October 22nd, 2018 3:14 PM THE WORK IS FOR THE POLITICAL (RULING) CLASS (h/t: Igor Surkanov, Alba Rising ) [P]lease stop asking me (us) to create a religion. I’ve laid out a prescription for a religion that isn’t false. And a “Cult” of the law that perpetuates our existing “Sacredness” of the law, the judiciary, courtroom, and the jury. Propertarianism solves the “missing” science: Social Science. With that solution we provide a Scientific basis for Law. And within that scientific basis, a logic, grammar, and vocabulary for law, and a test (criteria) for testimony (truth). This is my job. If I live long enough (Which is not very likely), and can invest a little money in content editors, I will produce a ‘bible’ of western civilization (literature). That culls Semiticism from our history completely. But I leave ‘religion’ – meaning education of intuition – up to those others who are narrators and educators. I am a scientist and at this point a jurist. And meaning(education) and truth (decidability) are different things.
Category: Politics, Power, and Governance
-
No. We’re Frustrated that We Can’t Solve the Problem with A One-Time Cost
October 23rd, 2018 2:48 PM NO, WE’RE FRUSTRATED THAT WE CAN’T SOLVE THE PROBLEM WITH A ONE-TIME COST
—“You’re mad because you have to take basic security measures for your family and property?”— Joseph Michael (Proletarian)
[A]ctually, we’re frustrated why we can’t just eliminate the reasons for having to take basic security measures – and remain distinct from second and third world countries. We never had to do that before. Most of us never had to lock our homes or cars, or worry if we dropped our wallets they’d be ‘found and taken’. Why should we pay those costs of self defense constantly, instead of paying the cost of deportation? Security is an ongoing cost, and deportation (or capital punishment for that matter) is a one-time-cost, and those one-time costs were extremely beneficial for our ancestors. I mean, there no reason not to return to taking advantage of the local oak tree. Economics in everything: – Every Property Owner a Sheriff. – Using Extra-Judicial Punishment. – Stand Your Ground Doctrine. – Castle Doctrine. – Zero Tolerance 😉
-
The Work Is for The Political (ruling) Class
October 22nd, 2018 3:14 PM THE WORK IS FOR THE POLITICAL (RULING) CLASS (h/t: Igor Surkanov, Alba Rising ) [P]lease stop asking me (us) to create a religion. I’ve laid out a prescription for a religion that isn’t false. And a “Cult” of the law that perpetuates our existing “Sacredness” of the law, the judiciary, courtroom, and the jury. Propertarianism solves the “missing” science: Social Science. With that solution we provide a Scientific basis for Law. And within that scientific basis, a logic, grammar, and vocabulary for law, and a test (criteria) for testimony (truth). This is my job. If I live long enough (Which is not very likely), and can invest a little money in content editors, I will produce a ‘bible’ of western civilization (literature). That culls Semiticism from our history completely. But I leave ‘religion’ – meaning education of intuition – up to those others who are narrators and educators. I am a scientist and at this point a jurist. And meaning(education) and truth (decidability) are different things.
-
No. We’re Frustrated that We Can’t Solve the Problem with A One-Time Cost
October 23rd, 2018 2:48 PM NO, WE’RE FRUSTRATED THAT WE CAN’T SOLVE THE PROBLEM WITH A ONE-TIME COST
—“You’re mad because you have to take basic security measures for your family and property?”— Joseph Michael (Proletarian)
[A]ctually, we’re frustrated why we can’t just eliminate the reasons for having to take basic security measures – and remain distinct from second and third world countries. We never had to do that before. Most of us never had to lock our homes or cars, or worry if we dropped our wallets they’d be ‘found and taken’. Why should we pay those costs of self defense constantly, instead of paying the cost of deportation? Security is an ongoing cost, and deportation (or capital punishment for that matter) is a one-time-cost, and those one-time costs were extremely beneficial for our ancestors. I mean, there no reason not to return to taking advantage of the local oak tree. Economics in everything: – Every Property Owner a Sheriff. – Using Extra-Judicial Punishment. – Stand Your Ground Doctrine. – Castle Doctrine. – Zero Tolerance 😉
-
It’s Not Just Density but Cost of Defense of Commons
October 24th, 2018 7:36 AM IT’S NOT JUST DENSITY BUT COST OF DEFENSE OF COMMONS
Does residential sorting explain geographic polarization? Gregory J. Martin (a1) and Steven W. Webster (a2) https://doi.org/10.1017/psrm.2018.44 Abstract Political preferences in the United States are highly correlated with population density, at national, state, and metropolitan-area scales. Using new data from voter registration records, we assess the extent to which this pattern can be explained by geographic mobility. We find that the revealed preferences of voters who move from one residence to another correlate with partisan affiliation, though voters appear to be sorting on non-political neighborhood attributes that covary with partisan preferences rather than explicitly seeking politically congruent neighbors. But, critically, we demonstrate through a simulation study that the estimated partisan bias in moving choices is on the order of five times too small to sustain the current geographic polarization of preferences. We conclude that location must have some influence on political preference, rather than the other way around, and provide evidence in support of this theory.
-
It’s Not Just Density but Cost of Defense of Commons
October 24th, 2018 7:36 AM IT’S NOT JUST DENSITY BUT COST OF DEFENSE OF COMMONS
Does residential sorting explain geographic polarization? Gregory J. Martin (a1) and Steven W. Webster (a2) https://doi.org/10.1017/psrm.2018.44 Abstract Political preferences in the United States are highly correlated with population density, at national, state, and metropolitan-area scales. Using new data from voter registration records, we assess the extent to which this pattern can be explained by geographic mobility. We find that the revealed preferences of voters who move from one residence to another correlate with partisan affiliation, though voters appear to be sorting on non-political neighborhood attributes that covary with partisan preferences rather than explicitly seeking politically congruent neighbors. But, critically, we demonstrate through a simulation study that the estimated partisan bias in moving choices is on the order of five times too small to sustain the current geographic polarization of preferences. We conclude that location must have some influence on political preference, rather than the other way around, and provide evidence in support of this theory.
-
NOT JUST DENSITY BUT COST OF DEFENSE OF COMMONS Does residential sorting explain
https://doi.org/10.1017/psrm.2018.44PublishedIT’S NOT JUST DENSITY BUT COST OF DEFENSE OF COMMONS
Does residential sorting explain geographic polarization?
Gregory J. Martin (a1) and Steven W. Webster (a2)
https://doi.org/10.1017/psrm.2018.44
Abstract
Political preferences in the United States are highly correlated with population density, at national, state, and metropolitan-area scales. Using new data from voter registration records, we assess the extent to which this pattern can be explained by geographic mobility. We find that the revealed preferences of voters who move from one residence to another correlate with partisan affiliation, though voters appear to be sorting on non-political neighborhood attributes that covary with partisan preferences rather than explicitly seeking politically congruent neighbors. But, critically, we demonstrate through a simulation study that the estimated partisan bias in moving choices is on the order of five times too small to sustain the current geographic polarization of preferences. We conclude that location must have some influence on political preference, rather than the other way around, and provide evidence in support of this theory.
Source date (UTC): 2018-10-24 07:36:00 UTC
-
Phrase Of The Day: —“Oak Tree Nationalism.”— Andrew Gribble (noose pike and
Phrase Of The Day:
—“Oak Tree Nationalism.”— Andrew Gribble
(noose pike and pyre.)
lolz 😉
Source date (UTC): 2018-10-23 20:02:25 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1054825390219452416
-
Nationalize a Majority Interest in Youtube, Google, Facebook, and Amazon, leavin
Nationalize a Majority Interest in Youtube, Google, Facebook, and Amazon, leaving them to operate but operate within the same parameters as other UTILITIES.
It’s gonna happen.
Source date (UTC): 2018-10-23 19:42:56 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1054820489175146496
-
UNDERSTANDING THE PRUSSIAN ORDER AS OUR NATIVE ORDER Militia First > Market in S
UNDERSTANDING THE PRUSSIAN ORDER AS OUR NATIVE ORDER
Militia First > Market in Service of The Militia > Family in services of Market, State, and Militia. It is a MILITARY order of MARKETS.
Source date (UTC): 2018-10-23 19:24:16 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1054815788241174534