Those questions that appear big, meaningful, or difficult rarely are https://propertarianism.com/2020/05/30/those-questions-that-appear-big-meaningful-or-difficult-rarely-are/
Source date (UTC): 2020-05-30 18:39:10 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1266801341877432320
Dec 23, 2019, 8:18 PM Those questions that appear big, meaningful, or difficult rarely are – but if deprived of meaningful history (demographics, technology, economics, and law) they appear so. 1) Corporations: We invented Markets to force cooperation (legislation), Markets to Cooperate in (markets for consumer goods, services, and information), and Markets To Suppress violations of cooperation (Courts.) The State disintermediated the people on purpose from suing corporations, so that they could increase tax revenues. (research coal and rail damage in England). This violates the Common Law tradition of sovereignty and reciprocity decided by tort (trespass) and is easily reversed and restored. There is no reason whatsoever that we lack ‘standing’ to sue corporations (politicians, bureaucrats), in matters of the commons (class actions). Restore it, restore libel and slander. Although hard to do, we might want to restore laws against Shrews and Shrewing (Gossip, undermining, and shrill behavior. look it up. Your screaming leftist would be in stocks for most of our history.)
Social Media Companies. Legislation always lags when it doesn’t impact state authority. There is no argument to be made that Google-search (yellow pages, library), Wikipedia (Encyclopedia), Twitter (news), Facebook-messenger (communication), and Youtube-Instagram (publication, media) are not necessary infrastructure. that is indifferent From Electricity, Yellow Pages, Telephone, Network, and Cable. All of which are (heavily) regulated to ensure free movement of information EXCEPT pornography or conspiracy to commit crime.
The underlying problem is whether we are going to preserve the American experiment in the ‘third way’ of Majority Middle-Class Meritocracy under the common law of equals, or revert to continental ( church, aristocracy) division of ruled and rulers, under the Napoleonic (totalitarian) code. The answer is of course, that we can afford to do either, and have immigrated so many underclasses that it’s not possible to preserve our American experiment, in extending the rights of Englishmen, anglo Saxons, germanic peoples, and west Indo-Europeans that has been the secret of our success: Truth before face regardless of cost, Duty before self, sovereignty, reciprocity the jury, and the natural common law of tort. … and the problem it leaves us with. The dirty secret of western civilization is that we have been eugenic since our beginning. And both Christianity in the ancient world and in the modern Boas, Freud, Marx, Adorno et al, Derrida et al, and the current neoliberal -postmodern dogmatists are advancing a host of different ‘re-wildings’ of mankind in order to achieve their ends: ending the eugenic civilization we call the west.
People were not oppressed. They were domesticated. And that’s what we see in the genetic record.
Dec 23, 2019, 8:18 PM Those questions that appear big, meaningful, or difficult rarely are – but if deprived of meaningful history (demographics, technology, economics, and law) they appear so. 1) Corporations: We invented Markets to force cooperation (legislation), Markets to Cooperate in (markets for consumer goods, services, and information), and Markets To Suppress violations of cooperation (Courts.) The State disintermediated the people on purpose from suing corporations, so that they could increase tax revenues. (research coal and rail damage in England). This violates the Common Law tradition of sovereignty and reciprocity decided by tort (trespass) and is easily reversed and restored. There is no reason whatsoever that we lack ‘standing’ to sue corporations (politicians, bureaucrats), in matters of the commons (class actions). Restore it, restore libel and slander. Although hard to do, we might want to restore laws against Shrews and Shrewing (Gossip, undermining, and shrill behavior. look it up. Your screaming leftist would be in stocks for most of our history.)
Social Media Companies. Legislation always lags when it doesn’t impact state authority. There is no argument to be made that Google-search (yellow pages, library), Wikipedia (Encyclopedia), Twitter (news), Facebook-messenger (communication), and Youtube-Instagram (publication, media) are not necessary infrastructure. that is indifferent From Electricity, Yellow Pages, Telephone, Network, and Cable. All of which are (heavily) regulated to ensure free movement of information EXCEPT pornography or conspiracy to commit crime.
The underlying problem is whether we are going to preserve the American experiment in the ‘third way’ of Majority Middle-Class Meritocracy under the common law of equals, or revert to continental ( church, aristocracy) division of ruled and rulers, under the Napoleonic (totalitarian) code. The answer is of course, that we can afford to do either, and have immigrated so many underclasses that it’s not possible to preserve our American experiment, in extending the rights of Englishmen, anglo Saxons, germanic peoples, and west Indo-Europeans that has been the secret of our success: Truth before face regardless of cost, Duty before self, sovereignty, reciprocity the jury, and the natural common law of tort. … and the problem it leaves us with. The dirty secret of western civilization is that we have been eugenic since our beginning. And both Christianity in the ancient world and in the modern Boas, Freud, Marx, Adorno et al, Derrida et al, and the current neoliberal -postmodern dogmatists are advancing a host of different ‘re-wildings’ of mankind in order to achieve their ends: ending the eugenic civilization we call the west.
People were not oppressed. They were domesticated. And that’s what we see in the genetic record.
Our Version of The Socratic Method: Competition https://propertarianism.com/2020/05/30/our-version-of-the-socratic-method-competition/
Source date (UTC): 2020-05-30 18:37:18 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1266800870513131521
Dec 23, 2019, 8:19 PM (I’m about finished with the propertarian project although there are always nuances to work with, but this is worth repeating.) KING OF THE HILL GAMES I teach by creating games that men will compete in. This is how men are best taught. Instead of asking questions I start arguments. Instead of preaching an angle, I attack a proposition and force others to defend it. Instead of assuming equality I play king of the hill and bait them into attacking me. Instead of writing essays of appeal I write arguments to criticize. BAIT MEN INTO DOMINANCE PLAY. Teaching men is really easy: Bait them into dominance play. Just as exhaustive forgiveness in tit-for-tat is the optimum cooperative strategy, exhaustive baiting for dominance play is the optimum MALE cooperative strategy. Set up King of the Hill games where ANY forward progress gets the men recognition. Do not criticize failure, only cowardice, attention seeking, or time wasting. If you are too predictable you will ruin the game. You must present a variety of challenges. We cannot feel ‘good’ about learning by conformity the way girls and women do. We must play at fighting or it’s not worth our time. AN EXPERIMENTAL CLASSROOM: KING OF THE HILL GAME: TEACHING MEN I have developed the “King of the Hill” strategy of discourse (teaching) because it is actually THE BEST method of teaching (masculine) men. Iâ��ve been doing this since we used 300 baud dial up modems and 80 character monochrome screens. And I learned it early. Men can attack me and my ideas, without acting vulnerable, or submissive, or begging for attention, but by exercising their dominance. And they can fail and no one cares. This is actually the optimum method of reaching men: we create a dominance game of low risk. We learn from playing this dominance game. The secret is to reward dominance expression if itâ��s backed by insight, argument, or wit. And to stop on effeminate, abrahamic, and non-argument. I make serious arguments to teach. I make half arguments to encourage debate. And I push controversial ideas to encourage them to refute them. My role in this game is to play king of the hill, and say “come get me”. I provide symbolic rewards (sharing quotes), and meaningful rewards (investing time in those with potential), and lifetime rewards (skill development). That is why this game works. Not everyone can play this game. But if they can play this game, and get good at it they will master a very special skill. And it’s that collection of talent I’m interested in creating. The internet does change. Men donâ��t change. The number of stupid men with access to digital discourse simply increases. The internet of such men requires street fighting, and I try to create a locker room for street fighters. In that locker room we play king of the hill. WE PUT DOMINANCE PLAY TO CONSTRUCTIVE USE. If you want beta-and-chick-friendly theatre watch TED videos. It’s a cult of pseudoscience. I teach argument.. I teach men. (And the occasional woman with character, intellectual honesty, and brains.) You might not realize I know this is a game, and that we are playing a game until you meet me in person or talk to me in an interview â�� because Iâ��m not very much like my online persona. This is educational entertainment and theatre. I DON’T DO HATE I’m pro natural law; pro my people; pro humanity; and pro transcendence; Yes, I will dig on genetic differences, biological differences, genetic differences, cultural differences, class, gender, and racial differences. Yes I will make objective analysis of the those differences. I will work to destroy the cherished lies of every race, civilization, culture, nation, tribe, and class. And I will crush those lies with some sense of both desperation, conviction and joy. But I don’t do racism. I hate on parasitism predation, and fictionalism to justify it. But I don’t hate on people. I fault my people for not using their superiority to defend against the group evolutionary strategies of other groups. I fault my people for failing to rule and rule well. I fault my people for intellectual folly and dishonesty. I advocate nationalism, tribalism, sovereignty and natural law of reciprocity and markets in everything for all human beings. And as many nations as it takes to transcend all humans through the gradual improvement of all and the gradual reduction of the underclasses that prohibit our transcendence. I don’t like hating on people. It’s not Christian and therefore not European. And not even Aryan. The beauty of christianity is that it seeks to extirpate all hatred from the human heart. And once extirpated we are free to use reason, with clear minds and clear judgement. I have no problem with war, murder, violence and destruction. i have no problem with rule, punishment, and if necessary incarceration or enslavement. I have a problem with hatred. A problem with deception. And a problem with any order other than the laws of nature, the natural law of reciprocity, and the transcendence of man. Edit
Dec 23, 2019, 8:19 PM (I’m about finished with the propertarian project although there are always nuances to work with, but this is worth repeating.) KING OF THE HILL GAMES I teach by creating games that men will compete in. This is how men are best taught. Instead of asking questions I start arguments. Instead of preaching an angle, I attack a proposition and force others to defend it. Instead of assuming equality I play king of the hill and bait them into attacking me. Instead of writing essays of appeal I write arguments to criticize. BAIT MEN INTO DOMINANCE PLAY. Teaching men is really easy: Bait them into dominance play. Just as exhaustive forgiveness in tit-for-tat is the optimum cooperative strategy, exhaustive baiting for dominance play is the optimum MALE cooperative strategy. Set up King of the Hill games where ANY forward progress gets the men recognition. Do not criticize failure, only cowardice, attention seeking, or time wasting. If you are too predictable you will ruin the game. You must present a variety of challenges. We cannot feel ‘good’ about learning by conformity the way girls and women do. We must play at fighting or it’s not worth our time. AN EXPERIMENTAL CLASSROOM: KING OF THE HILL GAME: TEACHING MEN I have developed the “King of the Hill” strategy of discourse (teaching) because it is actually THE BEST method of teaching (masculine) men. Iâ��ve been doing this since we used 300 baud dial up modems and 80 character monochrome screens. And I learned it early. Men can attack me and my ideas, without acting vulnerable, or submissive, or begging for attention, but by exercising their dominance. And they can fail and no one cares. This is actually the optimum method of reaching men: we create a dominance game of low risk. We learn from playing this dominance game. The secret is to reward dominance expression if itâ��s backed by insight, argument, or wit. And to stop on effeminate, abrahamic, and non-argument. I make serious arguments to teach. I make half arguments to encourage debate. And I push controversial ideas to encourage them to refute them. My role in this game is to play king of the hill, and say “come get me”. I provide symbolic rewards (sharing quotes), and meaningful rewards (investing time in those with potential), and lifetime rewards (skill development). That is why this game works. Not everyone can play this game. But if they can play this game, and get good at it they will master a very special skill. And it’s that collection of talent I’m interested in creating. The internet does change. Men donâ��t change. The number of stupid men with access to digital discourse simply increases. The internet of such men requires street fighting, and I try to create a locker room for street fighters. In that locker room we play king of the hill. WE PUT DOMINANCE PLAY TO CONSTRUCTIVE USE. If you want beta-and-chick-friendly theatre watch TED videos. It’s a cult of pseudoscience. I teach argument.. I teach men. (And the occasional woman with character, intellectual honesty, and brains.) You might not realize I know this is a game, and that we are playing a game until you meet me in person or talk to me in an interview â�� because Iâ��m not very much like my online persona. This is educational entertainment and theatre. I DON’T DO HATE I’m pro natural law; pro my people; pro humanity; and pro transcendence; Yes, I will dig on genetic differences, biological differences, genetic differences, cultural differences, class, gender, and racial differences. Yes I will make objective analysis of the those differences. I will work to destroy the cherished lies of every race, civilization, culture, nation, tribe, and class. And I will crush those lies with some sense of both desperation, conviction and joy. But I don’t do racism. I hate on parasitism predation, and fictionalism to justify it. But I don’t hate on people. I fault my people for not using their superiority to defend against the group evolutionary strategies of other groups. I fault my people for failing to rule and rule well. I fault my people for intellectual folly and dishonesty. I advocate nationalism, tribalism, sovereignty and natural law of reciprocity and markets in everything for all human beings. And as many nations as it takes to transcend all humans through the gradual improvement of all and the gradual reduction of the underclasses that prohibit our transcendence. I don’t like hating on people. It’s not Christian and therefore not European. And not even Aryan. The beauty of christianity is that it seeks to extirpate all hatred from the human heart. And once extirpated we are free to use reason, with clear minds and clear judgement. I have no problem with war, murder, violence and destruction. i have no problem with rule, punishment, and if necessary incarceration or enslavement. I have a problem with hatred. A problem with deception. And a problem with any order other than the laws of nature, the natural law of reciprocity, and the transcendence of man. Edit
Truth is demonstrated, not stated. Evidence is evidence.
Source date (UTC): 2020-05-30 18:23:44 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1266797456643293185
Reply addressees: @KaitMarieox
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1266491808932036608
Dec 28, 2019, 4:52 PM We focus largely on the law but not on the other innovations in the Propertarian program: Yes, Propertarianism consists of a set of innovations 1. Grammars (metaphysics) 2. Testimonialism (epistemology) 3. Acquisitionism and Propertarianism – Together making possible strictly constructed law (ethics) But we also have: 4: Cooperationism, Compatibilism, Cognitive division of labor This means that we specialize, largely along lines of gender cognition and age, in a division of perception, cognition, advocacy, and negotiation. And then we ‘calculate’ by discovering opportunities to cooperate across the spectrum of population, time, and space. So we function as a neural network that discovers opportunities despite variations in our division of labor in perceiving and comprehending the world. And we also have: 5. The Ternary Logic of Political Science. Let’s look at this a bit There are three states of logic, in order: 1. False 2. Truth candidate (actionable) 3. Undecidable (In-actionable) There are three options to cooperation 1. avoidance (ostracization) 2. exchange (cooperation) 3. predation-parasitism (conflict) There are three means of coercion 1. Remuneration (deprivation of trade, or benefit from trade) Middle class – Libertarian Meritocratic 2. Force (imposition of harm, defense from harm) Upper class – Conservative Eugenic 3. Undermining (ostracizing/inhibiting opportunity, including/generating opportunity) Under Class – Progressive Dysgenic There are three axes of elites 1. Scientific, Technical, Entrepreneurial, Financial, Treasury 2. Military, juridical, Police, Sheriff, Militia 3. Priests, Politicians, Public Intellectuals We can organize by three axes of elites (cooperate by) 1. Production and Evolution (Europe) 2. Administration and Stagnation (strong: China, weak: India) 3. Parasitism and Degeneration (Semitia, gypsies) We can rule by three axes of decidability 1. Science and Law (Europe) 2. Reason and Command (china India) 3. Sophistry and Propaganda (Semitia) We can govern by three axis 1. Markets, Law, Courts, (Europe) Middle Class 2. Bureaucracy (china) Upper class 3. Priesthood (Semitia) Underclass The ranking assuming we eradicate the Semitic dark ages: Europe, China, India, Iran-Assyria-Babylon, Egypt Mesoamerica, Semitia(Jewish Muslim), S-Pacific, E Africa, W Africa Africa, S Africa, Austronesia The only hard choice being Iran vs India and that choice possible only because the Persians were not able to shake off Islam and reassert Persian civilization despite efforts just as the Germans can’t sake of Christianity despite their efforts and reassert germanic civilization. If something had not ‘gone wrong’ in India she would have produced the best culture with time. It may be climate and a demographic curse. But I don’t quite understand what went wrong yet but I”ll figure it out. I think we understand what went wrong with Persia and Germania. And Russia, Germania, and china are our fault for not letting Russia retake orthodoxy, not letting Germany retake Europe, and not letting MacArthur and Patton finish the job of the second world war with Russia and China.
Dec 28, 2019, 4:52 PM We focus largely on the law but not on the other innovations in the Propertarian program: Yes, Propertarianism consists of a set of innovations 1. Grammars (metaphysics) 2. Testimonialism (epistemology) 3. Acquisitionism and Propertarianism – Together making possible strictly constructed law (ethics) But we also have: 4: Cooperationism, Compatibilism, Cognitive division of labor This means that we specialize, largely along lines of gender cognition and age, in a division of perception, cognition, advocacy, and negotiation. And then we ‘calculate’ by discovering opportunities to cooperate across the spectrum of population, time, and space. So we function as a neural network that discovers opportunities despite variations in our division of labor in perceiving and comprehending the world. And we also have: 5. The Ternary Logic of Political Science. Let’s look at this a bit There are three states of logic, in order: 1. False 2. Truth candidate (actionable) 3. Undecidable (In-actionable) There are three options to cooperation 1. avoidance (ostracization) 2. exchange (cooperation) 3. predation-parasitism (conflict) There are three means of coercion 1. Remuneration (deprivation of trade, or benefit from trade) Middle class – Libertarian Meritocratic 2. Force (imposition of harm, defense from harm) Upper class – Conservative Eugenic 3. Undermining (ostracizing/inhibiting opportunity, including/generating opportunity) Under Class – Progressive Dysgenic There are three axes of elites 1. Scientific, Technical, Entrepreneurial, Financial, Treasury 2. Military, juridical, Police, Sheriff, Militia 3. Priests, Politicians, Public Intellectuals We can organize by three axes of elites (cooperate by) 1. Production and Evolution (Europe) 2. Administration and Stagnation (strong: China, weak: India) 3. Parasitism and Degeneration (Semitia, gypsies) We can rule by three axes of decidability 1. Science and Law (Europe) 2. Reason and Command (china India) 3. Sophistry and Propaganda (Semitia) We can govern by three axis 1. Markets, Law, Courts, (Europe) Middle Class 2. Bureaucracy (china) Upper class 3. Priesthood (Semitia) Underclass The ranking assuming we eradicate the Semitic dark ages: Europe, China, India, Iran-Assyria-Babylon, Egypt Mesoamerica, Semitia(Jewish Muslim), S-Pacific, E Africa, W Africa Africa, S Africa, Austronesia The only hard choice being Iran vs India and that choice possible only because the Persians were not able to shake off Islam and reassert Persian civilization despite efforts just as the Germans can’t sake of Christianity despite their efforts and reassert germanic civilization. If something had not ‘gone wrong’ in India she would have produced the best culture with time. It may be climate and a demographic curse. But I don’t quite understand what went wrong yet but I”ll figure it out. I think we understand what went wrong with Persia and Germania. And Russia, Germania, and china are our fault for not letting Russia retake orthodoxy, not letting Germany retake Europe, and not letting MacArthur and Patton finish the job of the second world war with Russia and China.
Dec 31, 2019, 12:54 PM (important)(core) A grammar has traditionally referred to a book containing the rules of a language. But I had to put quite a bit of work into ‘disambiguating’ the terms we use in language. The human cognitive facility consists of identification of constant relations between stimuli in time resulting in categorization (identity). The human auto association facility consists of discovering relations between categories (identities). The human memory facility consists of repetition of stimuli or rehearsal from short term memory, to create, reinforce, change, and eliminate constant relation within and between categories (locations, places, barriers, models, identities) The human logical facility consist of tests of constant, inconstant, and unrecognized relations between states (categories, identities). The human grammar facility refers to our physical ability to perform continuous recursive disambiguation using a stream of signals, most commonly in the form of sounds. The human language facility refers to the use of patterns of symbols or sounds in sequence of continuously recursive attempts at disambiguation. A language consists of Phonemes (sounds), Morphemes(meaningful combination of sounds – roots), Vocabulary (words), Phrases (state), Sentences (changes in state – transactions), Stories (collections of transactions), Grammar (rules of organization making possible disambiguation by inference), and Syntax (further disambiguation – specifically when writing). A vocabulary consists of Names (Nouns, references to referents), Name Substitutes (pronouns), Properties (Adjective, state), Operations (verbs, actions, state of acting), Properties of Operations (Adverb). and Approval or Rejection (yes no true false agree disagree etc). Note that I’ve clarified some terms here a little differently than we traditionally do. However (this is the issue) the collections of permissible dimensions (paradigms) limit the rules of continuous recursive disambiguation: The logic of the paradigm. This is why…. Let’s use math because it’s the most simple language we have that all of us share. Mathematics consists of names of positions (numbers), variables (pronouns), names of operations ( mathematical operations, verbs), phrases (expressions), statements (functions), sentences (transactions), proofs (stories), and Approval or Rejection (true false). There are no adverbs or adjectives. What differs between ordinary language and mathematical language is that mathematics (the language of positional names) and ordinary language (the language of human experience) differ in ‘dimensions of permissible references’ to both Names (nouns) and Operations (verbs). And we can do the same analysis for every Grammar (system of rules) in the spectrum of: math, accounting, logics, programming, physics, chemistry, biochemistry, recipes, protocols, laws, testimony, descriptions, ordinary language, narration, storytelling, fictions, fictionalisms, and deceits – and everything in between. And we use the term “Deflationary grammar” for the narrowest grammars (math, logics), “ordinary grammar” for ordinary language, and “Inflationary grammar” for the widest grammars (story, fiction, fictionalism, deceits). Deflationary < —- Ordinary —-> Inflationary. So instead of the traditional hierarchy: Human Facilities -> language -> phoneme -> morpheme -> paradigms (metaphysics and resulting semantics) -> vocabulary -> grammar -> syntax. Instead we have: Human Facilities (see above) -> vocabulary -> paradigms(dimensions) -> grammar of paradigm(rules of story, transaction, function, expression, operation, names: the LOGIC of the paradigm) -> permissible vocabulary -> necessary syntax. So a Grammar refers to the Paradigm (permissible dimensions of perception, cognition, and action), the Names, Operations, and Rules of Continuous Recursive Disambiguation (morpheme, word, phrase, sentence, story organization) and the LOGIC (constant relations) that limit consistency, correspondence, coherence, and completeness. So in P we use a ‘grammar’ to refer to the Vocabulary, logic, syntax of a paradigm. And when we use the term “the Grammars’ we mean the spectrum And Operational Grammar or Testimony is a Deflationary Grammar: a Deflation (constraint upon) ordinary language grammar, limiting it to a single point of view, absent the verb to be, using complete promissory sentences, describing a series of operations (human actions), resulting in testable transactions (sentence), and sets of transactions (testimony). Edit