Category: Natural Law and Reciprocity

  • YES I GO AFTER EVERYONE – BECAUSE UNITY IS ONLY POSSIBLE ON WHAT WE AGREE ON: SE

    YES I GO AFTER EVERYONE – BECAUSE UNITY IS ONLY POSSIBLE ON WHAT WE AGREE ON: SELF DETERMINATION, SOVEREIGNTY AND RECIPROCITY.

    The law is the only neutral territory between factions. Just as science is the only neutral territory between factions. Because law and science are the same.

    I go after the left because I have solved the problem of the left, and everyone agrees on it. The left lies to steal. And they lie to steal because they are unfit to compete in an advanced economy. Or because they gain social status by virtue signaling for finding a place in it. It’s not complicated. They lie to steal or defraud.

    The left was easy – they put herd before self-confidence. (For obvious reasons of female seeking advantage by self-sacrifice to the herd.)

    The right isn’t easy – they put self-confidence before the pack. (For obvious male reasons of seeking advantage using whatever abilities they have.)

    I go after the NS because they are the impulsive ‘slow kids’ of the Europeans, that can’t imagine the difficulty of large complex organizations, and how large complex organizations must be run: by general rules we call legislation, regulation, and law.

    I go after WN because they are the correct, experienced, but unsophisticated kids of the Europeans, that can’t imagine that the conservative tendency to distill ideas to the reductive leads to failure – and that a more sophisticated strategy is necessary to win.

    I go after CN because they are willfully ignorant – and too comfortable to risk saving their civilization and are willing to ride the civilization to the bottom rather than save it.

    I go after our elites because they have abandoned our people – they have given up on trying to unite the self-absorbed egos of the right factions – they consider it a hopeless task. They don’t care any longer about our people or their future.

    I go after libertarians because they are the reasonably intelligent but self-absorbed naive boys that cannot imagine the minds of emotional people, and have no experience with large scale organizations, and therefore human nature.

    I go after Christians because they are indifferent from the left, they just promise life after death for belief in falsehood instead of prosperity before death for belief in falsehood.

    You don’t see pagans voting for democrats, teaching pseudoscience (creationism), sponsoring immigration, sponsoring tolerance, tolerating pedophiles, virtue signaling for belief (instead of actions), tolerating this nonsense.

    You see Christians doing it all day long.

    No respect for cowards hiding behind lies of fake virtue to excuse doing nothing but demanding better men solve their problems.

    Thats why christanity is femiine.

    “Men will do it”

    Because in history the male aristocracy DID do it.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-07-21 11:22:00 UTC

  • “The natural liberty of man is to be free from any superior power on Earth, and

    —“The natural liberty of man is to be free from any superior power on Earth, and not to be under the will or legislative authority of man, but only to have the law of nature for his rule.” — Samuel Adams (via josh moye)

    —“Not every individual can … https://t.co/w4FMF2Aoth

  • “The natural liberty of man is to be free from any superior power on Earth, and

    —“The natural liberty of man is to be free from any superior power on Earth, and not to be under the will or legislative authority of man, but only to have the law of nature for his rule.” — Samuel Adams (via josh moye)

    —“Not every individual can … https://ift.tt/2BhwvGB


    Source date (UTC): 2020-07-20 18:25:24 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1285279658976645122

  • “The natural liberty of man is to be free from any superior power on Earth, and

    —“The natural liberty of man is to be free from any superior power on Earth, and not to be under the will or legislative authority of man, but only to have the law of nature for his rule.” — Samuel Adams (via josh moye)

    —“Not every individual can practice Reciprocity in display word and deed. Every group can practice Rule of Law by Natural Law by getting rid of the members that can’t.”—Martin Štěpán

    —–“God is with us because only Europeans practice adherence to physical (entropy, conservation of energy), natural (reciprocity, testimony), and evolutionary laws (market eugenics, preventing regression). Only Europeans practice the Rule of Law by Natural Law. That is God’s Law.”— CDUpdated Jul 20, 2020, 2:25 PM


    Source date (UTC): 2020-07-20 14:25:00 UTC

  • “Not every individual can practice Reciprocity in display word and deed. Every g

    —“Not every individual can practice Reciprocity in display word and deed. Every group can practice Rule of Law by Natural Law by getting rid of the members that can’t.”—Martin Štěpán


    Source date (UTC): 2020-07-20 08:28:00 UTC

  • Me, or my job? In my job as ‘judge’, I decide the natural law by that which is t

    Me, or my job? In my job as ‘judge’, I decide the natural law by that which is testifiable. In my job as a ‘revolutionary’, I understand that there are multiple ‘faiths’ (priorities) and that Xianity is only one of them. And the only way to be neutral to all faiths is the law.

    Reply addressees: @sharpentheacts

  • Me, or my job? In my job as ‘judge’, I decide the natural law by that which is t

    Me, or my job? In my job as ‘judge’, I decide the natural law by that which is testifiable. In my job as a ‘revolutionary’, I understand that there are multiple ‘faiths’ (priorities) and that Xianity is only one of them. And the only way to be neutral to all faiths is the law.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-07-19 21:56:06 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1284970293153484801

    Reply addressees: @sharpentheacts

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1284968596486131715

  • Of Course, I was drawing that parallel on purpose.But what is the difference in

    Of Course, I was drawing that parallel on purpose.But what is the difference in the rule of law by the natural law of reciprocity that produced western achievements,and the Talmud (organized crime of baiting into hazard) and Islam (institutionalization of ignorance and dysgenia).

    Reply addressees: @Boyingtonfr @Gurdur @EnlightFundy

  • Of Course, I was drawing that parallel on purpose.But what is the difference in

    Of Course, I was drawing that parallel on purpose.But what is the difference in the rule of law by the natural law of reciprocity that produced western achievements,and the Talmud (organized crime of baiting into hazard) and Islam (institutionalization of ignorance and dysgenia).


    Source date (UTC): 2020-07-19 19:01:55 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1284926461804261382

    Reply addressees: @Boyingtonfr @Gurdur @EnlightFundy

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1284925513740374021

  • Succinct elegant argument. Only things I would add are first, that the market fo

    Succinct elegant argument. Only things I would add are first, that the market for incremental suppression of parasitism continuously expands with human innovation. Secondly that the returns on commons are so high that no polity can compete for survival without them. That’s because the market for commons defeats the market for government.

    —“I think your argument against the anarchist position can be simplified a little bit–

    Government is a business in the market of security. If the “morally” acceptable price of security is artificially capped at zero (as libertarians/anarchists insist), then there will be high demand for security, with little supply. This relationship (like any other market) leads to shortages. A shortage in the market of security means there will be lots of people that want security, but do not get it. The anarcho-capitalist “Moral” argument against government, is essentially the same as the communist “Moral” argument against profit – that is that the business owner does not have a right to seek a profit.

    Governments are essentially businesses, and they compete in the market of security, just as farmers compete in the market of corn. The market of security is not as efficient as markets like corn, because security is a ‘winner-take-all’ type of market. You are not making a utopian moral/immoral claim. You are simply making an observational statement of reality.

    If the anarchists are serious, they need to think of ways to compete in the market of security (thus lower its cost), instead of arbitrarily declaring profit-seeking in the market of security to be immoral.”—


    Source date (UTC): 2020-07-19 17:48:00 UTC