(FB 1541903425 Timestamp) THE FIRST PRINCIPLES Once you understand that we are “The People of The Law” and that “Truth is enough” and “Via Negativa” produces markets that calculate what a man cannot reason, the rest will fall into place. It is simply difficult to acquire those three cognitive habits.
Category: Natural Law and Reciprocity
-
Our Solution – and Our Limited Function in It.
(FB 1541945323 Timestamp) OUR SOLUTION – AND OUR LIMITED FUNCTION IN IT. 1) We are the JUDGES of the NATURAL LAW – the JUDGES of our polity. “Those Who State Limits.” 2) There are warriors, artists, scientists, engineers, craftsman, doctors, and mothers. Their jobs are ‘what shall we do and ‘how shall we do it’. Our job in the division of labor – a division of unequal knowledge and function – but equal duty and responsibility. 3) Signals alone will drive excellence out of what we shall do, if natural law is imposed upon them since the GOOD and EXCELLENT are the only means possible available to them. 4) Our men will build valhalla because we leave them no other choice. Our men will make immortality because we leave them no other choice. Our men will reach the stars because we leave them no other choice. We do not need instruct them to do so because we leave them no other choice. 5) As judges we must prosecute violators of the natural law. No matter who, where, and when they may be. 6) Our way is War: to eliminate that which is bad – leaving those with less agency to produce only that which is good. We parent mankind by this means alone. Not by telling them what to do. But by telling them what not to do, and leaving them to discover all possible means of doing what else they may do? It is for the lesser people – all who have failed – to anchor their people in an era by stating that which they must or should do other than avoid or defeat that which is false or bad. The uniqueness of western civilization is sovereignty reciprocity truth, duty, and the law – producing markets of the good by eliminating the bad, and thereby continuously calculating our transformation into gods – omniscient and omnipotent – by the fastest means possible: trial and error.
-
The First Principles
(FB 1541903425 Timestamp) THE FIRST PRINCIPLES Once you understand that we are “The People of The Law” and that “Truth is enough” and “Via Negativa” produces markets that calculate what a man cannot reason, the rest will fall into place. It is simply difficult to acquire those three cognitive habits.
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1541964384 Timestamp) THE ENEMY DOESN’T REQUIRE INTENT, ONLY FAILURE OF DUE DILIGENCE by John Mark This is massively important. Being sincerely wrong because you didn’t do due diligence (you didn’t study and question your priors sufficiently) is just as destructive as being malicious. And it allows you to be a useful idiot tool in the hands of those who would destroy all we value. This is why I have started telling civnats that still believe in the false religion of equality, “You are my enemy, because you are unwittingly working for my enemy, and until you fix that, I must treat you as an enemy.”
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1541989411 Timestamp) —“Our enemy always counts on the assumption that we are above doing to them what they readily do to us.”—Matt Evans When we leave our first offering to Vlad Tepes that assumption will dissipate immediately. 😉
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1541989411 Timestamp) —“Our enemy always counts on the assumption that we are above doing to them what they readily do to us.”—Matt Evans When we leave our first offering to Vlad Tepes that assumption will dissipate immediately. 😉
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1542122872 Timestamp) THE CENTRAL ARGUMENT 1) We lack agency. Our genes provide intuitionistic decidability. That intuitionistic decidability in matters of cooperation can be expressed on a spectrum from psychotic and solipsistic to ‘normie’ to analytic and autistic. This spectrum describes the differences in male and female brain structures (see Baron Cohen.). We assume we are making choices but we are not. We are merely following instinct. In this distribution the male and female brains produce biases that reflect their caloric and reproductive demands, with female the herd,r,offspring, and male,k,pack and this measurement shows up in all aspects of life from METHOD OF SPEECH, content of gossip, chatter, and banter, selection of terms, means of argument, value judgements, personality profile differences, job selection, time allocation, consumer product purchases, voting records. However, given the industrial technological era, and the independence of females from demand for male income we are seeing demand for ‘fulfillment’ (divergence) in not only gender preferences (toward the extremes) but in class and reproductive preferences (insurance from risk, vs achievement liberty). The more equal the more we diverge in demand for fulfillment of our reproductive strategies. At present we have those of us who prefer to separate from those of you. We experience you as ‘disgusting’ whereas you see fear we see disgust. This is because you are setting off our ‘harm to the tribe’ response. This is also genetic on our end. Truth, Loyalty, Purity are all anti-disgust demands. So in our perception of the world, you are not fully human, but simply semi-domesticated animals that can speak. We do not say this but it is how we perceive you. So we prefer to satisfy our disgust response they way you want to satisfy your fear of being left behind response, and separate from you. The alternative is warfare. Which is frankly more desirable but less profitable. 2) Ethnocentrism is the optimum group evolutionary strategy, nationalism the optimum means of protecting it, nomocracy and markets in everything, the optimum means of political order to achieving it, and soft eugenics (regulating underclass rates of reproduction) a necessity of defeating regression to the mean, such that demographics correspond to states of development rather than regress the standards of living, because together they produce rates of adaptation faster than all possible alternatives. The mediocre seek safety in the herd and speech and defense from the pack. The exceptional seek achievement and action – and to leave its dead weight behind. We can afford to speciate by reproductive strategy. You and yours are welcome to speciate by your preferred means, if me and mine are by our preferred means. That is reciprocity. If we cannot agree to reciprocity, then defeat, conquest, enserfment, enslavement, and extermination are preferable to loss. The Herd seeks equality, proportionality, and the Pack hierarchy and reciprocity. These are genetic and therefore intuitionistic and pre-cognitive expressions of fitness for social orders. So we can Revolt, Separate, Prosper (or not), and Speciate or we can war. The coming civil war is not over race – it is over our new found wealth sufficient to speciate. Or in historical terms, we continue the conflict between masculine indo-european-asian and feminine anatolian-semitic-afro-asiatic. This means that we have the opportunity to exit the unfit from our order, and the undesirable from yours. Or we have the opportunity to have the bloodiest conflict in human history – and one that it is very hard to imagine the ‘right’ will not win. The people who talk, teach, and preach, vs the people who act, produce, and invent. If this isn’t acceptable to your and yours, then enemies you choose to be. So, this is why we must separate. We don’t need to agree. It’s just going to happen. So the question is only how unpleasant it will be.
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1542122872 Timestamp) THE CENTRAL ARGUMENT 1) We lack agency. Our genes provide intuitionistic decidability. That intuitionistic decidability in matters of cooperation can be expressed on a spectrum from psychotic and solipsistic to ‘normie’ to analytic and autistic. This spectrum describes the differences in male and female brain structures (see Baron Cohen.). We assume we are making choices but we are not. We are merely following instinct. In this distribution the male and female brains produce biases that reflect their caloric and reproductive demands, with female the herd,r,offspring, and male,k,pack and this measurement shows up in all aspects of life from METHOD OF SPEECH, content of gossip, chatter, and banter, selection of terms, means of argument, value judgements, personality profile differences, job selection, time allocation, consumer product purchases, voting records. However, given the industrial technological era, and the independence of females from demand for male income we are seeing demand for ‘fulfillment’ (divergence) in not only gender preferences (toward the extremes) but in class and reproductive preferences (insurance from risk, vs achievement liberty). The more equal the more we diverge in demand for fulfillment of our reproductive strategies. At present we have those of us who prefer to separate from those of you. We experience you as ‘disgusting’ whereas you see fear we see disgust. This is because you are setting off our ‘harm to the tribe’ response. This is also genetic on our end. Truth, Loyalty, Purity are all anti-disgust demands. So in our perception of the world, you are not fully human, but simply semi-domesticated animals that can speak. We do not say this but it is how we perceive you. So we prefer to satisfy our disgust response they way you want to satisfy your fear of being left behind response, and separate from you. The alternative is warfare. Which is frankly more desirable but less profitable. 2) Ethnocentrism is the optimum group evolutionary strategy, nationalism the optimum means of protecting it, nomocracy and markets in everything, the optimum means of political order to achieving it, and soft eugenics (regulating underclass rates of reproduction) a necessity of defeating regression to the mean, such that demographics correspond to states of development rather than regress the standards of living, because together they produce rates of adaptation faster than all possible alternatives. The mediocre seek safety in the herd and speech and defense from the pack. The exceptional seek achievement and action – and to leave its dead weight behind. We can afford to speciate by reproductive strategy. You and yours are welcome to speciate by your preferred means, if me and mine are by our preferred means. That is reciprocity. If we cannot agree to reciprocity, then defeat, conquest, enserfment, enslavement, and extermination are preferable to loss. The Herd seeks equality, proportionality, and the Pack hierarchy and reciprocity. These are genetic and therefore intuitionistic and pre-cognitive expressions of fitness for social orders. So we can Revolt, Separate, Prosper (or not), and Speciate or we can war. The coming civil war is not over race – it is over our new found wealth sufficient to speciate. Or in historical terms, we continue the conflict between masculine indo-european-asian and feminine anatolian-semitic-afro-asiatic. This means that we have the opportunity to exit the unfit from our order, and the undesirable from yours. Or we have the opportunity to have the bloodiest conflict in human history – and one that it is very hard to imagine the ‘right’ will not win. The people who talk, teach, and preach, vs the people who act, produce, and invent. If this isn’t acceptable to your and yours, then enemies you choose to be. So, this is why we must separate. We don’t need to agree. It’s just going to happen. So the question is only how unpleasant it will be.
-
(FB 1542389587 Timestamp) FOR NEWBS: UNDERSTANDING PROPERTARIANISM AS THE EXTENS
(FB 1542389587 Timestamp) FOR NEWBS: UNDERSTANDING PROPERTARIANISM AS THE EXTENSION OF THE SCIENCES Propertarianism Consists of The Formal Logic of Natural Law: Psychology, Sociology, Politics, Group Evolutionary Strategy, as An Completion of The Laws of Nature. Originally I called it “capitalismv3” until I realized how erroneous that title was: I was doing the law, and economics only a part of it. Then I moved to calling it propertarianism. Then, once I understood what I was doing, I correctly labeled it Natural Law. The problem is that “Natural Law” has a long history of appropriation like “liberalism” and false criticism like “national socialism”. And is framed as a philosophical justification(excuse) rather than a scientific decidability (truth). And we had already built a brand around Propertarianism. So, we keep the ‘Brand’ Propertarianism for the simple reason that it was the ‘propertarians’ that I evolved the work out of, and the brand awareness is such that it’s hard to change at this point – and while it is only partially descriptive (referring to the unit of measure in psychology, sociology, ethics, politics and group strategy) , and could equally be called Testimonialism (truthful speech), or Vitruvianism or operationalism (universal system of measurement system by demonstrable human actions), or The Law of Conscious Beings (Any coopertting being must work by this set of decisions to survive), we retain Propertarianism and Natural Law out of situational convenience. , However, as this image illustrates, we have just COMPLETED the SCIENCES by expanding the scientific method into the social and psychological sciences. PROPERTARIANISM = THE NATURAL LAW. You should understand this then as the Application of the scientific method to the social sciences. and as such that we are learning a SCIENCE that will take you YEARS TO MASTER not a philosophy that you can read a book and add to your catalog of frames. PHYSICAL LAW OF TRANSFORMATION (INVOLUNTARY) EVOLVES INTO THE NATURAL LAW OF COOPERATION (VOLUNTARY) AS AN EXTENSION OF THOSE SAME LAWS. We can state these fundamental laws, Logically, Empirically, or operationally. Unfortunately, in the twentieth century, due to the ‘mathification’ of physics, and the ‘idealism’ of mathematics, due to the lack of a ‘model’, information has been LOST, that on the re-operationalizatoin of physics (undiscovered fundamental-wave, subatomic-particle, atomic, chemical, biological, sentient-cognizant, rational-calculable-computable), Psychology (Acquisitionism), Sociology (cooperation), law (decidability, organization), accounting-finance-economics (information, units of measure, measurements), is necessary to obtain the same benefits between sentient (feeling, evaluating, responding), aware (remembering, comparing), conscious (choosing), calculating (reasoning, calculating, computing) objects, as those objects that cannot detect and respond to changes in state. In other words, due to a lack of a model, the model-less-ness of mathematical idealism has worked through logic, and physics, and now into philosophy, ethics, and politics. just as theology did in the ancient world – producing similar ignorances. The Operational Movement (restoration of the model ) failed in the early part of the 20th century, and the postwar reaction against darwin (which is the model like it or not) and turing (which is the model, like it or not) because of eugenics (which is the optimum method of progression of human existence like it or not – just as was physics in the 17th-20th centuries, like it or not).
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1542386080 Timestamp) IT DOESN’T TAKE 30 YEARS TO SPEAK IN THE NATURAL LAW. IT TAKES AS LONG AS A DEGREE IN THE LAW —“In 30 years maybe I’ll have Curt’s ability to summarise this well.”— Regarding: ( “….No Marxist, postmodern, feminist revolution is possible because the competence structure necessary for the preservation of human standards of living cannot tolerate any other distribution than the Pareto…..”) Just to comfort you … it takes four years on average if you try to construct and repeat the arguments. There are people who are faster and take a year or so, but only four so far. We have pre-complied many of the arguments. We are in the process of refining them today into Definitions, Series (this>that>that-other), Aphorisms, and Maxisms, (like the quote above) that can be memorized rather than reinvented each time you want to use them. So it depends on age (younger is easier), personality (observers, lower agreeableness), and whether you have experience in philosophy of science, programming, economics, and history, so that you either have an existing framework, or so that you are not so ‘addicted’ to analogies and literature that (really) induce a form of ignorance through imprecision. Evidence is that if you are drawn to philosophy and theology it might be an impediment – although not always. Philosophy and theology as practiced are a significant part of the problem: fantasy literature.