Category: Human Behavior and Cognitive Science

IS THE BIG LIE ULTIMATELY JUST SOCIAL CONSTRUCTIVISM?

Pretty much. Social construction is how the big lies are created. But let’s go a little deeper and understand why.

—-“Among the most intriguing ideas for improving fairness in our economy–and creating capitalism that earns popular support–is “universal basic capital.” Spread the equity, give all a stake. “—Jonathan Haidt @JonHaidt

https://berggruen.org/the-worldpost/articles/sharing-the-wealth-as-we-recover-health/

Consensus, getting heads together, leadership, these are all village-thinking. The female intuition doesn’t scale. We have institutions and rule of law of tort for a reason – it scales, at the cost of suppressing the reproduction of the underclasses, keeping natural selection.

It wasn’t europeans that developed global religion, global marxism, global socialism, global cosmopolitanism, global postmodernism, global hbd-denialism, or europeans that undermined rule of law.

It was feminine intuition, and people of it, that cannot scale.

—” is the big lie ultimately just social constructivism?

So they try to do social engineering that achieves nothing except psychologically abusing people.”—

Social construction yes. Social construction requires a false promise. The only viable false promises that scale are those that violate physical, natural, and evolutionary laws. Violating those laws baits the victims into hazard.

Female social construction > ((())) > The Left.

Female Social Construction to Manage behavioral growth of children, using her seduction > The ((())) group strategy (undermining host peoples, while riding on their commons) > The Anti Evolutionary (domestication) Canon: Freud, Boas, Marx, Adorno-Fromm, Derrida, Trotsky-Kristol.

So if ((())) war on western-sensemaking, our realism, naturalism, operationalism, sovereignty, reciprocity, testimony, commons, and eugenics, is a continuation of their ancient world rebellion against the masculine empires, and an involuntary rebellion against evolution-eugenics.

This means if it’s genetic, as it is in our women,it’s irreparable, and separation is the only possibility. If it’s purely cultural (doesn’t appear to be) then it’s a matter of separating from their culture. Either way we have to outlaw it by requiring truthful reciprocal speech.

Which is the purpose of my work on the law: to end the repeatedly successful use of abrahamic technique at destroying civilizations from within by false promise, baiting into hazard, selling to vulnerable women and the underclasses, and reversing east and west eugenics.

We don’t need to increase ‘fairness’ or ‘social justice’ neither of which are either definable or measureable, but we need to return to suppression of the reproduction of those that cannot compete in the suite of market tests at whatever level of development that we’re in.