The more criticism one attracts, the more publicity one obtains. The more publicity the bigger the audience. The bigger the audience the more influence. The more influence the more power.
Generally speaking, most idiots stumble and attract more publicity than the content that they offer can satisfy the wants of new eyes.
And the opportunity of first impression is wasted.
All young entrepreneurs try to go to market too early.
Same thing for radicals.
Source date (UTC): 2017-06-09 18:45:00 UTC
ALL MEN WANT TO BE LED. FEW ARE WORTHY OF LEADING.
I know my betters when I meet them. I want to be led by my betters. If for no other reason than leadership is difficult, uncertain, and I may fail my people.
We all want to be led. We only want to choose our leaders.
Choose wisely. Choose your betters.
I choose the martial aristocracy of christian monarchies.
Source date (UTC): 2017-06-09 12:59:00 UTC
WHAT ANSWER DOES THE RIGHT HAVE?
It’s not exactly like the Right has a portfolio of philosophers to choose from. Who is there? A bunch of failures who took stylistic clues from christian literature and mixed it with Lovecraft’s occultism? A century and a half of Abrahamic apologists still hopeful that what defeated us in the previous era, what we escaped from, and what the Abrahamists are using to attack us once again, will somehow – like generals fighting the last war – succeed this time despite failing us over and over again in the past?
What strategy? What plan? What demands? What institutions? What will you change as meaningfully as what rescued us from Supernatural Abrahamism the last time (empiricism) and what can rescue us from SuperRational and Pseudoscientific Abrahamism this time (marxism/socialism/postmodernism/feminism)?
What military tactics that were required in the age of arrows, in the age of cannon, in the age of rifles, in the age of armor, are now possible and necessary in the current age under the ending of the peace of westphalia where the fragility is not the army, but the infrastructure, and the illusion of power and rule? By what means can the people overthrow the state and restore nation and sovereignty and militia?
If you are weak. I understand. But you are irrelevant. All that matters is a solution that it is possible to implement, a set of incentives by which to award the common people for changing the status quo, a set of demands to impose upon the state, a strategy for forcing their submission, command and control by which to act, and a minority of men ready to destroy that upon which the current order depends.
Does anyone out there have anything other, than cunning words?
No. I know so. Don’t bother pulling wishful thinking out of your backside.
Rule or be ruled. Rule by force or be ruled by force. Rule by distributed dictatorship of the militia of sovereign men, denying rule to all others. Or be ruled by any one of the alternatives, all of which render you a freeman, serf or slave.
The strong do not look for approval, permission, or cooperation of the weak. We act, regardless of the approval, or permission, or cooperation of the weak.
Curt Doolittle
The Propertarian Institute
Kiev, Ukraine.
Source date (UTC): 2017-06-09 12:54:00 UTC
THE IMPOLITIC TRUTH: WOMEN IN LEADERSHIP SIGNAL ORGANIZATIONAL FAILURE
(in response to May, LePen, Clinton, Merkel)
Women distribute wealth earned by the inventions and aggressions of men. Just as they do to children. They do not resolve conflicts. They do not invent solutions. They cannot lead. They cannot rule.
Any organization with a woman at its helm, that is not in the business of redistributing wealth or servicing **signals of wealth redistribution** (health, beauty, fitness, fashion) is an indication of organizational failure, and the board’s inability to find a strategic solution to the condition: that the board and shareholders are merely preserving income streams as the organization declines.
As far as I can tell, this rule is exceptionless. Entrepreneurial competition, economic competition, and political competition, are all warfare by the three means of coercion possible to man: remuneration(business), gossip(politics), and violence(war).
And with few exceptions, women in charge of companies of any scale fit this rule. Women in politics fit this rule. and female defense ministers (in europe there are a lot of them) fit this rule.
Women redistribute the wealth earned by the inventions and aggressions of men. If they are in a position to do that, it’s a luxury good. At some point we must understand that such luxury goods are merely *signal* goods that are the result of man-made goods, and not in fact – goods proper.
Source date (UTC): 2017-06-09 07:55:00 UTC
INTERNATIONAL ETHICS: I’M A SCIENTIST: NOT A RACIST, I’M A CLASSIST, AND A NATIONALIST. HERE IS WHY….
I just want to respond to this: I don’t do racism. The problem for all races, and subraces as far as I can tell, is that we have all specialized in some form of extreme. East in industriousness and Neoteny and West in creativity and Neoteny. Africa in hostile-environment resistance and sociability and deep maturity. South Asians in warm weather survival and sociability. Desert (semitic) and steppe (all others) people in masculine features (small brains) and aggression. And the ashkenazi – the strangest of all – reversing sexual dimorphism and transferring female verbal skills to males.
So given our specializations, the people one standard deviation above the white mean are all fine with each other. The problem is that the more of your population that is below a mean of 112/115, the more burden it places on adaptation to modernity because the cost of education and training is too high, and the cost of developing high trust norms is either too high or impossible, given the *incentives available by commercial means*.
Hence why lower trust lower IQ populations do not rely on commercial incentives, and instead rely on religious, social, and physical incentives. In other words the old problem of the tripartite aristocracy remains: the lower class must be culled consistently and the middle class maximized, because it is this single issue that determines rates of progress. All the rest is merely institutions that assist us in cooperation.
For these reasons I’m pro nationalism because the only moral means by which an underclass can be minimized is by its own kin, who do so in the interest of kin’s transcendence.
That last sentence constitutes my standing on global political morality: domesticate your kin, and do not force others do domesticate your kin. If others are domesticating your kin, they are just in doing so, because your failure to domesticate your kin is the reason, and only reason, we are in conflict.
Do not export your failures to others.
Source date (UTC): 2017-06-09 07:43:00 UTC
Well, it’s just another version of Marxism, right? Central control of resources by some self selected elite in order to pursue some end chosen by those elites?
So instead of pursuing a worker revolution. Instead of pursuing equality under the law. Instead of pursuing equality of opportunity. Instead of pursuing equality of condition. Instead of pursuing equality of outcome. Instead of pursuing the end of class oppression, of economic oppression, of racial oppression, of gender oppression, and now of identity oppression, the left wants once again to control resources and opportunities they cannot demonstrate the ability to conceive, organize, and produce, they want that control *without* demonstrating merit?
What record do democratic governments have of good choices? Any? What do good any governments that are in the lead do? Nothing. Government can drive change if the change is produced elsewhere and the people need to ‘catch up’. But they cannot know what hypothetical goods to pursue.
And for that matter, who is of the opinion that we are already not enduring change faster than our minds, norms, cultures, philosophies, laws, and institutions can adapt to on empirical evidence? We can’t.
We cannot know ‘the good’ other than by discovering something that works and determining what is good. The via positiva fallacy is that we can know what is good, other than what is bad.
We can know what is bad. We can act via negativa to eliminate the bad, and devote resources only to the potential goods.
We know the central ‘bad’: overpopulation by a vast world underclass.
The central problem we face is the REDUCTION OF THE SCALE OF THE UNDER CLASSES.
The rest of the opportunities are rapidly exploited by the private sector as fast as we can manage them. And the only ones they private sector can’t do is space exploration.
No. So no. All this wisfhul thinking is nonsense. FInd something we are behind on that is already proven and government can do that. Find soething that the market CAN’T do that is basic reserach, and maybe that is ok.
Otherwise, governement does one thing: pilfer as much as it can to distribute to cronies.
Source date (UTC): 2017-06-08 20:04:00 UTC
( can someone with a better pulse on current culture explain to me what shift is going on? Something is happening in our favor and I don’t know what it is. )
Source date (UTC): 2017-06-08 17:00:00 UTC
Yes. Eliminate islam from europe (once again).
Source date (UTC): 2017-06-08 14:02:08 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/872816013464797184
Reply addressees: @ParthibanRavind @MayorofLondon
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/872814185280790528
IN REPLY TO:
@ParthibanRG
@MayorofLondon But will you ever address the root cause of terrorism?
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/872814185280790528
#londonisopen for occupation, displacement, terrorists, and terrorism in a feeble play by the State to preserve the illusion of lost empire
Source date (UTC): 2017-06-08 14:01:37 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/872815883093192704
@mayoroflondon How are muslims in Britain not collaborators? Civilians saying “But I’m not a solider!” Yet sponsoring the army of conquest.
Source date (UTC): 2017-06-08 13:56:17 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/872814543176597505