Category: Politics, Power, and Governance

  • Your Government speaks all the time. But fiction isnt evidence and russians spea

    Your Government speaks all the time. But fiction isnt evidence and russians speak in fiction.


    Source date (UTC): 2016-11-26 01:54:41 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/802329697602441216

    Reply addressees: @GorskyDmitry @nntaleb @FamesBlond

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/802329164879659008


    IN REPLY TO:

    Original post on X

    Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/802329164879659008

  • Huh. I thought that they were nationalists that want to save their country from

    Huh. I thought that they were nationalists that want to save their country from invaders and malcontents.


    Source date (UTC): 2016-11-26 01:18:31 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/802320596453490692

    Reply addressees: @GorskyDmitry @nntaleb @FamesBlond

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/802307259225219072


    IN REPLY TO:

    Original post on X

    Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/802307259225219072

  • I love the guys. All of them. Especially the guys from Right Sector. Most people

    I love the guys. All of them. Especially the guys from Right Sector. Most people I know are in Azov.


    Source date (UTC): 2016-11-25 20:36:45 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/802249687608729600

    Reply addressees: @GorskyDmitry @nntaleb @FamesBlond

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/802205933946437633


    IN REPLY TO:

    Original post on X

    Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/802205933946437633

  • The Bourgeoise Society Has Been A Catastrophe.

    Nov 18, 2016 12:52pm There is a vast difference between the scientific enlightenment which was a tremendous success, and the classical liberal seizure of political power through the various revolutions against the aristocracy and the monarchies. Yes we can blame the aristocracy from failing to evolve the organization of the state and incorporate the bourgeoisie. And yes we can blame the bourgeoisie for failing by incorporating the proletariat and women into the house of commons. But in the present, of the Marxist proletariat(worldwide), the classical liberal bourgeoisie, the ‘liberal’ priesthood (20th century), and the martial aristocracy(antiquity to 1800), all have failed except the martial aristocracy. And more frighteningly, they have failed quickly, and in succession. The aristocracy created markets in every aspect of life: freedom, marriage, commerce, commons, dispute resolution, and rule. But failed to abandon their rents and accommodate the finance and merchant class when commerce rather than agrarian territory evolved to the central source of production. The classical liberal bourgeoisie tried to make the market everything, at the expense of the tribe. They tried to create a monopoly of the entrepreneurial classes. And they failed. They destroyed the family and community as a unit of production. They brought people to capital rather than capital to people. Even if the primary beneficiaries of their financial order were the common people’ The Marxists proletarians resisted the bourgeoise’s impact on home and family – and committed the greatest crimes in human history by trying to take over rule from the bourgeoisie. They tried to create a monopoly of the laboring classes. And they failed. They destroyed entire nations, tribes, families, economies and traditions. Worst of all they destroyed all trust. The secular priesthood we call ‘liberals’ or ‘the cathedral’ tried to take over from the Marxists, in pursuit of a global secular religion consisting of utopian promises, pseudoscience, and faith in the persistent expansion of technology – and destroyed the entirety of western civilization in less than a century. They tried to create a monopoly of the secular priestly caste. And they failed. They failed because they treated as equal in potential and demand people who are not. As the classical liberals destroyed the family as a unit of production, the liberals destroyed the nation as a unit of production. But only the martial aristocracy forced the creation of markets in everything by the total prohibition of monopoly – even a monopoly of rule – by resisting all unification and federalization until Napoleon used fiat credit to create ‘total war’ and forced them to relent out of defense. Only the monarchy created markets for the voluntary production, distribution, and exchange of goods, services, information, and commons, between the classes. And only the aristocracy understood that each class’ attempt to create monopolies would lead to a breakdown of the cooperation between the ‘estates of the realm’ – what we call today ‘the social classes’. Aristocracy creates a monopoly: the prevention of monopoly by the enforcement of markets.

  • The Bourgeoise Society Has Been A Catastrophe.

    Nov 18, 2016 12:52pm There is a vast difference between the scientific enlightenment which was a tremendous success, and the classical liberal seizure of political power through the various revolutions against the aristocracy and the monarchies. Yes we can blame the aristocracy from failing to evolve the organization of the state and incorporate the bourgeoisie. And yes we can blame the bourgeoisie for failing by incorporating the proletariat and women into the house of commons. But in the present, of the Marxist proletariat(worldwide), the classical liberal bourgeoisie, the ‘liberal’ priesthood (20th century), and the martial aristocracy(antiquity to 1800), all have failed except the martial aristocracy. And more frighteningly, they have failed quickly, and in succession. The aristocracy created markets in every aspect of life: freedom, marriage, commerce, commons, dispute resolution, and rule. But failed to abandon their rents and accommodate the finance and merchant class when commerce rather than agrarian territory evolved to the central source of production. The classical liberal bourgeoisie tried to make the market everything, at the expense of the tribe. They tried to create a monopoly of the entrepreneurial classes. And they failed. They destroyed the family and community as a unit of production. They brought people to capital rather than capital to people. Even if the primary beneficiaries of their financial order were the common people’ The Marxists proletarians resisted the bourgeoise’s impact on home and family – and committed the greatest crimes in human history by trying to take over rule from the bourgeoisie. They tried to create a monopoly of the laboring classes. And they failed. They destroyed entire nations, tribes, families, economies and traditions. Worst of all they destroyed all trust. The secular priesthood we call ‘liberals’ or ‘the cathedral’ tried to take over from the Marxists, in pursuit of a global secular religion consisting of utopian promises, pseudoscience, and faith in the persistent expansion of technology – and destroyed the entirety of western civilization in less than a century. They tried to create a monopoly of the secular priestly caste. And they failed. They failed because they treated as equal in potential and demand people who are not. As the classical liberals destroyed the family as a unit of production, the liberals destroyed the nation as a unit of production. But only the martial aristocracy forced the creation of markets in everything by the total prohibition of monopoly – even a monopoly of rule – by resisting all unification and federalization until Napoleon used fiat credit to create ‘total war’ and forced them to relent out of defense. Only the monarchy created markets for the voluntary production, distribution, and exchange of goods, services, information, and commons, between the classes. And only the aristocracy understood that each class’ attempt to create monopolies would lead to a breakdown of the cooperation between the ‘estates of the realm’ – what we call today ‘the social classes’. Aristocracy creates a monopoly: the prevention of monopoly by the enforcement of markets.

  • Definitions: Aristocracy vs Oligarchy

    Q&A: ARISTOCRACY VS OLIGARCHY —“What are the features that distinguish aristocracy and oligarchy?”— William Butchman An aristocracy preserves a judge of last resort (monarch). You can kill a monarch and change the judge of last resort. It is much harder to kill an oligarchy (group). It is much harder to kill a government (larger group) it is much harder to kill a bureaucracy ( larger group ) An oligarchy subverts the market (rule of law) by use of: – Force – Gossip – Capital The defense against an oligarchy is a judiciary that rules by productive fully informed, warrantied, voluntary transfer limited to productive externalities. Most oligarchies persist only because they violate one or more of the provisions of natural law. Most commonly: productivity. In other words competition in the market and prosecution in court are EQUALLY necessary methods of preserving sovereignty by the suppression of parasitism, and the demand for sovereign transfer, in a market for opportunities, rather than in a market for rents, where the market for opportunities is made possible by nothing more than an increase in population density and an increase in the suppression of parasitism.

  • Definitions: Aristocracy vs Oligarchy

    Q&A: ARISTOCRACY VS OLIGARCHY —“What are the features that distinguish aristocracy and oligarchy?”— William Butchman An aristocracy preserves a judge of last resort (monarch). You can kill a monarch and change the judge of last resort. It is much harder to kill an oligarchy (group). It is much harder to kill a government (larger group) it is much harder to kill a bureaucracy ( larger group ) An oligarchy subverts the market (rule of law) by use of: – Force – Gossip – Capital The defense against an oligarchy is a judiciary that rules by productive fully informed, warrantied, voluntary transfer limited to productive externalities. Most oligarchies persist only because they violate one or more of the provisions of natural law. Most commonly: productivity. In other words competition in the market and prosecution in court are EQUALLY necessary methods of preserving sovereignty by the suppression of parasitism, and the demand for sovereign transfer, in a market for opportunities, rather than in a market for rents, where the market for opportunities is made possible by nothing more than an increase in population density and an increase in the suppression of parasitism.

  • To Rule is to Limit, To Govern to Direct

    TO RULE ARISTOCRATICALLY IS TO LIMIT NOT TO DIRECT. WE MUST RULE, OR BE RULED. WE FORGOT. WE ARE MEN. WE MUST RULE.

  • To Rule is to Limit, To Govern to Direct

    TO RULE ARISTOCRATICALLY IS TO LIMIT NOT TO DIRECT. WE MUST RULE, OR BE RULED. WE FORGOT. WE ARE MEN. WE MUST RULE.

  • In Praise of Taxes

    Nov 19, 2016 12:29pm IN PRAISE OF TAXES 😉 (rulership is a profession, and one we must return to) Assuming that taxes are used for the purpose of the creation and defense of the full spectrum of markets. And assuming we have juridical defense against taxes not used in creation and defense of those markets. And assuming that tax competition exists by freedom of exit and absence of collusion. And assuming one of the markets constructed is a market for commons. Then taxes are merely a commission on the use of violence to construct markets that enforce production and deny parasitism. In other words, the Aristocracy may profit via commissions on the construction, maintenance, and defense of markets just like the provider of any other form of good, service, or information. In fact, the wealth created by profits from the construction, maintenance and defense of markets, is possibly the most morally defensible form of profit a man, family, and clan, tribe, and race can demonstrate. So again, the libertarians, classical liberals, and progressive liberals, and Marxist socialist have been wrong. While the liberation from the mysticism of the church by the scientific enlightenment has been a boon for man, the attempts by the various other classes to create monopolies favoring their classes rather than markets for the cooperation between the classes, has been predicated on moral falsehoods, pseudoscience, and outright lies. Like the Spartans, Athenians, Romans, Germans, French, we must rule for our betterment and the betterment of man, or be ruled against our interests, and against the interests of man. Not only should we tax. We should revel in our taxes. We should maximize the returns on our shares. And continue to profit from the incremental domestication and eventual transcendence of man. We were mistaken. We need NO OTHER CAREER than rule. Rule and fee for rule, by commission on successful rule, is perhaps the greatest of our achievements, and a means by which we have, can, and shall profit. What must we do to return to rule? Restore Rule of Natural Law (Science) Restore the Judiciary. (Rule of Law) Restore the Monarchy. (Judge of last resort) Restore the Nobility (Governors) Restore the Knights (Regiments) Restore the Sheriffs. (Police) Restore the Militia (disaster, emergency, war) Restore the Artisans (artists and craftsmen) Restore the Laborers (of the commons) Restore the market for marriage Restore the market for commons Restore the market for rule.