Category: Commentary, Critique, and Response

  • Thanks. … Hmm…. I’ve tested: 1) the “Single Donation” 2) And the “Monthly Do

    Thanks. … Hmm….

    I’ve tested:
    1) the “Single Donation”
    https://t.co/nwynhQnavA
    2) And the “Monthly Donation”
    https://t.co/Fyy9QpAOBe

    And they both work.

    3) We haven’t yet enabled the “Donate to an Initiative”
    https://t.co/JiQhO4IZEV
    Which like all ‘pending’ pages displays ” ( … ) ” which is our universal “waiting for content” tag.

    4) and the Donor Page is also waiting for content “( … )”.
    https://t.co/zTuZT2QTjJ

    So if you are seeing 404s, please post or pm a link so we can fix it. There was a problem in the past were old URLs were reaching an archive of the site for some reason, instead of the live site.

    Thanks for reporting this.


    Source date (UTC): 2024-01-22 15:28:25 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1749453973566713856

  • Your evasion by departure, further demonstrating my accusation was correct. Ad h

    Your evasion by departure, further demonstrating my accusation was correct. Ad hom. No argument. Intellectual dishonesty. Feminine undermining in lieu of honesty and argument, demonstrating incompetency.

    Despite performance under cover of dishonesty, your submission and…


    Source date (UTC): 2024-01-22 14:45:29 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1749443171010924747

    Reply addressees: @DouglasGOsborne @TuckerCarlson

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1749433227578581427

  • Again, not an argument. Evidence of lack of one. Attempt at redirection. Both ev

    Again, not an argument. Evidence of lack of one. Attempt at redirection. Both evidence of intellectual dishonesty and attempted deception. In addition, either your accusation is substantive or it is not. If it is, you should be capable of defining Natural Law as you understand it, and explaining how my work is “antithetical in spirit and substance”. That would constitute an argument. Are you able? Or will you continue your pretense, dishonesty, and schoolgirl ad hominem as an evasion of that inability to make an argument?

    I find you and your ilk childish examples of infantilized males demonstrating their immaturity – and often because they overly trained by women not men.

    Reply addressees: @DouglasGOsborne @TuckerCarlson


    Source date (UTC): 2024-01-22 14:28:07 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1749438800676212736

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1749432427657695415

  • I live to serve. 😉

    I live to serve. 😉


    Source date (UTC): 2024-01-22 00:11:49 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1749223306799026509

    Reply addressees: @geros194

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1749219986944807268

  • Your penis envy is a complement. But you’re demeanor is revolting. So move along

    Your penis envy is a complement. But you’re demeanor is revolting. So move along please.


    Source date (UTC): 2024-01-21 23:44:55 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1749216536181567972

    Reply addressees: @Garfield20202

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1749216284519346515

  • HAYEK VS MARX IN JUST ONE BOOK –‘Fascism is the stage reached after communism h

    HAYEK VS MARX IN JUST ONE BOOK
    –‘Fascism is the stage reached after communism has proved an illusion’– FA Hayek. “I just came across this quote from Hayek. I think I sort of know what he’s trying to say. I was hoping someone here was more familiar with the guy and could elaborate.–(Anon From Reddit)

    Old post, but came up in search, so I’d offer an answer.

    Hayek started with epistemology in the sense of the state of neuroscience of his age. He then understood the problem of economics as a constraint on the misbehavior of man. And then he understood and moved on to law as a constraint on the misbehavior of man. And the insight was really quite early in a simple pamphlet he wrote that would become very popular.

    Hayek’s innovation in his pamphlet “A Road To Serfdom” was accounting for informal capital and especially informal capital in the commons that is the West’s competitive advantage, that of course Marx didn’t account for, and if he did it would falsify his entire framework even more so than the falsehood of the labor theory of value;

    Or the pretense that a ‘society’ is a involuntary organization such as a family rather than superpredators who find convenience in peaceful cooperation until they don’t;

    Or the false possibility of the failure of rule of law leading to market economies and the extraordinary wealth produced indirectly that is the opposite of what rule-by-man’s communism and socialism produce directly;

    Or the even more absurd pretension that competence is distributed other than in by painful empiricism of demonstrated competency by survival in adversarial markets.

    Or worse, that classes are not a reflection of genetic load and therefore ability.

    Or worse, that credentialist intellectuals are capable of defeating the efforts of the pricing system, the credit system, the rule of law, and the decisions of those who, because of demonstrated competency in such a system defend that system and it’s continuous massive parallel computation of the optimum allocation of everything in everyone’s service of one another by selfish incentives.

    It’s somewhat difficult to imagine why any interest in Marx as other than an attempt a pseudoscientific reformation of the abrahamic religion survives despite the evolutionary failure of class marxism, cultural marxism, sex marxism, truth marxism (postmodernism), Libertarianism (middle class marxism), Neoconservatism (upper class marxism), and the present resulting race marxism.

    The marxist sequence is, as was the abrahamic sequence before it, feminine magical thinking in a desperate attempt to avoid individual responsibility for self, private and common, and the feminine and beta war against european civilization’s aristocratic, heroic, militaristic, expansionist, hierarchical, paternal, technological, sky worshipping, meritocratic foundations that demand individual responsibility of all in exchange for individual sovereignty and self determination – the most correspondent with the laws of nature man has developed, and the reason for the evolutionary velocity of the west in the bronze, iron, an steel ages, despite the abrahamic occult dark ages and this second attempt at the second abrahamic pseudoscientific dark ages.

    The middle east is feminine in its foundations and it has been rebelling against the indo europeans since the beginnings of the recovery from the bronze age collapse. Marx’s feminism in cognition is simply a continuation of the feminine abrahamic means of baiting into hazard – the art of seduction applied to deception and submission in a war against the laws of nature – especially darwin.

    Cheers.


    Source date (UTC): 2024-01-21 23:34:26 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1749213895514861568

  • RT @Logos_Elect: Can you imagine growing up as a kid getting to learn and practi

    RT @Logos_Elect: Can you imagine growing up as a kid getting to learn and practice war tactics with your friends… man


    Source date (UTC): 2024-01-21 23:01:44 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1749205666416238972

  • LINDSAY MAY ALWAYS BE HALF WRONG BUT HE’S STILL HALF RIGHT – SO FILTER THE WRONG

    LINDSAY MAY ALWAYS BE HALF WRONG BUT HE’S STILL HALF RIGHT – SO FILTER THE WRONG BUT LISTEN TO THE RIGHT.
    @ConceptualJames cannot imagine the mind of a conservative especially a conservative intellectual any more than a woman can understand the mind of a man.
    His paradigm of history is philosophical and literary and not scientific, economic, and legal.
    His attempt to falsely cast the genealogy of the history of the cancerous ideas in order to defend his bias and his revenue sources is so obvious it’s painful.zz
    His attempt to walk the middle ground is somewhat fascinating to watch, abut his defense of it is tiresome.
    His abusive working class behavior to cover all of the above is simply a feminine defensive mechanism. (Though I have to control my cursing as badly as he for the same reasons of agitation.)

    That said, if you’re intellectually honest, you have to give the man his due when he explains the folly of the enemy, and explains it from their perspective (one he almost shares). He is still the best person working today and popularizing the enemy’s ideas strategy sedition and warfare against civilization by the ‘translation’ of the ‘woke’ into standard philosophical language – even if he does so from a center left disposition.

    This talk is reasonably effective if you filter out all the the above.
    https://t.co/12iSvjpDWW


    Source date (UTC): 2024-01-21 22:27:25 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1749197029991956480

  • An accusation without an argument or demonstration by an nitwit or midwit incapa

    An accusation without an argument or demonstration by an nitwit or midwit incapable of constructing an argument, or demonstrating the competency to do so.

    Boring. Tedious. Example of the overconfidence of the generations of ignorance.


    Source date (UTC): 2024-01-21 22:09:56 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1749192631987388827

    Reply addressees: @DouglasGOsborne @TuckerCarlson

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1749176024565223913

  • Hugs. Doing my job. Which is enjoyable when answering intellectually honest and

    Hugs.
    Doing my job.
    Which is enjoyable when answering intellectually honest and moral questions from the minority of intellectually honest and moral people like yourself. 😉


    Source date (UTC): 2024-01-21 22:08:35 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1749192291003064750

    Reply addressees: @Aryayana83 @rosswcalvin @realJohnVictor

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1749190143418994967