Mar 20, 2020, 11:24 AM Women got the vote because they were entering the workforce during the war; out of a feeling of moral gratitude for their having done so; and the government wanted to tax them, and the reason for the american revolution was ‘no taxation without representation’. In addition, they wanted to reduce the conflict postwar. women weren’t happy just ‘going home’ now that they could find work. Men wanted them to go home so that they could have their jobs bad. The politicians found women were more pliable (open to political manipulation) and so both parties cooperated on the integration of women. That’s the reason. There is nothing more complicated than that. War, labor shortage, women filled the shortage, tax revenues could be increased by women working at the cost of number of children. The only mistake was not giving women a separate house. This wasn’t such a big problem until the pill. The pill and jewish anti-male feminism were concerted efforts by the jewish socialists to undermine the family institution so that women could be used to undermine men. This is all well covered in the literature. Everyone knew what was going on. But it was regarded as a conspiracy theory. It was, but it was true.
Category: Politics, Power, and Governance
-
Tyler Cowen Says the Progressive Left Is Over
Tyler Cowen Says the Progressive Left Is Over https://propertarianism.com/2020/05/28/tyler-cowen-says-the-progressive-left-is-over/
Source date (UTC): 2020-05-28 20:44:20 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1266108062957539334
-
Tyler Cowen Says the Progressive Left Is Over
The Coronavirus Killed the Progressive Left – Marginal REVOLUTION marginalrevolution.com https://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2020/03/the-coronavirus-killed-the-progressive-left.html — The EGALITARIANISM of the progressive left also will seem like a faint memory. Elites are most likely to support wealth redistribution when they feel comfortable themselves, and indeed well-off coastal elites in California and the Northeast are a backbone of the progressive movement. But when these people feel threatened in their lives or occupations, or when the futures of their children suddenly seem less secure, redistribution will not be such a compelling ideal… — The case for MASS TRANSIT also will seem weaker, because subways and buses will be associated with the fear of Covid-19 transmission. In a similar fashion, the forces of NIMBY WILL BECOME STRONGER, relative to those of YIMBY, because people secure in their isolated suburban homes will feel less stressed than those in densely packed urban apartment buildings. — There is likely to be much MORE GOVERNMENT INTERVENTION in some parts of the health-care sector, but it will focus on scarce hospital beds and ventilators, and enforce nasty triage, rather than being a benevolent move toward universal coverage. If anything, it will drive home the message that SUPPLY CONSTRAINTS ARE BINDING AND AMERICA CAN’T HAVE EVERYTHING — hardly the traditional progressive message. — — The CLIMATE CHANGE MOVEMENT is likely to be another victim. How much have you heard about Greta Thunberg lately? Concern over the climate will seem like another luxury from safer and more normal times. In addition, the course of anti-Covid-19 efforts may not prove propitious for the climate change movement. If the fight against Covid-19 suddenly improves (perhaps a vaccine working very quickly?), Americans may come to expect the same in the fight against climate change.
-
Tyler Cowen Says the Progressive Left Is Over
The Coronavirus Killed the Progressive Left – Marginal REVOLUTION marginalrevolution.com https://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2020/03/the-coronavirus-killed-the-progressive-left.html — The EGALITARIANISM of the progressive left also will seem like a faint memory. Elites are most likely to support wealth redistribution when they feel comfortable themselves, and indeed well-off coastal elites in California and the Northeast are a backbone of the progressive movement. But when these people feel threatened in their lives or occupations, or when the futures of their children suddenly seem less secure, redistribution will not be such a compelling ideal… — The case for MASS TRANSIT also will seem weaker, because subways and buses will be associated with the fear of Covid-19 transmission. In a similar fashion, the forces of NIMBY WILL BECOME STRONGER, relative to those of YIMBY, because people secure in their isolated suburban homes will feel less stressed than those in densely packed urban apartment buildings. — There is likely to be much MORE GOVERNMENT INTERVENTION in some parts of the health-care sector, but it will focus on scarce hospital beds and ventilators, and enforce nasty triage, rather than being a benevolent move toward universal coverage. If anything, it will drive home the message that SUPPLY CONSTRAINTS ARE BINDING AND AMERICA CAN’T HAVE EVERYTHING — hardly the traditional progressive message. — — The CLIMATE CHANGE MOVEMENT is likely to be another victim. How much have you heard about Greta Thunberg lately? Concern over the climate will seem like another luxury from safer and more normal times. In addition, the course of anti-Covid-19 efforts may not prove propitious for the climate change movement. If the fight against Covid-19 suddenly improves (perhaps a vaccine working very quickly?), Americans may come to expect the same in the fight against climate change.
-
Notes from March 19th Curtis Yarvin Interview
Notes from March 19th Curtis Yarvin Interview https://propertarianism.com/2020/05/28/notes-from-march-19th-curtis-yarvin-interview/
Source date (UTC): 2020-05-28 20:41:04 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1266107244732653568
-
Notes from March 19th Curtis Yarvin Interview
Mar 21, 2020, 11:34 AM Curtis Yarvin Live at the Based Deleuze Release Party in LA (Mencius Moldbug) youtube.com youtube.com/watch?v=RRQO3VbJsMw& SPECTRUM: I’m 60 (Curt Doolittle). Curtis is in his 40’s. Justin is in his 30’s. The audience might be in their 20’s-30s. JUSTIN: 1 – There is an demand for intellectual life, intellectual discourse. You have to make it yourself. Put it on. If you build it they will come. 2 – Power Hungry Institutionalized CURTIS: 1 – Loosen’s up and gets comfortable about 35 minutes in. Then we see the ‘him’. Good. 2 – Makes the point that the american lesson of democracy failed by wilson’s acknowledgement of it. (I use the economics of the american experiment in expansion permitting the luxury of our incompetence). 3 – American revolution is the vietnam war in the 18th c where england is america. A civil conflict between two factions (whig/puritan against anglican). Created conflict in two segments of english society, in a cold war, but it was a hot war in america. The americans win the war. But because britain loses the will to fight. “Jefferson is a cringe”. Articles of Confederation… John Hanson the president of congress. It was so disastrous because of democracy (by adams). “We have to establish responsible aristocratic government.” Very much an aristocratic republic. 4 – Fear of the Other. We are the enlightened few. Historically this is not a ridiculous fear. Deep bitter loathing between upper and middle class. (Disagree: Status conflict between capital owners and producers and capital renters.) 5 – “If anything is going to work it will require an alliance of the three classes.” , “are we in the late roman republic or the late roman empire”. “the history of the republic is conflict between the classes”, (He doesn’t believe civil war is possible.) “With augustus this whole conflict goes away. One side wins the civil war. The side that wins is the military. They were unifiers. They claimed to restore the republic. But they were authoritarians. we’ve in practice created a monarchy. So augustus is more like FDR. A startup nation. Under augustus restarted because of caesar.’s use of the people (working men)’s violence”. “caesar captures cato’s headquarters. And finds a chest of letters from cato’s supporters (the old guard’s wealthy supporters). We are going to kill them (soros et all) and give it our friends (magas). (We don’t need to find the chest. it’s public information.) …. (I think more in Mao’s terms but the problem is the same.) (the spartan way is to find some hostile and burn down his house). 6 – “I don’t have any ideas or any big ideas … I disagree … the important thing is all negative: the absence of belief.” (I agree. He’s a practitioner of Critique which is his cultural background. I do solutions. That’s mine. But criticism is more fun. you don’t have to bet anything on it – just feel good about yourself. You have to risk to take solutions. That doesn’t mean that criticism fails to help us understand the problem that we DO need to solve. ) 7 – Agree on The Machiavellians as the most important book of politics in the 20th. (“The italian school of political science”, Mosca. Elements of political science / theory of the ruling class” Read Burnham instead. most political systems have divergence between formal power (supposed to work) vs objective power (who is really in charge). The reality of power and the formal legal reality of power diverge. (Hence my work on preventing that by providing a via-negativa market via the court). When appearance is powerless and symbolic, then the reality is unaccountable – especially when it’s distributed and bureaucratic. (Curtis isn’t mentioning the via negativa of monarchy, but that’s trivial.) 8 – The Times and the Post are part of the government. “The Department of Information” and it’s entirely unaccountable. The New York Times is an absolute hereditary monarchy.” (true). 9 – “Formalism and Sovcorps are old ideas that I emphasize differently.” This is what Curtis does that others don’t equal. He criticizes and explains with historical literary depth and excels at thought experiments to assist the audience. This is the value of an analyst and teacher. The fact that he doesn’t have solutions is not a failing. We get intelligent conversation that isn’t dumbed down or sentimental. The problem is the world wants solutions sold by someone who can explain them like curtis. We don’t have that person. QUESTIONS: Large number of small governments. Patchworks. A governance structure. the government owns territory and runs t like a business. A government is a corporation that runs a country. Corporations are monarchies. “Imagine gordon ramsay going through the state department’s fridge”. The answer is as generally as possible, you want accountable monarchies. Augustus saved rome. That’s the unanimous sentiment. Tiberius. Caligula. Claudius. Nero. (Bad) Henry VI etc. Steve Jobs, Apple, most like monarchy. Puritans were very experienced at forming the republic. President was an accountable ruler to the shareholders. The President in the government was inherited from the puritan private corporation structure. The industrial revolution was the corporate revolution. (CD: he’s confirming hoppe on monarchy). (CD: no via-negativa.) reality… the ceo is a monarch, completely in charge but completely accountable to the board. but if the board gets involved then something is wrong. if the shareholders get involved its worse. The board isn’t corrupted by power because it doesn’t have power. It’s an exception handler. ( CD: Board as a form of via negativa judiciary – exception handler. I have to work on that idea. ) MY THOUGHTS 1 – I think Minsky’s observation that programming is as novel a way of thinking as were logic and mathematics. And that there is a very clear reason why programmers trend male, right, and libertarian, because we are always disambiguating categorizing, and testing empirically rather than intuitionistically. 2 – Curtis is a “pill dispenser” because he uses Critique rather than analysis. At least he uses it toward beneficial ends. 😉 3 – Curtis: academic institutions evolved as low influence. (He doesn’t touch the economics of it postwar and why that became a problem.) (He’s strangely interested in the marxist period .) They are power hungry and that’s the problem. 4 – Same attitude for blue state ruling class – these are my peeps – but are you taking care of the people or just power? 5 -Main difference between us is that I consider humans ‘bot’s that require an operating system that fails gracefully downward and increases in precision upward, and that we need both negativa legal and positiva reward (commercial) markets – and that all of this is noise on top of group strategies. Politics sits on Traditional Law and the Metaphysics therein.
-
Notes from March 19th Curtis Yarvin Interview
Mar 21, 2020, 11:34 AM Curtis Yarvin Live at the Based Deleuze Release Party in LA (Mencius Moldbug) youtube.com youtube.com/watch?v=RRQO3VbJsMw& SPECTRUM: I’m 60 (Curt Doolittle). Curtis is in his 40’s. Justin is in his 30’s. The audience might be in their 20’s-30s. JUSTIN: 1 – There is an demand for intellectual life, intellectual discourse. You have to make it yourself. Put it on. If you build it they will come. 2 – Power Hungry Institutionalized CURTIS: 1 – Loosen’s up and gets comfortable about 35 minutes in. Then we see the ‘him’. Good. 2 – Makes the point that the american lesson of democracy failed by wilson’s acknowledgement of it. (I use the economics of the american experiment in expansion permitting the luxury of our incompetence). 3 – American revolution is the vietnam war in the 18th c where england is america. A civil conflict between two factions (whig/puritan against anglican). Created conflict in two segments of english society, in a cold war, but it was a hot war in america. The americans win the war. But because britain loses the will to fight. “Jefferson is a cringe”. Articles of Confederation… John Hanson the president of congress. It was so disastrous because of democracy (by adams). “We have to establish responsible aristocratic government.” Very much an aristocratic republic. 4 – Fear of the Other. We are the enlightened few. Historically this is not a ridiculous fear. Deep bitter loathing between upper and middle class. (Disagree: Status conflict between capital owners and producers and capital renters.) 5 – “If anything is going to work it will require an alliance of the three classes.” , “are we in the late roman republic or the late roman empire”. “the history of the republic is conflict between the classes”, (He doesn’t believe civil war is possible.) “With augustus this whole conflict goes away. One side wins the civil war. The side that wins is the military. They were unifiers. They claimed to restore the republic. But they were authoritarians. we’ve in practice created a monarchy. So augustus is more like FDR. A startup nation. Under augustus restarted because of caesar.’s use of the people (working men)’s violence”. “caesar captures cato’s headquarters. And finds a chest of letters from cato’s supporters (the old guard’s wealthy supporters). We are going to kill them (soros et all) and give it our friends (magas). (We don’t need to find the chest. it’s public information.) …. (I think more in Mao’s terms but the problem is the same.) (the spartan way is to find some hostile and burn down his house). 6 – “I don’t have any ideas or any big ideas … I disagree … the important thing is all negative: the absence of belief.” (I agree. He’s a practitioner of Critique which is his cultural background. I do solutions. That’s mine. But criticism is more fun. you don’t have to bet anything on it – just feel good about yourself. You have to risk to take solutions. That doesn’t mean that criticism fails to help us understand the problem that we DO need to solve. ) 7 – Agree on The Machiavellians as the most important book of politics in the 20th. (“The italian school of political science”, Mosca. Elements of political science / theory of the ruling class” Read Burnham instead. most political systems have divergence between formal power (supposed to work) vs objective power (who is really in charge). The reality of power and the formal legal reality of power diverge. (Hence my work on preventing that by providing a via-negativa market via the court). When appearance is powerless and symbolic, then the reality is unaccountable – especially when it’s distributed and bureaucratic. (Curtis isn’t mentioning the via negativa of monarchy, but that’s trivial.) 8 – The Times and the Post are part of the government. “The Department of Information” and it’s entirely unaccountable. The New York Times is an absolute hereditary monarchy.” (true). 9 – “Formalism and Sovcorps are old ideas that I emphasize differently.” This is what Curtis does that others don’t equal. He criticizes and explains with historical literary depth and excels at thought experiments to assist the audience. This is the value of an analyst and teacher. The fact that he doesn’t have solutions is not a failing. We get intelligent conversation that isn’t dumbed down or sentimental. The problem is the world wants solutions sold by someone who can explain them like curtis. We don’t have that person. QUESTIONS: Large number of small governments. Patchworks. A governance structure. the government owns territory and runs t like a business. A government is a corporation that runs a country. Corporations are monarchies. “Imagine gordon ramsay going through the state department’s fridge”. The answer is as generally as possible, you want accountable monarchies. Augustus saved rome. That’s the unanimous sentiment. Tiberius. Caligula. Claudius. Nero. (Bad) Henry VI etc. Steve Jobs, Apple, most like monarchy. Puritans were very experienced at forming the republic. President was an accountable ruler to the shareholders. The President in the government was inherited from the puritan private corporation structure. The industrial revolution was the corporate revolution. (CD: he’s confirming hoppe on monarchy). (CD: no via-negativa.) reality… the ceo is a monarch, completely in charge but completely accountable to the board. but if the board gets involved then something is wrong. if the shareholders get involved its worse. The board isn’t corrupted by power because it doesn’t have power. It’s an exception handler. ( CD: Board as a form of via negativa judiciary – exception handler. I have to work on that idea. ) MY THOUGHTS 1 – I think Minsky’s observation that programming is as novel a way of thinking as were logic and mathematics. And that there is a very clear reason why programmers trend male, right, and libertarian, because we are always disambiguating categorizing, and testing empirically rather than intuitionistically. 2 – Curtis is a “pill dispenser” because he uses Critique rather than analysis. At least he uses it toward beneficial ends. 😉 3 – Curtis: academic institutions evolved as low influence. (He doesn’t touch the economics of it postwar and why that became a problem.) (He’s strangely interested in the marxist period .) They are power hungry and that’s the problem. 4 – Same attitude for blue state ruling class – these are my peeps – but are you taking care of the people or just power? 5 -Main difference between us is that I consider humans ‘bot’s that require an operating system that fails gracefully downward and increases in precision upward, and that we need both negativa legal and positiva reward (commercial) markets – and that all of this is noise on top of group strategies. Politics sits on Traditional Law and the Metaphysics therein.
-
The Rest of The Right Is Intellectually Embarrassing
The Rest of The Right Is Intellectually Embarrassing https://propertarianism.com/2020/05/28/the-rest-of-the-right-is-intellectually-embarrassing/
Source date (UTC): 2020-05-28 20:40:30 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1266107102155739145
-
Definition: Right Wing?
Definition: Right Wing? https://propertarianism.com/2020/05/28/definition-right-wing/
Source date (UTC): 2020-05-28 20:38:20 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1266106554232832001
-
Definition: Right Wing?
Mar 21, 2020, 7:05 PM STIPULATIONS: 0 – Inveriance in human nature 1 – Anti-Hubris (Presumption of hubris) 2 – Requiring Evidence before action. 3 – Political Institutions: Military, Duty, Merit, Property, Law, Benevolent Adversarialism. 4 – Family Institutions: church, marriage, family, humility, 5 – Civil Institutions: virtues, norms, manners. 6 – Western Tradition: Heroism, Excellence, Truth, Beauty, Status, Dominance, Hierarchy – Stability and excellence (capitalization) over experience and novelty (consumption) RIGHT WING [ˌrīt ˈwiNG] NOUN (the right wing) the conservative or reactionary section of a political party or system. “a candidate from the right wing of the party” ADJECTIVE conservative or reactionary. “a right-wing Republican senator” A person or group with conservative or capitalist views. synonyms: conservative · rightist · ultra-conservative · alt-right · blimpish · diehard · reactionary · traditionalist · conventional · traditional · old-fashioned · unprogressive · Birchite CONSERVATISM Conservatism is a political and social philosophy promoting traditional social institutions in the context of culture and civilization. The central tenets of conservatism include tradition, organic society, hierarchy, authority, and property rights. Conservatives seek to preserve a range of institutions such as religion, parliamentary government, and property rights, with the aim of emphasizing social stability and continuity. The more traditional elements—reactionaries—oppose modernism and seek a return to “the way things were” Solidarity Solidarity is an awareness of shared interests, objectives, standards, and sympathies creating a psychological sense of unity of groups or classes. Rule of law the principle whereby all members of a society (including those in government) are considered equally subject to publicly disclosed legal codes and processes Private property Civil Society Communitarianism Familism Family values HISTORY Conservatism is a political and social philosophy promoting traditional social institutions in the context of culture and civilization. The central tenets of conservatism include tradition, organic society, hierarchy, authority, and property rights.[1] Conservatives seek to preserve a range of institutions such as religion, parliamentary government, and property rights, with the aim of emphasizing social stability and continuity.[2] The more traditional elements—reactionaries—oppose modernism and seek a return to “the way things were”.[3][4] The first established use of the term in a political context originated in 1818 with François-René de Chateaubriand[5] during the period of Bourbon Restoration that sought to roll back the policies of the French Revolution. Historically associated with right-wing politics, the term has since been used to describe a wide range of views. There is no single set of policies regarded as conservative because the meaning of conservatism depends on what is considered traditional in a given place and time. Thus conservatives from different parts of the world—each upholding their respective traditions—may disagree on a wide range of issues. Edmund Burke, an 18th-century politician who opposed the French Revolution, but supported the American Revolution, is credited as one of the main theorists of conservatism in Great Britain in the 1790s.[6] According to Quintin Hogg, the chairman of the British Conservative Party in 1959: “Conservatism is not so much a philosophy as an attitude, a constant force, performing a timeless function in the development of a free society, and corresponding to a deep and permanent requirement of human nature itself”.[7]