http://universalfreepress.com/nearly-every-mass-shooting-has-this-one-thing-in-common-and-it-isnt-weapons/UM CRAZY. THAT’S WHAT.
Source date (UTC): 2014-09-05 17:39:00 UTC
Category: Commentary, Critique, and Response
-
FROM RON PAUL?
http://www.salon.com/2014/09/03/confessions_of_a_recovering_libertarian_how_i_escaped_a_world_of_ron_paul_hero_worship/?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=socialflowESCAPE FROM RON PAUL?
Source date (UTC): 2014-09-05 04:49:00 UTC
-
Well, you know, he sort of has a point here. lol
Well, you know, he sort of has a point here. lol
Source date (UTC): 2014-09-03 14:55:00 UTC
-
(stupid stuff. celebrity photos) Maybe I am just immune because my entire life i
(stupid stuff. celebrity photos)
Maybe I am just immune because my entire life is exposed online, but I don’t see the whole fury over the exposed selfies of celebrities. I mean, they look like a bunch of normal, pretty girls, doing normal stuff. Certainly none of the white trash nonsense we’ve seen from the Kardashians and others.
That’s what the internet era has done to privacy: it’s made us all realize that our illusions are just that. That we’re all the same. That we all care about and do the same things.
Now, I am not in favor of libertinism at all. And I understand that northern european prudishness is merely an attempt to delay childbirth so that women become educated, participate in the work force, and can support their own children before they have them, and therefore don’t remain a burden on their parents – and society. Because our declining incomes are in no small part due to the 40%+ of children who are born out of marriage to single mothers. So I’m all in favor of demanding gentlemanly and ladylike behavior.
On the other hand, none of these young ladies seem to be terribly risqué. I mean, they act like normal middle class girls. (whereas the the lower class girls act quite differently.)
Just seems like a non-issue to me. But then I am not a solipsistic female.
Source date (UTC): 2014-09-03 11:57:00 UTC
-
Humor of the day. —“Getting a driving test in Ukraine is like getting a drug t
Humor of the day.
—“Getting a driving test in Ukraine is like getting a drug test from Charlie Sheen.”—
Source date (UTC): 2014-09-02 16:04:00 UTC
-
JUST TEN? ARE YOU KIDDING? Sean Ring, Johannes Meixner, Michael Parley Griffith,
http://www.propertarianism.com/reading-list/BOOKS, JUST TEN? ARE YOU KIDDING?
Sean Ring, Johannes Meixner, Michael Parley Griffith, Robyn Harte-Bunting Vincent Wolters, Brian Ó Caithnia, Jakub Bozydar Wisniewski.
There is a difference between books that affected me emotionally, books that affected my thinking, books I learned from, and books that I recommend. I keep a book list on Propertarianism.com that references all the books I recommend. But those are the books whose arguments and ideas are correct, not the books that affected me intellectually, emotionally or spiritually.
Durant was wright that there are few answers in philosophy. Philosophy tells us of intellectual history, and makes one’s mind fit. That is all. It is the wishful thinking of man, not the evidence of man. Instead, history provides us with evidence of man to work from. History, Economics(cooperation) and evolutionary biology provide answers that philosophy does not, but only if our minds are fit enough to tell the difference between possible truth and possible fallacy.
HEROIC MAN AFFECTED ME MORALLY, EMOTIONALLY AND SPIRITUALLY
Heroism is the central western proposition.
The Iliad, the Odyssey, The Greek Myths, Aesop’s Fables. Pinocchio. Beowulf. Le Morte D’ Arthur. Shakespeare’s Henry V, Macbeth.Grimm’s Fairy Tales, Spencer’s The Faerie Queene. Ivanhoe. Howard’s Conan stories. Starship Troopers, A Wizard of Earthsea. Harlan Ellison’s stories. Time Enough For Love. Hobbit/LOTR. Dune. Snow Crash, and Neuromancer. (Campbell’s Hero with a Thousand Faces, Frazer’s The Golden Bough).
The principle pagan arguments are is the worship of the earth and the personal virtue of the heroism of man, and the political virtue of aristocracy as prevention against tyranny – under which the earth is not worshipped, man is not heroic, and the best do not rise for us to imitate their behaviors, and aspire to their achievements.
BOOKS THAT AFFECTED MY THINKING
The books that affect you are determined by where you were in your intellectual development. That is why the books that affect each of us are somewhat different. These are the books that I remember very much rearranging or influencing everything else that I understood at the time.
Encyclopedia Britannica. The Constitution and DoE. Biography of Samuel Colt. Durant’s Lessons of History. Karen Armstrong’s: The Great Transformation. Ceram’s Gods, Graves and Scholars. Mallory’s In Search of Indo Europeans. Axelrod’s Evolution of Cooperation. The Third Chimpanzee. Guns Germs and Steel. Kahneman’s Thinking fast and slow. Haidt’s The Righteous Mind. Keegan’s History of Warfare. Fussel’s Class. Rand’s aesthetics. Hayek’s Road to Serfdom, and essays on Knowledge. Popper’s CR and Open Universe. The many papers of the economic calculation argument.
BOOKS I RECOMMEND
Ricardo Duchesne: The Uniqueness of Western Civilization
JP Mallory: In Search of Indo Europeans
John Keegan: A History Of Warfare
Joseph Campbell : The Hero’s Journey
Karen Armstrong : The Great Transformation
William Tucker: Marriage and Civilization
Emmanuel Todd: The Explanation of Ideology
Emmanuel Todd: The Invention of Europe
Daniel Hannan: Inventing Freedom
Alan MacFarlane : Origins of English Individualism
Gregory Clark: A Farewell to Alms
Matt Ridley: The Red Queen
Dale Petersen: Demonic Males
Steven Pinker: The Better Angels of Our Nature
Daniel Kahneman: Thinking, Fast and Slow
Francis Fukuyama: Trust
Sam Harris : Lying
Steven Pinker : The Blank Slate
Jonathan Haidt: The Righteous Mind
Stephen Hicks : Explaining Postmodernism
Hans Hoppe: Democracy The God That Failed
BOOKS I LEARNED FROM
Well that’s too many to list, so I’ll just point to my web site:
Source date (UTC): 2014-09-01 05:11:00 UTC
-
MORAL BASIS OF A BACKWARD SOCIETY – RUSSIA ENDS THE INTERREGNUM
http://www.the-american-interest.com/shevtsova/2014/08/28/putin-ends-the-interregnum/THE MORAL BASIS OF A BACKWARD SOCIETY – RUSSIA ENDS THE INTERREGNUM
Source date (UTC): 2014-08-30 00:35:00 UTC
-
ACKNOWLEDGE COLLAPSE BUT PUSSY-OUT’s ON THE SOLUTION A year ago I would not have
http://online.wsj.com/articles/the-assembly-of-a-new-world-order-1409328075KISSINGER ACKNOWLEDGE COLLAPSE BUT PUSSY-OUT’s ON THE SOLUTION
A year ago I would not have understood why today I do: the failure of the western program is a failure of his program.
But there is an obvious answer to the new world order. Abandon multi-culturaism and the corporates state and re-nationalize liberalism.
There is no common good.
Source date (UTC): 2014-08-29 13:56:00 UTC
-
Do I get to punch Obama voters in the face if I go back home? I mean, that seems
Do I get to punch Obama voters in the face if I go back home? I mean, that seems fitting. Just. Moral.Ethical and otherwise appropriate.
Source date (UTC): 2014-08-28 10:28:00 UTC
-
Popper's Cosmopolitanism
POPPER’S COSMOPOLITANISM
(worth repeating)[I] increasingly position Popper as trying to defend against the authoritarian use of science promoted by the (pseudo)scientific socialists. And his moral propositions are true, albeit not much of an advance on Socrates’ less elaborate one: that wisdom is knowing our ignorance, and being none-to certain of anything, that we are willing to coerce others to common ends.
And like all cosmopolitans he is ALSO, at every moment resisting anglo empiricism, political truth, and the requirement that we contribute to the commons. Like the rest, he seems to want to preserve ethical dualism, central to the cosmopolitan mission. Whereas objective truth is a political construct, cosmopolitan truth is not – it is either authoritarian on one hand, or dualistic, preserving choice independent of objective truth, but never political. (This is a really complicated and really fascinating line of thought I’m working on, and I haven’t reduced it to something tolerably digestible yet. But as someone else said, I think it’s a superior to the Hegelian hypothesis of cultural differences.)
But like all the cosmopolitans, Popper seems to have resorted to their strange fascination with getting it only half right, and fudging the rest with elaborate conflation of existence, experience, and objective experience through the mere use of experiential language. This is very consistent with jewish literature, which is the most sophisticated justificationary philosophy humans have ever invented. Muhammed couldn’t rely on the same intellect so he just reduced the same ideas to authoritarian commands. The Chinese wrote in hedged moralisms justified by harmony (balance) – but they honestly could not solve the problem of politics, because the very idea was an anathema. The europeans celebrate aspirational falsehoods (democracy) in part because politics is an aristocratic status signal – and in most of the west, participation and contribution mandatory.
I see what the cosmopolitans are doing now, but I am not sure how it’s possible. I mean, in Heidegger you can see it and in Kant you can see it, but in both cases it’s in the aristotelian sense: objective. These are products brought to market. Cosmopolitan ideas are authoritarian prognostications positioned as truths. While all of the cosmopolitans retain subjectivity by verbal conflation.
I want to ask Agassi about this because he dances all around the subject in his recent book, which I’ve read, twice now, but I think I might piss him off. (Honestly I got more out of his analysis of popper’s context than all other writers combined. It’s literally delicious to read. I dont think I really understood Feyerabend’s motives until I read Agassi.)
So, I think, probably within a year or at the outside two, I will figure out they how, what and why, of the technique they are using, and I can put an end to that form of obscurantism too. Not that I care about Popper, but because of all the less noble applications of that technique.
Curt.