Category: Politics, Power, and Governance

  • THE ‘AGGRESSIVENESS’ OF NRx ADVOCATES The NRx movement evolved as a criticism of

    THE ‘AGGRESSIVENESS’ OF NRx ADVOCATES

    The NRx movement evolved as a criticism of political correctness, dishonesty, pseudo-rationalism, pseudoscience, and lying in politics.

    The current alt-right has evolved into the practice of activism against political correctness, dishonesty, pseudo-rationalism, pseudoscience, and lying. In their ethos you are practicing political correctness (lying) not science or truth. If we all practice pragmatism we are merely all lying.

    So the question is, how, given the truth, should we construct the commons (social order and the law that enforces it)?

    It is not pleasant to look in the mirror and admit that one is just practicing political correctness (lying) for the purpose of self interest. And that for all intents and purposes one is no different from a neocon or socialist or any other niche that lies for the purpose of self-signal production.

    TRUTH IS ENOUGH.


    Source date (UTC): 2015-08-10 03:06:00 UTC

  • RACISM: RACE, CLASS, CULTURE, SIGNALS, POLITICS, GENETIC PACIFICATION (a) people

    RACISM: RACE, CLASS, CULTURE, SIGNALS, POLITICS, GENETIC PACIFICATION

    (a) people act as racial blocks to obtain power over other people – this is in their interests. (b) minorities largely are irrelevant as long as they cannot obtain political power – ie: democracy – and live within their ‘quarters’ (neighborhoods); (c) the origin of friction is not race it is the value of in-group vs out-group status signals and differences in cultural rules that suppress different degrees of parasitism: normative incommensurability; (d) where the problem of conflict is not culture it is desirability for reproduction and therefore status signals in group vs out group; (e) where the problem is not desirability it is impulsivity, and the consequences of impulsivity (spontaneous, loud, rude, crude, violent), which hinders cooperation between less impulsive and more impulsive groups.

    It’s irrational to seek to overcome these frictions. In otherwords, it is not rational to expect people to behave otherwise to competitiors in those cases where they are in fact competitors not cooperators.

    Genetic culling (genetic pacification, eugenic reproduction) matters. That is bcause conflict is largely a problem OF CLASS and CULTURE not of race. The problem is the distribution of numbers between the classes between the races. if you see upper and middle class people of various colors in the same room they are still more positive and trusting to in-group members, but they cause fewer political problems with outgroup members.

    All groups reject out-group competitors. Whether within race or without. Upper class whites (me) don’t like to spend too much time with lower class whites. They like it even less with lower classes of other groups over whom they have no signaling value to exchange to moderate conflicts.s

    I am keenly aware when traveling, or doing business, or participating in intellectual forums, when I am the white minority, and how people treat me, just as anyone else is. In Hartford (which is a black city) I felt it. For many years I worked in predominantly jewish companies and felt it. In academia I feel an outlier. In business I feel an outlier. We all feel kin selection unless we are privileged by circumstance, and in peer classes.

    Hence the only way to avoid racism is to homogenize the classes and cultures such that racial signals are neither valuable nor detrimental.

    We can tolerate racial mixture (it merely affects reproductive desirability). We can tolerate some class mixture within the same group. But mixing race, culture and class differences is more cross group competition for individuals in each group to rationally choose egalitarianism.

    As an intellectual I prefer to judge people only on intellectual and moral merits. As member of my family and tribe I place greater value on the perpetuation, improvement and expansion of of mine than that of others. As a business man, I prefer to see everyone as equal in potential to generate wealth. As a politician I am keenly aware that internal conflict and competition are constraints upon in-group status signals (harmony), economic prosperity, the construction of commons, and the competitive success of the group is predicated on the least diverse, most

    If groups are not willing to practice culling (genetic pacification, eugenic reproduction) then they are merely lying when they say they want equality – what they want is to win, and to weaken their competitors through appeal via suggestion to pathological altruism.

    So from this perspective, racists are not the problem. The failure of groups to genetically pacify their underclasses is the challenge to overcome.

    Anyway, that is where I end up today.

    I have seen the change in american in my lifetime, and it is tragic. I am sitting here in Estonia and I see the damage done by the Russians and that the Russians constitute the lower (trailer park) classes. I can see in Sweden, Denmark, England and Norway that they have no intellectual recollection of their history of genetic pacification and therefore do not appreciate the suicide mission they are engaging in. The Chinese are perfectly aware of it. The were just less successful than the west because of their large numbers. THe hindus use class. The Brazillians have been most successful in the opposite: elimination of racism, interbreeding. And that has resulted in recreating the caste and poverty of india.

    There are only three choices: hindu castes bcause of genetic diversity, aristocratic equality through genetic pacification, or asian tyranny to force homogeniety of behavior.

    As usual, I would say that complaints about out-groups are admissions of in-group failure to resist competition from the range of strategies of others.

    Curt


    Source date (UTC): 2015-08-09 04:09:00 UTC

  • IS REDUCIBLE TO PROPERTY RIGHTS…OR ISNT IT? The challenge for libertarians has

    http://angrybearblog.com/2015/08/libertarianism-simplified-the-three-proper-powers-of-government.htmlLIBERTARIANISM IS REDUCIBLE TO PROPERTY RIGHTS…OR ISNT IT?

    http://angrybearblog.com/2015/08/libertarianism-simplified-the-three-proper-powers-of-government.html

    The challenge for libertarians has been the definition of private property. Saying we defend it without defining it is an incomplete statement that allows the audience to assume his concept of private property is what the speaker refers to. This is a cute act of suggestion that inspires moral affiliation, but it is not sufficient for representation as the basis for law that provides non discretionary decidability in matters of conflict.

    Rothbardians define property with the ethics of pastoralists and the ghetto: inter subjectively verifiable property. These are the low trust ethics of the steppe, levant, and medieval ghetto.

    If we look at high trust societies instead, they assert property rights not only to physical property, but to all property that causes conflict and retaliation for the imposition of costs.

    So humans demonstrate that they treat as their property all that they have expended resources to obtain with the expectation of a monopoly of control(private), fruits from(shareholder property), and prevention from consumption (commons).

    We agree to enforce retaliation or restitution against impositions against all of those forms of property.

    But why? Because the most scarce and rewarding good is cooperation. We evolve moral intuitions, moral and ethical rules, manners, laws and traditions to preserve the value of cooperation.

    Property rights then represent a warranty by the group members of those forms of property that one has acquired or invested in or refrained from the consumption of, in order to preserve the incentive to cooperate and the disproportionate rewards of cooperation, including the rewards from the production of commons- property rights being the first commons.

    The origin of property preceded cooperation. The origin of morality followed cooperation. The origin of rights evolved from morality. Law evolved from the need for uniform application of restitution for impositions upon property.

    Property rights did not evolve from the scarcity of goods but from the gradual atomization of the family in the increasingly individualistic division of labor.

    So while libertarianism contains comforting memes, it is predicated on a number of half truths and falsehoods.

    The problem we face is the preservation of the disproportionate rewards of cooperation. Property rights – insuring one another – are the means by which we do so.

    As such, the scope of property necessary for an anarchic polity is that which preserves the will to cooperate.

    And as far as we know, that is a high trust requirement.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian institute

    Kiev, Ukraine.

    Libertarianism is reducible to rule of law under the total prohibition against the imposition of costs against that property necessary to preserve the incentives to cooperate.


    Source date (UTC): 2015-08-08 08:00:00 UTC

  • We were wrong to approve the 1965 immigration act, and wrong to open the borders

    We were wrong to approve the 1965 immigration act, and wrong to open the borders to the third world.


    Source date (UTC): 2015-08-07 13:37:14 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/629647488086097920

    Reply addressees: @JulieBorowski

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/629413750332911616


    IN REPLY TO:

    @JulieBorowski

    Is america the greatest nation in the history of history or nah?

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/629413750332911616

  • We were wrong in WW1. Uniting Germany and Russia was in all our interests. We we

    We were wrong in WW1. Uniting Germany and Russia was in all our interests. We were wrong in WW2. We were wrong in the Gulf.


    Source date (UTC): 2015-08-07 13:35:25 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/629647031825469440

    Reply addressees: @JulieBorowski

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/629413750332911616


    IN REPLY TO:

    @JulieBorowski

    Is america the greatest nation in the history of history or nah?

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/629413750332911616

  • Build The Future: Choose Aristocracy (Advocacy), Not Racism (Criticism) #tcot #t

    Build The Future: Choose Aristocracy (Advocacy), Not Racism (Criticism) http://www.propertarianism.com/MyTf2 #tcot #tlot #nrx


    Source date (UTC): 2015-08-07 12:32:02 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/629631082841903104

  • RUSSIA: Only Reformation of your trust will end American Hegemony. And ending it

    RUSSIA: Only Reformation of your trust will end American Hegemony. And ending it is good for us all. http://www.propertarianism.com/U2zeI #tcot #nrx #tlot


    Source date (UTC): 2015-08-07 12:00:27 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/629623134686191616

  • We Need A Name For Propertarian “Politics”.

    [T]HE UNIFICATION OF MORALITY, PHILOSOPHY, SCIENCE, AND LAW


    1) Testimonialism (Epistemology),
    2) Propertarianism(Ethics), and;
    3) Strict-Construction Dissent Liberalism: the multi-house market for the production of commons(Politics).

    (I am trying to figure out a name for propertarian and testimonial Politics)

  • We Need A Name For Propertarian “Politics”.

    [T]HE UNIFICATION OF MORALITY, PHILOSOPHY, SCIENCE, AND LAW


    1) Testimonialism (Epistemology),
    2) Propertarianism(Ethics), and;
    3) Strict-Construction Dissent Liberalism: the multi-house market for the production of commons(Politics).

    (I am trying to figure out a name for propertarian and testimonial Politics)

  • THINKING. TRUST. RUSSIA. Despite my criticism of Russian politics and culture si

    THINKING. TRUST. RUSSIA.

    Despite my criticism of Russian politics and culture since the invasion of Ukraine for purely dishonest reasons, I tend to have deep affection for Russian people, even when I think they are absurd, superstitious and crazy.

    Because I love that they are brave. Americans are brave by and large *outside of the millennial generation. Some brits are brave, if a minority. But continentals seem submissive and feminized to the core.

    So that is why I love Russians. Every crazy, lunatic, superstitious, conspiracy-theorizing, pseudoscientific, one of them – at least in the middle and upper classes. Russian working class is as boorish as the come, and the saddest example of white people( outside of California. lol).

    The wonderful thing about Russians is personal craftsmanship – pride in cunning in particular (which blows up as frequently as it succeeds). But they are very proud of their work, and very prideful in judging it. I find them very American in this regard.

    Unlike americans they do not easily trust one another, so while individual work is exceptional, collective work must be managed. And management is universally poor among Russians.

    The most obvious obstacle to Russian (and Ukrainian) trust is that admitting ignorance to others places you at the mercy of those who claim to possess knowledge that they almost always don’t have, but seek as a means of obtaining status, control, and as a consequence, work avoidance. Achieving ‘rest’ (laziness) is somehow seen as a reward, or bonus, or status symbol (Mafia Ethics – Russia is a Mafia Culture, just as Judaism is a Mafia Culture, and the two are closely related in that Judaism relies on cunning and Russian culture relies upon force).

    Russians ‘fence’ to demonstrate who should be in control. They lack the socratic and jesuit, and anglo technique of slowly ‘seeking to understand’ one another’s position. Women do this all the time. Instead Russian men seek to trip one another up or argue for position of authority rather than seek to collect Knowledge from each other and come to a consensus. Men do this all the time.

    This is how trust is built between peers. But Russians, like the Chinese and muslims, always seek hierarchy.

    The reason to do business with anglos and germans is because they are trustworthy and honest, and friction and risk are reduced. The reason other cultures like to work with their own is that they understand one another’s lie-signals and so they can lie honestly with one another and consider it manners. It is less economically productive but more comfortable for them. Conversely, when working with higher trust peoples, the feel weaker, or more nervous.

    Now, Muscovites are not equal to Russians. Many Moscow business people are like very poor versions of Germans. They are highly empirical, and work very hard. But they live in a world of corruption and theft, and fragile infrastructure. So they must be more skeptical than the westerners.

    I have more than a few times tripped up using anglo french political language with Russians and they view it as dishonest or patronizing. I must keep it in mind at all times.

    I am not an authority on this subject. I write so that I can understand it. I think I have come to understand, a bit, the Russian character. But I can only empathize so far. I know who I am and where I come from. We are the most trusting people on earth – to our own detriment.


    Source date (UTC): 2015-08-07 10:37:00 UTC