressive eugenic domestication to man as he had to animal and plant. Ergo, man was not oppressed but domesticated until he could demonstrate equal sovereignty over mind, body, kin and possessions as his domesticators.
As far as I know, libertarianism remains a form of rebellion against the warriors and soldiers who create sovereignty by the organized application of non-substitutable violence to prevent alternative orders other than sovereignty. And that liberty movements arose as appeals for incremental sovereignty as the protected middle class sought to retain the proceeds of their production, as providing value in the preservation of sovereignty equal in all but risk to the peerage of the warriors.
Once libertarians are willing to pay the cost of their liberty, rather than rally and shame others for not giving it to them, the libertarian movement will be complete. And the conservative and libertarian movements united in all but demand for behavioral norms and reliance on argument and choice rather than ritual and obedience – which is the only material difference between us: libertarians with higher ambitions for novelty and opportunity, and higher ambitions for predictability and security.
At that point you will cease needing to struggle for donations, and the aged remains of ‘hopeful’ conservatism, and revel in the position of the central agent of change that restores western civilization.
Someone will profit from it and achieve it if you don’t. (wink)
I’m happy you’ve made the journey. I’d be happier if you led that journey, rather than require the institute continue to be dragged, kicking, rallying, ignoring, prevaricating, and shaming into the western tradition: Nomocracy: Incremental suppression of the animal, Evolution through reproduction, Transcendence via reason.
Curt Doolittle
The Propertarian Institute
https://mises.org/blog/new-libertarian
Source date (UTC): 2017-08-02 13:03:00 UTC
https://mises.org/blog/new-libertarianTHE MISES INSTITUTE BEGINS TO RETURN TO WESTERN CIVILIZATION
(followers: please share enthusiastically everywhere, and let me know you have.)
Jeff,
Very Inspiring. Congratulations. Thank you for what you’re doing. It’s profoundly important for lovers of liberty everywhere.
Thank you for bringing the reformation to the Mises Institute and the restoration of liberty to the western rule of law. You are taking the first steps toward producing a necessary reformation of libertarianism – the one I have been aggressively working to force by criticism, and the one I hoped the Mises Institute would finally – against all institutional memory, embrace.
I realize that reformation is challenging, and that it has taken time to change from radical individualism advocating separatism and hostility to commons, to radical civil society that preserves individualism by the production of commons. That was a hard transition to make. It restores liberty to the western and specifically anglo-germanic and greco-roman tradition of civil society. It’s important because separatism in the absence of institutions, commons, and territory means one ends up a diasporic people at the mercy of host civilizations, or survivors on a borderland in an age of man where no more borderlands exist.
And while changing values from individual separatism to community membership is difficult, I also realize that completing that restoration of liberty to the argumentative western tradition is even more challenging, and that it will take time to correct the Institute’s accumulated overinvestment in anti-western philosophy: (a) Rothbardian ethics of volition (allowing blackmail and externalities) instead of the natural law of reciprocity (not provoking retaliation), (b) The test of reciprocity using the NAP against intersubjectively verifiable property instead of non-imposition against demonstrated investment in homesteading or exchange (property-in-toto), (c) praxeology as a conflation of science and logic, instead of a logic within the scientific method by which we test rationality and reciprocity(morality) of transfers:, (d) argument by Rabbinical and Kantian Hermeneutic Justification (law and morality post agreement to cooperate) instead of Darwinian Survival from Scientific Criticism (continuous rational choice between predation, cooperation, and boycott prior to agreement to cooperate).
And I expect it will be even harder to swallow that western aristocracies profited from the domestication of the animal man by millennia of normative (access to opportunity), reproductive(access to reproduction), manorial (access to property and therefore food), and prosecutorial (legal), suppression of impulsive, immoral, unethical, and criminal behavior, and thereby applying the same aggressive eugenic domestication to man as he had to animal and plant. Ergo, man was not oppressed but domesticated until he could demonstrate equal sovereignty over mind, body, kin and possessions as his domesticators.
As far as I know, libertarianism remains a form of rebellion against the warriors and soldiers who create sovereignty by the organized application of non-substitutable violence to prevent alternative orders other than sovereignty. And that liberty movements arose as appeals for incremental sovereignty as the protected middle class sought to retain the proceeds of their production, as providing value in the preservation of sovereignty equal in all but risk to the peerage of the warriors.
Once libertarians are willing to pay the cost of their liberty, rather than rally and shame others for not giving it to them, the libertarian movement will be complete. And the conservative and libertarian movements united in all but demand for behavioral norms and reliance on argument and choice rather than ritual and obedience – which is the only material difference between us: libertarians with higher ambitions for novelty and opportunity, and higher ambitions for predictability and security.
At that point you will cease needing to struggle for donations, and the aged remains of ‘hopeful’ conservatism, and revel in the position of the central agent of change that restores western civilization.
Someone will profit from it and achieve it if you don’t. (wink)
I’m happy you’ve made the journey. I’d be happier if you led that journey, rather than require the institute continue to be dragged, kicking, rallying, ignoring, prevaricating, and shaming into the western tradition: Nomocracy: Incremental suppression of the animal, Evolution through reproduction, Transcendence via reason.
Curt Doolittle
The Propertarian Institute
https://mises.org/blog/new-libertarian
(thanks for the alert to the post via @Kier Martland)
Source date (UTC): 2017-08-02 13:02:00 UTC
“Our current and recent past elites are “the best” by immoral measures- the best liars, tricksters, manipulators. We need to change the standards by which we measure merit.” – Bill Joslin
Source date (UTC): 2017-08-02 12:07:00 UTC