Category: Commentary, Critique, and Response

  • CHRIS CANTWELL BLOCKED ME? It’s… it’s ridiculous. I belong to a lot of groups

    CHRIS CANTWELL BLOCKED ME?

    It’s… it’s ridiculous. I belong to a lot of groups – advocating all sides – mostly because people from those groups invite me. And they invite me because they want me to participate in the debate. I debate anything…. I can almost always debate multiple sides of any question.

    THat’s the reason I specialize in deflationary truth and natural law and propertarian ethics: because it allows me to both understand all sides, diagnose the arguments of all sides, and recommend an exchange between sides rather than a conflict of deceit.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-03-08 14:04:00 UTC

  • TRUTH AND THE WEST – Answering the Jordan Peterson vs Sam Harris Debate #conserv

    TRUTH AND THE WEST – Answering the Jordan Peterson vs Sam Harris Debate
    https://propertarianism.com/2017/03/07/the-answer-to-the-peterson-harris-debate/ #conservative #libertarian #tcot #tlot


    Source date (UTC): 2017-03-07 21:42:10 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/839229711888879622

  • “BAD IDEAS, HOWEVER SACRED, CANNOT SURVIVE THE COMPANY OF GOOD ONES FOREVER.”—

    –“BAD IDEAS, HOWEVER SACRED, CANNOT SURVIVE THE COMPANY OF GOOD ONES FOREVER.”— Sam Harris

    This statement is demonstrably false, primarily because the market for comforting falsehoods, is greater than the market for uncomfortable truths; and because the market for gossip that justifies one’s priors is greater than the market for uncomfortable truths that contradict one’s priors. Those are two empirically demonstrable statements that have been the subject of not insignificant study and debate.

    We could, instead say, that in the market for weapons of argument, usable on those subjects of argument – rather than gossip and propaganda – that more truthful (and therefore scientific) arguments defeat the less truthful (rational, reasonable, pseudo-rational, pseudoscientific, and supernatural).

    The problem we face is the difference in the scale and distribution of gossip, propaganda, justification and critical argument. Falsehood is a cheaper product than truth.

    In other words, as intellectuals we cannot for a moment cast ourselves as ‘average persons’.

    A third of the electorate (market for political choice) is fully committed to the dysgenic and feminine reproductive strategy (the left) and a third fully committed to the eugenic and masculine reproductive strategy (the right), and the third in the middle is not only uncommitted, but unconcerned, and largely uninformed, and demonstrably persuaded by what they empathize with, obtain information from friends (gossip), are exposed to the media (propaganda), and lack the general knowledge to engage in argument. (See The Myth of the Rational Voter).

    Imagining that the way you think is somehow average rather than one of a host of possible outliers, is merely demonstration of the various cognitive social biases wherein we attribute to others in general what applies to us in particular.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine


    Source date (UTC): 2017-03-07 16:20:00 UTC

  • Answer to the Peterson Harris Debate @jordanbpeterson @SamHarrisOrg #conservativ

    https://t.co/yOqZsqbJ9OThe Answer to the Peterson Harris Debate @jordanbpeterson @SamHarrisOrg #conservative #libertarian #NewRight


    Source date (UTC): 2017-03-07 12:24:00 UTC

  • “Are you specifically maintaining there would be no libertarianism without marx,

    —“Are you specifically maintaining there would be no libertarianism without marx, or merely that most contemporary libertarian rhetoric derives from the marxist tradition? For example, libertarian class theory preceded marx, and marx explicitly borrowed from it.”— Skye Stewart

    (a) there is no ‘libertarian’ theory that I know of prior to the 20th century, even though there were libertine and anarchist theories. (b) western liberty movements sought to preserve contractualism, but never decried commons – classical liberalism was a movement to do MORE with the commons, rather than privatize it by the nobility. To gain peerage with the nobility. An aristocracy of everyone.

    The western liberty movement peaks under jefferson’s natural law contractualism. And the rent seeking began all over again.

    But Marx restated jewish history “of the unwanted” as a universal, and cast the aristocracy as oppressors rather than domesticators and defenders – a tradition continued by the Frankfurt school. He created a class theory of oppression rather than domestication. He sought a revolution against the aristocracy, and an inversion of the aristocratic order. And he sought to do it by depriving the aristocracy of property as its means of domestication.

    Rothbard only changed the strategy; deprive the aristocracy of commons and retain your private property, and you will destroy the principle asset of western man: his unique ability to construct commons.

    Do I think marx and rothbard, as well as freud, mises, and boaz (jews), have any more of an idea what they’re doing than women do when they undermine our civilization? Do gypsies? Do Muslims? I don’t think these people operate by reason but by intuition, and they all intuit that the west is something to be preyed upon – and do so.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-03-05 10:09:00 UTC

  • I think the problem is that the past was honest but justified it supernaturally,

    ….I think the problem is that the past was honest but justified it supernaturally, because the promise of reward was after death. Whereas the present is dishonest and justified pseudo-scientifically and promised if we can reach a socialist utopia or some variation thereof. The medieval order was hierarchical and honest. The only false promise was after death. We live in a world of loneliness and lies….


    Source date (UTC): 2017-03-04 07:24:00 UTC

  • MY POSITION ON THE JEWISH QUESTION (revised and updated) ( Hint: My position is

    MY POSITION ON THE JEWISH QUESTION

    (revised and updated)

    ( Hint: My position is the same toward every out group. )

    I WILL BRUTALLY MANAGE THIS THREAD AGAINST STUPIDITY


    Source date (UTC): 2017-03-03 10:12:00 UTC

  • You are so interesting because you speak in both levantine and western cognitive

    You are so interesting because you speak in both levantine and western cognitive tendencies as the same time. -Cheers


    Source date (UTC): 2017-03-02 21:42:44 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/837417916526182401

    Reply addressees: @nntaleb

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/837123578634125312


    IN REPLY TO:

    @nntaleb

    Skin in the game, almost finished https://t.co/6sEm1JDeWg

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/837123578634125312

  • When you discuss cultural deltas I hear (a) levantine low trust with (b) mathema

    When you discuss cultural deltas I hear (a) levantine low trust with (b) mathematical and literary platonism. Not Natural Law.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-03-02 21:41:08 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/837417512526626816

    Reply addressees: @nntaleb

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/837123578634125312


    IN REPLY TO:

    @nntaleb

    Skin in the game, almost finished https://t.co/6sEm1JDeWg

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/837123578634125312

  • Curious…. Outside of the natural sciences, engineering, computer science, and

    Curious…. Outside of the natural sciences, engineering, computer science, and mathematics, does the academy teach anything that can’t be reduced to some form of lying, cheating, and stealing?


    Source date (UTC): 2017-03-01 16:12:00 UTC