Form: Argument

  • IMMATERIALITY OF GODS. The Four Reasons Are 1. God’s silence, 2. God’s inaction,

    IMMATERIALITY OF GODS.

    The Four Reasons Are

    1. God’s silence,

    2. God’s inaction,

    3. the lack of evidence, and

    4. the universe looks exactly like a godless universe would,

    and not at all like a Christian universe would, even down to its very structure.

    Of course this is true if you think gods are material beings. If instead you think gods are software distributed in the minds of all of their worshippers, producing synchronicities because of the software, then that’s quite different.

    You see, I talk to my gods all the time, but I don’t have to imagine them as supernatural because I understand that they exist as information and information hosted in a vast distributed computing network called ‘worshippers’ who pay debts to these gods (thanks) in exchange for wisdom and the consequences of wisdom obtained from their counsel.

    Gods exist like numbers exist.

    They do not exist in supernatural form.

    THey’re just information.

    And that is enough.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-08-24 18:54:00 UTC

  • “I do universal nationalism. Why? Because natural law judges it as the only not-

    “I do universal nationalism. Why? Because natural law judges it as the only not-immoral means of cooperation. But that doesn’t tell you much. Instead it’s because “all men are distant… https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=453305208599708&id=100017606988153


    Source date (UTC): 2019-08-23 11:41:25 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1164865220235407361

  • “One of the common themes we see from some people who countersignal us is often

    —“One of the common themes we see from some people who countersignal us is often they seem to pooh-pooh law as a solution and think that everything can be solved with some sort of aesthetic… https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=453302635266632&id=100017606988153


    Source date (UTC): 2019-08-23 11:36:12 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1164863909553213441

  • “One of the common themes we see from some people who countersignal us is often

    —“One of the common themes we see from some people who countersignal us is often they seem to pooh-pooh law as a solution and think that everything can be solved with some sort of aesthetic or spiritual movement. These guys are often young. I see them as just looking for a solution within a frame they understand and that is intuitive to them. In contrast to some of the more mature people who have a spiritual bent but also recognize the importance of punishment (law) and that not everything can be accomplished only with persuasion.”— John Mark


    Source date (UTC): 2019-08-23 07:36:00 UTC

  • The debate is between RULE OF LAW (capitalism) and ARBITRARY RULE (everything el

    The debate is between RULE OF LAW (capitalism) and ARBITRARY RULE (everything else). You will not reframe this argument as a means of destroying the American experiment in a “Third Way”: A Purely Middle Class Society of Responsible People.

    You want something else: Then Go Home.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-08-21 18:27:51 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1164242727866908672

    Reply addressees: @AndrewYang

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1163943868825554946


    IN REPLY TO:

    @AndrewYang

    The socialism vs. capitalism debate is dated and unproductive. We need to break out of this simplistic mindset and pass legislation that would benefit all Americans, without regard for labels that are rapidly losing their relevance. https://t.co/3fKCDZOLJQ

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1163943868825554946

  • 1) If we divide America along political lines, just as there are left and right

    1) If we divide America along political lines, just as there are left and right states, there will be left and right countries.
    2) Of course they will protect their parasitism.
    3) if they didn’t how would we identify who must exit?
    😉


    Source date (UTC): 2019-08-20 23:23:57 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1163954855179952138

    Reply addressees: @YvesBurri

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1163933232842362880


    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/1163933232842362880

  • “you know, ANOTHER option to civil war “— There are many cases of ANOTHER. If

    —“you know, ANOTHER option to civil war “—

    There are many cases of ANOTHER.

    If we cannot have rule of law, then I am willing to risk my life, (as are many millions more) to rule rather than be ruled.

    In the end. That’s the only conversation. The rest is hot air.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-08-19 19:58:42 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1163540816184467459

    Reply addressees: @SignHexa @NoahRevoy @StefanMolyneux

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1163534541241442305


    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/1163534541241442305

  • When People Are Presented with The Choice They Will Choose P-Law

    —“Your version of Propertarianism requires oppression; denial of equal political rights and full free speech – your dude Mark is already posting how your society will require the first amendment to only allow speech your “truth-judiciary” greenlights.”— N6 @SignHexa

    [P]ropertarianism (Natural Law) would restore Defamation & extend commercial liability and warranty to the content of economic, political, and scientific speech, made to the public, and convert Free Speech to Free Truthful (meaning Scientific) and Reciprocal Speech. No More Lies. How is requiring public speech, to the public, in matters commercial, financial, economic, political, and scientific, meet the criteria of Truthful(Scientific and Operational), and Reciprocal, other than preventing lying to the public? How is requiring we speak Truthfully, Reciprocally, in pursuit of Exchanges in both private and public rather than lie cheat and steal from one another via government, to redistribute to our favored classes, by arbitrary judgement of individuals or masses – other than optimum? How is requiring speech be logical, empirical, operational, reciprocal, fully accounted, when one asserts a claim of Good or True anything other than honest, ethical, and moral – and all other claims just dishonest, unethical, and immoral? Your desire to preserve lying, cheating, stealing, conspiracy, and oppression of the truth, denial of opportunity for exchange, and generation of conflict, and generation of an authoritarian state not ‘Oppression’, where truth, reciprocity, exchange, not ‘Freedom’? You see you have nowhere to go. 1. You want what you want regardless of the cost to others.2. You want to lie cheat steal, coerce, and force others to give you what you want.So;Why should the opposition RECIPROCATE, and just take from you by all you have to offer: enserfment? You see, we are happy to let you continue to spread your favelas in your urban “Plantations” (ghettos in training), but we are not willing to let you take our Ethnic groups, our Civilization, our Institutions, our Culture, and our Sovereignty, Liberty, and Freedom with you. But you are not willing to Reciprocate by Separation (Devolution or Secession) because you cannot survive on your own without the vast middle – the central achievement of western men: a middle class civilization of Reciprocity, Contract and Law: Markets. So you leave us no choice but civil war. You are exposed for what you are: a mob of undomesticated, ignorant, barbaric, thieves, ungrateful for the prosperity, freedoms, provided for you by the middle classes of the ancient and modern world, and happy to return to the gutter of equality in poverty you came from. One needs equal protection UNDER the law to have ‘RIGHTS’. But may only have political ‘POWER’ having demonstrated OBSERVANCE of that law, and achievement under that law: Sovereignty, Reciprocity, Truth, Duty, Jury, and Voluntary Cooperation in every aspect of life. (You don’t) So you do not want rights, you want power to violate the rights of others. There is only one natural law, one right, from which all other rights descend both logically, operationally, and empirically: Reciprocity. Because other than reciprocity one can only harm, steal & defraud. Now, do you see what I did there? I used categorically, logically, empirically, operationally consistent, fully accounted, speech to end your ability to engage in False Promise, Baiting into Hazard, Undue Praise, using Sophism, Critique, and GSRRM. That is what I teach people. I teach: – The Natural Law, – The Science of Testimony, – The Grammars of Truth and Deceit, – The Logics of Acquisition and Compatibility; And their application to: – The strict construction of constitutions, legislation, regulation, and findings of the court we call ‘Law’.

    [pullquote]
    I teach:
    – The Natural Law,
    – The Science of Testimony,
    – The Grammars of Truth and Deceit,
    – The Logics of Acquisition and Compatibility;
    And their application to:
    – The strict construction of constitutions, legislation, regulation, and findings of the court we call ‘Law’.
    [/pullquote]

    Now you are a naturally dishonest, deceitful, polluter of the informational commons as a practitioner of Abrahamic False Promise, Baiting into Hazard, Pilpul and Critique. A useful idiot for smarter men. But…. I am quite willing to bet, even my life, that the majority is not like you, but ethical and moral, and when given the choice of a truthful reciprocal commons where genders, classes, races can conduct exchanges (disciplined behavior for redistribution) in Government – We win. Because the truth is that the reason people are unhappy is YOU and the rest of the Useful Idiots who took the genealogy of Abraham > Marx > Stalin > Alinsky > Feminists > Postmodernists > Political Correctness to create conflict between genders, classes, races. When you offer, as did the jews, christians, and muslims, ignorance, poverty, and decline during the last abrahamic dark age. And you are in the process of creating the next – in a long oscillation between the prosperity created by western man’s truth, reciprocity, and markets… … and the ignorance, poverty, suffering, of those who destroy them. The only problem facing western man in the ancient world and in the modern, is that we lacked a book of parables (histories) and scriptures (laws) beyond which no man or woman may tread. That’s not true any longer. We have our “scripture” of the ancient and modern world. We have always had it. It’s our law, the natural law. Sovereignty and Reciprocity, Truth and Duty, Law and Jury, Voluntary Markets in association, cooperation, reproduction, production, commons, and polities. Defense of all under the law. The purpose of political power being nothing other than the denial of violations of that law, and as a consequence the direction of all people to voluntary mutual cooperation. Political power that is Egalitarian (open to all of merit and observance of the law) not Equalitarian (independent of merit and observancy of the law). The only possible counter proposition is that a given group is of such failure in genetics, ability, habits, culture, religion, and institutions, that it cannot engage in productive, voluntary cooperation with others. Meaning they were demonstrably inferior, and those who could compete were demonstrably superior, and that the central problem is one of self perceived status as inferior. The solution is separation, separate political, economic and status systems. Which is how we evolved.��So when John and I get to that point, of making a series of videos that explain our position vs yours. And present a constitution that is pure, and another than is tailored to the condition in the west, it is very hard for me to see that you and yours win a moral majority.

  • When People Are Presented with The Choice They Will Choose P-Law

    —“Your version of Propertarianism requires oppression; denial of equal political rights and full free speech – your dude Mark is already posting how your society will require the first amendment to only allow speech your “truth-judiciary” greenlights.”— N6 @SignHexa

    [P]ropertarianism (Natural Law) would restore Defamation & extend commercial liability and warranty to the content of economic, political, and scientific speech, made to the public, and convert Free Speech to Free Truthful (meaning Scientific) and Reciprocal Speech. No More Lies. How is requiring public speech, to the public, in matters commercial, financial, economic, political, and scientific, meet the criteria of Truthful(Scientific and Operational), and Reciprocal, other than preventing lying to the public? How is requiring we speak Truthfully, Reciprocally, in pursuit of Exchanges in both private and public rather than lie cheat and steal from one another via government, to redistribute to our favored classes, by arbitrary judgement of individuals or masses – other than optimum? How is requiring speech be logical, empirical, operational, reciprocal, fully accounted, when one asserts a claim of Good or True anything other than honest, ethical, and moral – and all other claims just dishonest, unethical, and immoral? Your desire to preserve lying, cheating, stealing, conspiracy, and oppression of the truth, denial of opportunity for exchange, and generation of conflict, and generation of an authoritarian state not ‘Oppression’, where truth, reciprocity, exchange, not ‘Freedom’? You see you have nowhere to go. 1. You want what you want regardless of the cost to others.2. You want to lie cheat steal, coerce, and force others to give you what you want.So;Why should the opposition RECIPROCATE, and just take from you by all you have to offer: enserfment? You see, we are happy to let you continue to spread your favelas in your urban “Plantations” (ghettos in training), but we are not willing to let you take our Ethnic groups, our Civilization, our Institutions, our Culture, and our Sovereignty, Liberty, and Freedom with you. But you are not willing to Reciprocate by Separation (Devolution or Secession) because you cannot survive on your own without the vast middle – the central achievement of western men: a middle class civilization of Reciprocity, Contract and Law: Markets. So you leave us no choice but civil war. You are exposed for what you are: a mob of undomesticated, ignorant, barbaric, thieves, ungrateful for the prosperity, freedoms, provided for you by the middle classes of the ancient and modern world, and happy to return to the gutter of equality in poverty you came from. One needs equal protection UNDER the law to have ‘RIGHTS’. But may only have political ‘POWER’ having demonstrated OBSERVANCE of that law, and achievement under that law: Sovereignty, Reciprocity, Truth, Duty, Jury, and Voluntary Cooperation in every aspect of life. (You don’t) So you do not want rights, you want power to violate the rights of others. There is only one natural law, one right, from which all other rights descend both logically, operationally, and empirically: Reciprocity. Because other than reciprocity one can only harm, steal & defraud. Now, do you see what I did there? I used categorically, logically, empirically, operationally consistent, fully accounted, speech to end your ability to engage in False Promise, Baiting into Hazard, Undue Praise, using Sophism, Critique, and GSRRM. That is what I teach people. I teach: – The Natural Law, – The Science of Testimony, – The Grammars of Truth and Deceit, – The Logics of Acquisition and Compatibility; And their application to: – The strict construction of constitutions, legislation, regulation, and findings of the court we call ‘Law’.

    [pullquote]
    I teach:
    – The Natural Law,
    – The Science of Testimony,
    – The Grammars of Truth and Deceit,
    – The Logics of Acquisition and Compatibility;
    And their application to:
    – The strict construction of constitutions, legislation, regulation, and findings of the court we call ‘Law’.
    [/pullquote]

    Now you are a naturally dishonest, deceitful, polluter of the informational commons as a practitioner of Abrahamic False Promise, Baiting into Hazard, Pilpul and Critique. A useful idiot for smarter men. But…. I am quite willing to bet, even my life, that the majority is not like you, but ethical and moral, and when given the choice of a truthful reciprocal commons where genders, classes, races can conduct exchanges (disciplined behavior for redistribution) in Government – We win. Because the truth is that the reason people are unhappy is YOU and the rest of the Useful Idiots who took the genealogy of Abraham > Marx > Stalin > Alinsky > Feminists > Postmodernists > Political Correctness to create conflict between genders, classes, races. When you offer, as did the jews, christians, and muslims, ignorance, poverty, and decline during the last abrahamic dark age. And you are in the process of creating the next – in a long oscillation between the prosperity created by western man’s truth, reciprocity, and markets… … and the ignorance, poverty, suffering, of those who destroy them. The only problem facing western man in the ancient world and in the modern, is that we lacked a book of parables (histories) and scriptures (laws) beyond which no man or woman may tread. That’s not true any longer. We have our “scripture” of the ancient and modern world. We have always had it. It’s our law, the natural law. Sovereignty and Reciprocity, Truth and Duty, Law and Jury, Voluntary Markets in association, cooperation, reproduction, production, commons, and polities. Defense of all under the law. The purpose of political power being nothing other than the denial of violations of that law, and as a consequence the direction of all people to voluntary mutual cooperation. Political power that is Egalitarian (open to all of merit and observance of the law) not Equalitarian (independent of merit and observancy of the law). The only possible counter proposition is that a given group is of such failure in genetics, ability, habits, culture, religion, and institutions, that it cannot engage in productive, voluntary cooperation with others. Meaning they were demonstrably inferior, and those who could compete were demonstrably superior, and that the central problem is one of self perceived status as inferior. The solution is separation, separate political, economic and status systems. Which is how we evolved.��So when John and I get to that point, of making a series of videos that explain our position vs yours. And present a constitution that is pure, and another than is tailored to the condition in the west, it is very hard for me to see that you and yours win a moral majority.

  • The only possible counter proposition is that a given group is of such failure i

    The only possible counter proposition is that a given group is of such failure in genetics, ability, habits, culture, religion, and institutions, that it cannot engage in productive, voluntary cooperation with others.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-08-19 13:18:14 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1163440032205737984

    Reply addressees: @SignHexa @NoahRevoy @StefanMolyneux

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1163439679758372864


    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    @SignHexa @NoahRevoy @StefanMolyneux Political power that is Egalitarian (open to all of merit and observance of the law) not Equalitarian (independent of merit and observancy of the law).

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1163439679758372864


    IN REPLY TO:

    @curtdoolittle

    @SignHexa @NoahRevoy @StefanMolyneux Political power that is Egalitarian (open to all of merit and observance of the law) not Equalitarian (independent of merit and observancy of the law).

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1163439679758372864