If you can’t define the series of constant relations to which the word you’re using belongs, you do not understand the word.
Source date (UTC): 2019-11-24 19:16:32 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1198681824844812288
If you can’t define the series of constant relations to which the word you’re using belongs, you do not understand the word.
Source date (UTC): 2019-11-24 19:16:32 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1198681824844812288
If you can’t define the series of constant relations to which the word you’re using belongs, you do not understand the word.
Source date (UTC): 2019-11-24 14:16:00 UTC
that’s the justification, what’s the cause?
Source date (UTC): 2019-11-23 17:24:57 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1198291355673518081
Reply addressees: @d_hemlock
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1198277873758605312
IN REPLY TO:
Original post on X
Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1198277873758605312
(pet peeve) The reason for pervasive pseudoscience in psych is the absence of operational logic yielding (a) falsification of hypotheses, and (b) cueing us to seek equilibrating influences. If you can’t do physics, economics, phil-of-science, you can’t do human science (well). https://twitter.com/DegenRolf/status/1198147553948246016
Source date (UTC): 2019-11-23 14:14:19 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1198243383560548352
(NOTES)
CONTEXT
Context of this, the Aristotelian(scale) and enlightenment (scale), and how the work contains the same degree of reformation.
Because each time we run into the problems of scale – scaling ARISTOCRACY as fast a we scale MARKETS made possible by aristocracy.
And we have this problem of scale because we don’t know why we have been successful – we just do it.
So I explain why we were what we did what we do and now you won’t have to just intuit it as moral or not. You can explain it.
PREFACE FOR CRITICS
This is an adult conversation about the most important topic of our century. If you need to work to understand it, that’s simply true. John can help you. John and others will teach.
Do you really understand the declaration, constitution, bill of rights, supreme court rulings, and federal code? or do you morally intuit them. I can test that theory if you’d like and I bet you won’t like the results.
So try to imagine how stupid you sound when you say you want something simple. There is nothing simple. If it was simple we wouldn’t have had the social conflict of the 20th and 21st century.
I have the patience for questions. I dont have the patience for the intellectually dishonest, overconfident ignorant or immoral – I work too hard every day to spend time on that.
SO WHAT DOES A CONSTITUTION NEED TO COVER?
What is the current problem – we can’t solve it if we can’t define it and most current confusion is over failure to define it.
Why are we in this condition
How can we fix this problem.
What benefits do we gain from fixing the problem.
What are the costs and consequences of fixing it.
And… what are the costs if we just go to civil war.
SECTIONS
There are roughly four sections.
1 – The Indictment, is an overall explanation of the success of the european peoples and why we are in this problem today.
2 – The Law is a technical description of the Natural Law. It’s sort of like learning programming language. Because its very much like one.
3 – The Prosecution and Crimes
4 – The Judgement and Enforcement.
FUTURE ORIENTED GRAND STRATEGY
(last video)
CONCEPTUAL DIFFERENCES
Whereas our original constitution was an experiment in governing under the common natural law, this constitution repairs weaknesses in that constitution, and common law.
Common law differs from continental law in that….
We obsess over government, but we this constitution obsesses on law and rule of law. We tend to focus on governments because our laws are weak. when if we have better laws, the method of governing matters far less.
CORRECT OUR BIGGEST ERRORS
Repeating the Error of Monarchy MONOPOLY:
Conflating rule and governance has been one of our three largest errors:
1) conflating rule and governance
2) not expanding houses for the classes.
3) repeating the roman error of the unearned franchise.
4) majority monopoly rather than market.
5) Monarchy. Better to think of monarchies as intergenerational custodians. It is clearly better to have intergenerational families make profits or loss from rule (arts and limits) and a rotating middle class for governance (commons).
PRIMARY DIFFERENCES
1. The primary improvement in the constitution is to increase the ability of the law to criminalize the saturation of the people with disinformation misinformation and lies in order to profit from manipulating them and fostering conflicts between them for profit. The 20th was largely an era of pseudoscience, lies, sophism and economic and financial innumeracy (a kind of pseudoscience) that created our current crisis.
2. The second is to restore the constitution to its original intent, and a continuation of the european civilizational project, which is a continental military, judicial, and trade union, as we had in Europe throughout most of our history – even though we don’t think of the church as a weak political judiciary that was largely it’s political function. So a restoration of he constitution to a constitution of the european peoples in the european tradition.
3. The third is controversial, which is solving the failure of integration the failure of multiculturalism, and the failure of the marxist-feminist-postmodern program to produce other than illusory improvements at the cost of destruction of the family and rates of reproduction. And that is a set of choices – I only recommend a set of them – of escalating unpleasantness. This is where we will find conflict.
4. The fourth doesn’t really consist of much policy so much as a set of restitutions to compensate for the crimes of the 20th and 21st century, so that we restore our civilization and our families, and the benefits of our ‘third way’ of civilizational order. There won’t be a lot of conflict here. And it’s what most people want from our government anyway.
OFFEND EVERYONE
There is something to offend everyone. Your offense is part of the cost of any solution.
Naming the enemy and the enemies and explaining their strategy in detail is not something I’ve treated gently – just the opposite. And that’s what will start the escalation in both directions.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction – summary of the case
Declaration – to mirror the original in content
Preamble – how this modifies the existing constitution
Article I – Man – Definitions
Article II – The Law – What it is and how to write it.
Article III – Rights and Obligations – everyone has under the law
so notice that the law is before and higher than the state or the government.
Article IV – The Court
Article V – The State
Article V Section I – The State
Article V Section II – The Military, Regiments, and Militia
Article V Section III – The Treasury
Article V Section IV – The Insurer of Last Resort
Article VI – The Government of the State
Article VII – The Governments of the Several States
Article VIII – The People
Article IX – The Economy
Article X – The Commons
Article XI – Commerce and Cooperation
Article XII – Marriage, Family, Children
Article XIII – Training: Religion, Fitness, Education, Training,
Article XIV – The Territories, Monuments, Arts, and Letters
Article XV – Articles of Devolution
Article XVI – Restitutions and Punishments
Addenda
Threats, Charges, and Duties (“The Black Pages”)
Letters of Marque
====
PICK YOUR GOVERNMENT
Think about that question for a moment.
What protection did our founders intend?
What protection do we have now?
What is the ultimate protection that we CAN have?
Globalism
or
Nationalism
… Ethnocentrism
… … Homogeneity
… … … Conformity
… … … … Subject of Law
… … … … … individual
… … … … … or;
… … … … … individual and collective
… … … … Subject of Policy
… … … … … Extended Intergenerational Family
… … … … … or;
… … … … … Nuclear Intergenerational Family;
… … … … … or;
… … … … … Individual
… … … … Subject of Polity
… … … … … Consumption (dysgenia)
… … … … … or;
… … … … … Capitalization (eugenia)
and (Limits)
Rule by Priesthood (tradition? wisdom?) (Islam)
… Rule by Justification (Supernatural)
or
Rule by Politicians (discretion)(europe)
… Rule by Discretion (Sophistry)
or
Rule of Law (non-discretion)(old-usa)
…Rule of Law (Technology)
and Judiciary (Resolution of Disputes)
… Constitution
… … Supreme Court
… … … Courts of Appeals
… … … … Regional Courts
… … … … … Specialty Courts
… … … … … … Professional Judiciary (judges)
… … … … … … … Professional Officers of Court (law)
… … … … … … … … Prof.l Property Finance, Banking (title)
… … … … … … … … … Prof Insurers
and (Production of Commons)
Government (Closure: final decision maker)
… Dictator
… or
… Monarchy
… or
… President
… or
… Prime Minister
and (selection of commons)
… … … cabinet
… … or
… … … Jury (veto) of appropriations
… … or (representation)
… … … Senate-lords
… … … or
… … … Parliament and senate-lords
… … … or
… … … Lower house(families),
… … … Middle house(parliament/business), and
… … … … Upper house (senate-lords/territories)
… … or (direct participation)
… … … direct proportional democracy
… … … or
… … … direct economic democracy (by who pays)
and Services (Assets)
… … Military
… … … Standing
… … … … Warfighters
… … … … Professional Technical
… … … … Logistics and Supply
… … … … Medical and Care
… … … Regiments (Local Part time)
… … … Reserves( those who have served )
… … … Militia (every able bodied citizen)
… … Infrastructure (assets)
… … Insurer (emergency, disasters, etc)
… … Treasury
and Administration (Operations)
… … … Bureaucracy
… … … or
… … … Bureaucracy – Private Partnership
… … … or
… … … Competing Private Contractors
… … … or
… … … Private Mandatory Public Service
and Participation (participation)
… … … … Maximally Earned Franchise
… … … … Minimally Earned Franchise
… … … … Citizenship Franchise
… … … … Resident Franchise
… … … … Genetic Franchise
Source date (UTC): 2019-11-21 17:37:00 UTC
So you know, in my work, I study the progress of the technique of lying, and in particular the techniques of lying by suggestion, false promise, and sophism, pseudoscience, innumeracy, and the occult, and how those lies are used to manipulate the public: Economics and Social Sci.
Source date (UTC): 2019-11-21 17:06:42 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1197561990442618881
Reply addressees: @Steve_Adema @sapinker
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1197560942931972103
IN REPLY TO:
@Steve_Adema
@curtdoolittle @sapinker Pinker never tries to claim ‘net harms’ are declining. I don’t even know how one could even approach trying to measure something so expansive. Collecting historical data for violent deaths seemed hard enough, let alone getting nuanced data like non-physical harm.
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1197560942931972103
This is the problem with the left of center “Pseudo -Intellectual’ public intellectuals: They produce what sells but is only half true and that’s because they rely on correlations not as economists or physicists: OPERATIONALISMS. Tell the WHOLE truth not half-truth: lying.
Source date (UTC): 2019-11-21 15:41:43 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1197540602172334082
Reply addressees: @Steve_Adema @sapinker
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1197539953317679104
IN REPLY TO:
Unknown author
@Steve_Adema @sapinker All Steven is saying is what every other economist says: harms are NOT decreasing, it’s just that physical crimes are more costly and less profitable than at any previous time in history. So why not state Whole Truth? Another system of lies like Boas, Freud, Marx, Cantor? See?
Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1197539953317679104
IN REPLY TO:
@curtdoolittle
@Steve_Adema @sapinker All Steven is saying is what every other economist says: harms are NOT decreasing, it’s just that physical crimes are more costly and less profitable than at any previous time in history. So why not state Whole Truth? Another system of lies like Boas, Freud, Marx, Cantor? See?
Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1197539953317679104
Hmmm… Define “True”. b/c True = Sufficient to satisfy the demand for infallibility given the decision in question. It doesn’t matter what S believes, only what S warranties. Self reporting and reporting have little if any correspondence with demonstrated behavior.
Source date (UTC): 2019-11-20 23:55:23 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1197302448500756482
Reply addressees: @analytic_philo
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1197294219544662016
IN REPLY TO:
@analytic_philo
If you think your mere opinion is knowledge, you’re totally wrong. Knowledge is justified true believe, as Plato put it. Nowadays, philosophers say that:
S knows that P
if and only if
i) P is true,
ii) S believes that P and
iii) S has a justification for believing in P. https://t.co/uott3iIfuI
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1197294219544662016
High investment parenting in WHAT? Complete sentences are really useful for ‘outing’ sophisms that cause auto-suggestion, thereby making you think both parties are saying the same thing.
(Abrahamic technique of deceit is everywhere)
Source date (UTC): 2019-11-20 22:45:15 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1197284801650266112
Reply addressees: @_JJ_14
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1197277724504723456
IN REPLY TO:
Original post on X
Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1197277724504723456
—The lost virtue of “I don’t know”—Steve Pender
Source date (UTC): 2019-11-20 15:45:39 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1197179203797618693