THE CORRECT ANSWER —”Who is driving social Marxism across the globe, and why?”—- If you mean Cultural Marxism, then that was the third generational failure of the Ashkenazi Jews: 1 – Labor Communism (Marx), Generation 1 2 – State Socialism (Trotsky/Lenin/Mao/(Many), Generation 2 3 – Academic Cultural Marxism (The Frankfurt School: Adorno et al.). Generation 3 4 – But upon the failure of all three the French supplied Postmodernism (Derrida, Foucault), and all the university, media, and state actors that had over-invested in the three generational failures of marxism converted to postmodernism. Postmodernism states that there is no truth, no science, no reason, only power, and as such, by use of ideology, propaganda, academy, and media, the ‘Revolution’ against meritocracy (western civilization) can be achieved by the power of words and voting instead of by ideas, science, reason, and achievement. It’s worth noting that The French (always europe’s enemy) had the most authoritarian government in Europe prior to its revolution, the most authoritarian after the revolution, and remains the most authoritarian in Europe today. With Rousseau providing the authoritarian arguments. Arguments that were first copied by the (timid) Germans, then the Rebellious Ashkenazis (Marxists). And horridly implemented by the Soviets, the Maoists, and the Cambodians. And still the cause of South American and Indian poverty. 5 – If we look at the chief propagandists in the west, it’s single women, immigrants, the lower middle class, lower class, underclass, and American jews. As always since American jews are superior competitors in verbal presentation, they provide a disproportionate influence in Entertainment, Entertainment Media, News, Pseudosciences, and Propaganda. (This is easily measured by random sampling of authors of daily propaganda.) Note: Read Paul Fussel’s “Class” for an improvement on marxist class theory. It’s Fussel’s categories I refer to, because they roughly reflect (a) occupational hierarchy, (b) IQ hierarchy, and as such, they match the data. “Defectors” One thing I did not expect was that while the majority of white americans are of german decent (not english), the germans are MUCH LESS likely to serve the country in the military, and the burden is HEAVILY born by the Anglo – Scotts-Irish demographics. Likewise, the Germans and the Puritans of New England are more likely to ‘defect’ into marxism, socialism, postmodernism, and the Scandinavians of the north central even more likely to defect. Note: a friend counsels that the ‘defect’ has been on the continent forever, and goes back to Heraclitus. So the ‘defect’ we see in German Americans, if not all but anglo-scots-iris (southerners). And therefore the question is, what is this defect, and how do we name it operationally? (Really)
Form: Argument
-
—“Who is driving social Marxism across the globe, and why?”—
THE CORRECT ANSWER —”Who is driving social Marxism across the globe, and why?”—- If you mean Cultural Marxism, then that was the third generational failure of the Ashkenazi Jews: 1 – Labor Communism (Marx), Generation 1 2 – State Socialism (Trotsky/Lenin/Mao/(Many), Generation 2 3 – Academic Cultural Marxism (The Frankfurt School: Adorno et al.). Generation 3 4 – But upon the failure of all three the French supplied Postmodernism (Derrida, Foucault), and all the university, media, and state actors that had over-invested in the three generational failures of marxism converted to postmodernism. Postmodernism states that there is no truth, no science, no reason, only power, and as such, by use of ideology, propaganda, academy, and media, the ‘Revolution’ against meritocracy (western civilization) can be achieved by the power of words and voting instead of by ideas, science, reason, and achievement. It’s worth noting that The French (always europe’s enemy) had the most authoritarian government in Europe prior to its revolution, the most authoritarian after the revolution, and remains the most authoritarian in Europe today. With Rousseau providing the authoritarian arguments. Arguments that were first copied by the (timid) Germans, then the Rebellious Ashkenazis (Marxists). And horridly implemented by the Soviets, the Maoists, and the Cambodians. And still the cause of South American and Indian poverty. 5 – If we look at the chief propagandists in the west, it’s single women, immigrants, the lower middle class, lower class, underclass, and American jews. As always since American jews are superior competitors in verbal presentation, they provide a disproportionate influence in Entertainment, Entertainment Media, News, Pseudosciences, and Propaganda. (This is easily measured by random sampling of authors of daily propaganda.) Note: Read Paul Fussel’s “Class” for an improvement on marxist class theory. It’s Fussel’s categories I refer to, because they roughly reflect (a) occupational hierarchy, (b) IQ hierarchy, and as such, they match the data. “Defectors” One thing I did not expect was that while the majority of white americans are of german decent (not english), the germans are MUCH LESS likely to serve the country in the military, and the burden is HEAVILY born by the Anglo – Scotts-Irish demographics. Likewise, the Germans and the Puritans of New England are more likely to ‘defect’ into marxism, socialism, postmodernism, and the Scandinavians of the north central even more likely to defect. Note: a friend counsels that the ‘defect’ has been on the continent forever, and goes back to Heraclitus. So the ‘defect’ we see in German Americans, if not all but anglo-scots-iris (southerners). And therefore the question is, what is this defect, and how do we name it operationally? (Really)
-
“Why is the subject of cognitive deficit rarely mentioned as one of the contributing factors of poverty?”
—“Why Is the subject of cognitive deficrt rarely mentioned as one of the contributing factors of poverty?” THE CORRECT ANSWER 1. First, because it violates the marxist and postmodern oppression narrative. People were not oppressed. The underclass was domesticated as were all other domesticated animals. The current social economic political and military differences between races and nations is determined entirely by the success at culling the underclasses under the harsh conditions of agrarian winters. 2. Second because the marxist-postmodernists that dominate education cannot accept it, because it would violate the oppression narrative. If the oppression narrative is undermined that means that the pursuit of power by the marxist postmodernists loses legitimacy. 3. Third because it is largely in-actionable other than via eugenics, and leads directly to justifying the eugenics narrative. 4. Fourth because it would justify either redistribution which would make the right furious OR eugenics which would make the left furious. 5. Fifth because the truth is unacceptable to the underclasses (and non- whites) and therefore the left’s political party (democrats) would lose their base – democracy forces falsehoods and prevents truths. Thanks, as always for the Ask To Answer. -cheers.
-
“Why is the subject of cognitive deficit rarely mentioned as one of the contributing factors of poverty?”
—“Why Is the subject of cognitive deficrt rarely mentioned as one of the contributing factors of poverty?” THE CORRECT ANSWER 1. First, because it violates the marxist and postmodern oppression narrative. People were not oppressed. The underclass was domesticated as were all other domesticated animals. The current social economic political and military differences between races and nations is determined entirely by the success at culling the underclasses under the harsh conditions of agrarian winters. 2. Second because the marxist-postmodernists that dominate education cannot accept it, because it would violate the oppression narrative. If the oppression narrative is undermined that means that the pursuit of power by the marxist postmodernists loses legitimacy. 3. Third because it is largely in-actionable other than via eugenics, and leads directly to justifying the eugenics narrative. 4. Fourth because it would justify either redistribution which would make the right furious OR eugenics which would make the left furious. 5. Fifth because the truth is unacceptable to the underclasses (and non- whites) and therefore the left’s political party (democrats) would lose their base – democracy forces falsehoods and prevents truths. Thanks, as always for the Ask To Answer. -cheers.
-
Political Argument: The Correct Answer (and a Painful Truth)
(dysgenia requires theft and deceit) —-“How can you present facts in a political conversation without sounding biased? (https://www.quora.com/How-can-you-present-facts-in-a-political-conversation-without-sounding-biased)?”—- By **explaining both sides **and demonstrating that your argument remains superior in some way or other, or explaining that the other’s argument relies upon **falsehood or theft **…. which is what you should always do anyway. **Truth** is a bias, it is just a decidable bias instead of a preferential one. **Theft** (involuntary transfer) and moralizing (using guilt as means of forcing involuntary transfer) is decidable, and not a bias. Demonstrate that an argument is either **false** or causes i**nvoluntary transfer** (imposition of costs upon the demonstrated investments of others) and you have covered the two decision criteria that are not open to opinion. The sophist will attempt to argue for a good. A **preference** or a **good** is subjective. Anything that is not false or involuntary (directly or indirectly) is a candidate good. That something is a candidate good does not mean one can engage in **falsehood, ridicule, shaming, rallying, and involuntary transfer** in order to achieve that candidate good. It is very difficult to argue against **Truth and Voluntary Exchange**, using advocacy of **Falsehood, Shaming, and Thef**t. Explaining to people they are engaged in falsehood, coercion, and attempted theft produces humiliation. But it wins the argument. It just so happens that the **majority of arguments **in favor of preferences and candidate goods are made by falsehoods, shaming and theft, rather than truths and voluntary exchanges. **All political differences **are determined reducible to preferences for **dysgenic** (irresponsible reproduction) that forces the costs of one’s decisions on the polity, and **eugenic** (responsible reproduction) that forces one to bear the costs of one’s decisions. The reason being that the female and underclass incentive is dysgenic (The Equalitarian Herd), and the male and middle and upper class incentive is eugenic (The Meritocratic Packs). With the general outcome being the military and entrepreneurial class aligning with the working, middle, and upper middle classes, while the priestly, academic, and political classes aligning with the underclasses. In other words, **the immoral top and bottom against the moral middle.** Since **dysgenia depends upon theft**, it is usually argued falsely, which is why **marxism** (pseudoscience) and **postmodernism** (pseudo-rationalism), and **feminism** (pseudo-moralism) were invented to circumvent Darwin (biological evolution), Spencer (social evolution), and Nietzsche (moral evolution). **Marxism, Postmodernism, Feminism: They needed an elaborate set of lies.**
-
Political Argument: The Correct Answer (and a Painful Truth)
(dysgenia requires theft and deceit) —-“How can you present facts in a political conversation without sounding biased? (https://www.quora.com/How-can-you-present-facts-in-a-political-conversation-without-sounding-biased)?”—- By **explaining both sides **and demonstrating that your argument remains superior in some way or other, or explaining that the other’s argument relies upon **falsehood or theft **…. which is what you should always do anyway. **Truth** is a bias, it is just a decidable bias instead of a preferential one. **Theft** (involuntary transfer) and moralizing (using guilt as means of forcing involuntary transfer) is decidable, and not a bias. Demonstrate that an argument is either **false** or causes i**nvoluntary transfer** (imposition of costs upon the demonstrated investments of others) and you have covered the two decision criteria that are not open to opinion. The sophist will attempt to argue for a good. A **preference** or a **good** is subjective. Anything that is not false or involuntary (directly or indirectly) is a candidate good. That something is a candidate good does not mean one can engage in **falsehood, ridicule, shaming, rallying, and involuntary transfer** in order to achieve that candidate good. It is very difficult to argue against **Truth and Voluntary Exchange**, using advocacy of **Falsehood, Shaming, and Thef**t. Explaining to people they are engaged in falsehood, coercion, and attempted theft produces humiliation. But it wins the argument. It just so happens that the **majority of arguments **in favor of preferences and candidate goods are made by falsehoods, shaming and theft, rather than truths and voluntary exchanges. **All political differences **are determined reducible to preferences for **dysgenic** (irresponsible reproduction) that forces the costs of one’s decisions on the polity, and **eugenic** (responsible reproduction) that forces one to bear the costs of one’s decisions. The reason being that the female and underclass incentive is dysgenic (The Equalitarian Herd), and the male and middle and upper class incentive is eugenic (The Meritocratic Packs). With the general outcome being the military and entrepreneurial class aligning with the working, middle, and upper middle classes, while the priestly, academic, and political classes aligning with the underclasses. In other words, **the immoral top and bottom against the moral middle.** Since **dysgenia depends upon theft**, it is usually argued falsely, which is why **marxism** (pseudoscience) and **postmodernism** (pseudo-rationalism), and **feminism** (pseudo-moralism) were invented to circumvent Darwin (biological evolution), Spencer (social evolution), and Nietzsche (moral evolution). **Marxism, Postmodernism, Feminism: They needed an elaborate set of lies.**
-
THE LIE OF COMMUNISM, SOCIALISM, AND CAPITALISM —“What’s the unbiased pros and
THE LIE OF COMMUNISM, SOCIALISM, AND CAPITALISM
—“What’s the unbiased pros and cons of socialism, communism and capitalism?”—
Each proposes a MONOPOLY, just as the abrahamic religions… https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=279756825954548&id=100017606988153
Source date (UTC): 2018-08-17 17:14:37 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1030503175378399232
-
photos_and_videos/TimelinePhotos_dJ9jhts2Ng/39282969_279722852624612_15427582442
photos_and_videos/TimelinePhotos_dJ9jhts2Ng/39282969_279722852624612_1542758244202577920_o_279722845957946.jpg POLITICAL ARGUMENT: THE CORRECT ANSWER (AND A PAINFUL TRUTH)
(dysgenia requires theft and deceit)
—-“How can you present facts in a political conversation without sounding biased? (https://www.quora.com/How-can-you-present-facts-in-a-political-conversation-without-sounding-biased)?”—-
By **explaining both sides **and demonstrating that your argument remains superior in some way or other, or explaining that the other’s argument relies upon **falsehood or theft **…. which is what you should always do anyway.
**Truth** is a bias, it is just a decidable bias instead of a preferential one.
**Theft** (involuntary transfer) and moralizing (using guilt as means of forcing involuntary transfer) is decidable, and not a bias.
Demonstrate that an argument is either **false** or causes i**nvoluntary transfer** (imposition of costs upon the demonstrated investments of others) and you have covered the two decision criteria that are not open to opinion.
The sophist will attempt to argue for a good. A **preference** or a **good** is subjective. Anything that is not false or involuntary (directly or indirectly) is a candidate good. That something is a candidate good does not mean one can engage in **falsehood, ridicule, shaming, rallying, and involuntary transfer** in order to achieve that candidate good.
It is very difficult to argue against **Truth and Voluntary Exchange**, using advocacy of **Falsehood, Shaming, and Thef**t. Explaining to people they are engaged in falsehood, coercion, and attempted theft produces humiliation. But it wins the argument.
It just so happens that the **majority of arguments **in favor of preferences and candidate goods are made by falsehoods, shaming and theft, rather than truths and voluntary exchanges.
**All political differences **are determined reducible to preferences for **dysgenic** (irresponsible reproduction) that forces the costs of one’s decisions on the polity, and **eugenic** (responsible reproduction) that forces one to bear the costs of one’s decisions. The reason being that the female and underclass incentive is dysgenic (The Equalitarian Herd), and the male and middle and upper class incentive is eugenic (The Meritocratic Packs). With the general outcome being the military and entrepreneurial class aligning with the working, middle, and upper middle classes, while the priestly, academic, and political classes aligning with the underclasses. In other words, **the immoral top and bottom against the moral middle.**
Since **dysgenia depends upon theft**, it is usually argued falsely, which is why **marxism** (pseudoscience) and **postmodernism** (pseudo-rationalism), and **feminism** (pseudo-moralism) were invented to circumvent Darwin (biological evolution), Spencer (social evolution), and Nietzsche (moral evolution).
**Marxism, Postmodernism, Feminism: They needed an elaborate set of lies.**POLITICAL ARGUMENT: THE CORRECT ANSWER (AND A PAINFUL TRUTH)
(dysgenia requires theft and deceit)
—-“How can you present facts in a political conversation without sounding biased? (https://www.quora.com/How-can-you-present-facts-in-a-political-conversation-without-sounding-biased)?”—-
By **explaining both sides **and demonstrating that your argument remains superior in some way or other, or explaining that the other’s argument relies upon **falsehood or theft **…. which is what you should always do anyway.
**Truth** is a bias, it is just a decidable bias instead of a preferential one.
**Theft** (involuntary transfer) and moralizing (using guilt as means of forcing involuntary transfer) is decidable, and not a bias.
Demonstrate that an argument is either **false** or causes i**nvoluntary transfer** (imposition of costs upon the demonstrated investments of others) and you have covered the two decision criteria that are not open to opinion.
The sophist will attempt to argue for a good. A **preference** or a **good** is subjective. Anything that is not false or involuntary (directly or indirectly) is a candidate good. That something is a candidate good does not mean one can engage in **falsehood, ridicule, shaming, rallying, and involuntary transfer** in order to achieve that candidate good.
It is very difficult to argue against **Truth and Voluntary Exchange**, using advocacy of **Falsehood, Shaming, and Thef**t. Explaining to people they are engaged in falsehood, coercion, and attempted theft produces humiliation. But it wins the argument.
It just so happens that the **majority of arguments **in favor of preferences and candidate goods are made by falsehoods, shaming and theft, rather than truths and voluntary exchanges.
**All political differences **are determined reducible to preferences for **dysgenic** (irresponsible reproduction) that forces the costs of one’s decisions on the polity, and **eugenic** (responsible reproduction) that forces one to bear the costs of one’s decisions. The reason being that the female and underclass incentive is dysgenic (The Equalitarian Herd), and the male and middle and upper class incentive is eugenic (The Meritocratic Packs). With the general outcome being the military and entrepreneurial class aligning with the working, middle, and upper middle classes, while the priestly, academic, and political classes aligning with the underclasses. In other words, **the immoral top and bottom against the moral middle.**
Since **dysgenia depends upon theft**, it is usually argued falsely, which is why **marxism** (pseudoscience) and **postmodernism** (pseudo-rationalism), and **feminism** (pseudo-moralism) were invented to circumvent Darwin (biological evolution), Spencer (social evolution), and Nietzsche (moral evolution).
**Marxism, Postmodernism, Feminism: They needed an elaborate set of lies.**
Source date (UTC): 2018-08-17 12:20:00 UTC
-
photos_and_videos/TimelinePhotos_152793348650897/39282969_279722852624612_154275
photos_and_videos/TimelinePhotos_152793348650897/39282969_279722852624612_1542758244202577920_o_279722845957946.jpg POLITICAL ARGUMENT: THE CORRECT ANSWER (AND A PAINFUL TRUTH)
(dysgenia requires theft and deceit)
—-“How can you present facts in a political conversation without sounding biased? (https://www.quora.com/How-can-you-present-facts-in-a-political-conversation-without-sounding-biased)?”—-
By **explaining both sides **and demonstrating that your argument remains superior in some way or other, or explaining that the other’s argument relies upon **falsehood or theft **…. which is what you should always do anyway.
**Truth** is a bias, it is just a decidable bias instead of a preferential one.
**Theft** (involuntary transfer) and moralizing (using guilt as means of forcing involuntary transfer) is decidable, and not a bias.
Demonstrate that an argument is either **false** or causes i**nvoluntary transfer** (imposition of costs upon the demonstrated investments of others) and you have covered the two decision criteria that are not open to opinion.
The sophist will attempt to argue for a good. A **preference** or a **good** is subjective. Anything that is not false or involuntary (directly or indirectly) is a candidate good. That something is a candidate good does not mean one can engage in **falsehood, ridicule, shaming, rallying, and involuntary transfer** in order to achieve that candidate good.
It is very difficult to argue against **Truth and Voluntary Exchange**, using advocacy of **Falsehood, Shaming, and Thef**t. Explaining to people they are engaged in falsehood, coercion, and attempted theft produces humiliation. But it wins the argument.
It just so happens that the **majority of arguments **in favor of preferences and candidate goods are made by falsehoods, shaming and theft, rather than truths and voluntary exchanges.
**All political differences **are determined reducible to preferences for **dysgenic** (irresponsible reproduction) that forces the costs of one’s decisions on the polity, and **eugenic** (responsible reproduction) that forces one to bear the costs of one’s decisions. The reason being that the female and underclass incentive is dysgenic (The Equalitarian Herd), and the male and middle and upper class incentive is eugenic (The Meritocratic Packs). With the general outcome being the military and entrepreneurial class aligning with the working, middle, and upper middle classes, while the priestly, academic, and political classes aligning with the underclasses. In other words, **the immoral top and bottom against the moral middle.**
Since **dysgenia depends upon theft**, it is usually argued falsely, which is why **marxism** (pseudoscience) and **postmodernism** (pseudo-rationalism), and **feminism** (pseudo-moralism) were invented to circumvent Darwin (biological evolution), Spencer (social evolution), and Nietzsche (moral evolution).
**Marxism, Postmodernism, Feminism: They needed an elaborate set of lies.**POLITICAL ARGUMENT: THE CORRECT ANSWER (AND A PAINFUL TRUTH)
(dysgenia requires theft and deceit)
—-“How can you present facts in a political conversation without sounding biased? (https://www.quora.com/How-can-you-present-facts-in-a-political-conversation-without-sounding-biased)?”—-
By **explaining both sides **and demonstrating that your argument remains superior in some way or other, or explaining that the other’s argument relies upon **falsehood or theft **…. which is what you should always do anyway.
**Truth** is a bias, it is just a decidable bias instead of a preferential one.
**Theft** (involuntary transfer) and moralizing (using guilt as means of forcing involuntary transfer) is decidable, and not a bias.
Demonstrate that an argument is either **false** or causes i**nvoluntary transfer** (imposition of costs upon the demonstrated investments of others) and you have covered the two decision criteria that are not open to opinion.
The sophist will attempt to argue for a good. A **preference** or a **good** is subjective. Anything that is not false or involuntary (directly or indirectly) is a candidate good. That something is a candidate good does not mean one can engage in **falsehood, ridicule, shaming, rallying, and involuntary transfer** in order to achieve that candidate good.
It is very difficult to argue against **Truth and Voluntary Exchange**, using advocacy of **Falsehood, Shaming, and Thef**t. Explaining to people they are engaged in falsehood, coercion, and attempted theft produces humiliation. But it wins the argument.
It just so happens that the **majority of arguments **in favor of preferences and candidate goods are made by falsehoods, shaming and theft, rather than truths and voluntary exchanges.
**All political differences **are determined reducible to preferences for **dysgenic** (irresponsible reproduction) that forces the costs of one’s decisions on the polity, and **eugenic** (responsible reproduction) that forces one to bear the costs of one’s decisions. The reason being that the female and underclass incentive is dysgenic (The Equalitarian Herd), and the male and middle and upper class incentive is eugenic (The Meritocratic Packs). With the general outcome being the military and entrepreneurial class aligning with the working, middle, and upper middle classes, while the priestly, academic, and political classes aligning with the underclasses. In other words, **the immoral top and bottom against the moral middle.**
Since **dysgenia depends upon theft**, it is usually argued falsely, which is why **marxism** (pseudoscience) and **postmodernism** (pseudo-rationalism), and **feminism** (pseudo-moralism) were invented to circumvent Darwin (biological evolution), Spencer (social evolution), and Nietzsche (moral evolution).
**Marxism, Postmodernism, Feminism: They needed an elaborate set of lies.**
Source date (UTC): 2018-08-17 12:20:00 UTC
-
Commercial production will evolve to reflect the greatest demand.
No, you don’t understand. Commercial production will evolve to reflect the greatest demand. The aristocracy, the burghers, the craftsmen, the labor, the women, the underclass. It’s just that (a) people are no longer aspiring to consume in imitation of aristocracy, (b) people are no longer trying to aspire to, and consume in imitation of the middle class, (c) and instead are consuming as is the majority, the underclasses, who are, at present, signaling consumption by deformity rather than conformity. We call it individualism. It is. It’s just the only signaling available to them by consumption, rather than production or achievement.