Um. I know that if you are sensitive to the gender issue, it’s hard to see my underlying strategy, but I’m saying we all MUST trade. Because if we don’t trade the option is women prey upon men, or men prey upon women. In that choice, men will always prey upon women.
Source date (UTC): 2017-08-06 16:52:00 UTC
TO END ISLAM AND JUDAISM WE MUST END CHRISTIANITY
Everything good in Christianity was there before Jesus was.
The argument that the christians adopted the cult of the emperor and applied it to jesus is just as true as they adopted the cult of mithras and sol invictus.
There is a big difference between the imperial cult, the cult of mithras, and the cult of sol invictus, and the cult of jesus. The others were martial and good, and the jesus cult was destructive as hell. Not as destructive as islam but nearly.
There is no superior social technology than cult of the monarchy as embodiment of the people, cult of ancestors and heroes(masculine) and saints(feminine), cult of the militia, cult of the law as justice, cult of stoicism, cult of truth.
Lies are not necessary. They are cheap. And they are effective. But their consequences are worse than their benefits.
The old world lies of Islam, Christianity, and Judaism, as well as the new world lies of Islamism, Postmodernism, and Marxism, must be extinguished. They are semitic, babylonian inventions. They are the evolution of the Persian heresy of Zoroastrianism, turned against the circumpolar peoples in order to undermine our ancient military, technical, and civic social orders by the seduction of our women, our weak, and our ignorant.
Source date (UTC): 2017-08-06 10:57:00 UTC
DISTRIBUTING DEFECTIVE SPEECH?
If you sell a product that’s defective, or deliver a service that was defective, were you responsible for the consequences? Of course you were. Because you failed to perform due diligence.
how do we know whether you failed to perform due diligence out of deception, out of laziness, or out of incompetence?
This is the basic question. Does it matter if you cause damage intentionally or unintentionally? No. We still hold each other liable for the damage we do.
What percent of people’s speech (bullshit) do they know is false or half true, or immoral or just wrong (bullshit) but they do it anyway to see if they can get away with it?
Conversely, what percent of people’s speech have they done sufficient due diligence to insure that they do not spread a falsehood, half truth, immoral, or just ‘wrong’ information?
What percent of people cannot be trusted to perform that due diligence – simply because they lack the ability?
How would the world differ if we learned to speak truthfully along with our learning reading, writing, grammar, and arithmetic?
It would be a very different place.
Source date (UTC): 2017-08-05 18:31:00 UTC
THE TEST OF TRUTH VS LIES IS EASY:
Libertarianism = rights w/o obligations
-vs-
Sovereignty = only possible to posses rights in exchange for obligations (reciprocal insurance)
Libertarianism = “gimme” = Permission or gift = limited only by my willingness to exit. (pastoralists)
-vs-
Sovereignty = “fight to insure each other” = Exchange = Limited by market demand. (land holders)
Source date (UTC): 2017-07-31 14:24:00 UTC
OUR CHOICE: EUGENIC SCIENTIFIC TRUTH OR DYSGENIC ABRAHAMIC LIES
Don’t be stupid.
We had the consequences of the anglo enlightenment 17th. then the french 18th. then the german 19th, then the jewish 20th. And we’re dealing with the muslim failure to adapt to it today.
The question is whether the aristocratic scientific eugenic and progressive or the underclass abrahamic, dysgenic and regressive will succeed. It’s the choice between another age of innovation, or another dark age of abrahamic superstition and ignorance.
Source date (UTC): 2017-07-31 09:37:00 UTC
SCIENTISM IS PROBABLY A COMPLIMENT
In science we use the term parsimony to provide decidability. We do so because it is a human cognitive bias to pile complexity on a prior rather than to abandon a prior. So parsimony demands we abandon priors and seek simpler solutions rather than double down on failed investments.
Source date (UTC): 2017-07-31 09:16:00 UTC
THE ‘SH-T TEST’ theory of female behavior has legs. In fact, it might be the most important theory of female behavior – ever.
Seriously. As a search algorithm for a life form with a valuable commodity (vagina), it’s fantastic. Women Sh-t Test each other too you know. Constantly. And that’s why women have so few close friends compared to men.
It’s just cheaper to Sh-t Test than any other available strategy.
Source date (UTC): 2017-07-31 08:30:00 UTC
THE ARGUMENT AGAINST OUR DECAYING RELIGION
I don’t question the value of solving the problems of strategy (morals), tactics(norms), trust(in others), and mindfulness (self trust). Nor the use of the various tools of training ourselves for that purpose. But I question whether the restoration of the stoic ‘religion’, an iteration that further refines it, history as mythos (as was did homer), and the roman model (volunteers with life achievement who perform ceremonies and rituals, many ‘heroes’), sports, and civic duties will do a better job of providing those services than the ones imposed upon us by force that caused a dark age that only a reserve of aryans in the north was able to rescue us from.
Source date (UTC): 2017-07-26 12:57:00 UTC
IT’S JUST ‘CAUSE YOU’RE WELL INTENTIONED BUT IGNORANT (REALLY)
I’m saying that (a) you don’t need to be taught morality because it’s both in your genes and necessary for survival in existential reality – we have tested it. It’s just true. (b) What you have been taught as a means of obtaining mindfulness can be obtained by many ways, and of those ways you have been taught is one of the worst of them (c) one of the means of teaching such is by conflating the obvious and necessary and unavoidable with superstitious falsehood.
Every religion teaches the same thing using different arguments. These arguments JUSTIFY what exists, by providing a FALSE explanation of what exists in lieu of UNDERSTANDING why it exists.
They do not CAUSE it to exist whatsoever.
What they CAN do, whether by Law (understanding of precise measurements), education (knowledge of general rules), or religion (empathy by storytelling) is increase the precision of those measures, rules, and analogies.
The fact that you have been trained in one religion not ten, and that you understand one moral code not twenty, and understand one legal code, not one hundred, just means you’re ignorant of the alternatives.
That’s all it means. That’s what the evidence shows.
The value of christianity in the west was that it mirrored existing low clannishness because of higher pedomorphism (science) and higher verbal acumen (science) and reduction of friction from the lower clasesses (science). The germanicization of christianity resulted in individual protestantism and action vs replacing community catholicism and submission. And even today protestant countries are far higher trust and less backward and corrupt than catholic countries.
The value of anglo legalism (viking-thinking, anglo-saxon thinking) is that it’s simply personally, commercially, and civically beneficial to demonstrate high trust to others.
The problem with european and american atheism is that it’s NOT atheism but faith in 19th and 20th century pseudoscience. And the evidence is clear that the church (pseudorationalism, supernaturalism) cannot defeat pseudoscience.
So if we are going to defeat pseudoscience, the only method of doing so is truth.
Sorry. That’s all there is.
Either you are defeated by the marxist/postmodernist/democratic secular socialist / universal human rights pseudosciences that were invented (psudo-scientific abrahamism) to exterminate the aristocratic civilizations, or you will use truth (law, eduction, science) to defeat them AND the supernaturalism of ancient abrahamism (judaism, christianity, islamism)
You cannot use a more primitive form of lie (religion) to defeat a more advanced form of lie (pseudoscience).
THat’s what the evidence is.
Source date (UTC): 2017-07-26 10:31:00 UTC
UM. NO. I THINK LIKE A KING OR A GENERAL AND YOU LIKE A SOLDIER, OR CITIZEN, THAT’S THE DIFFERENCE.
Many criticisms for my lack of ‘spirituality’ one way or another:
—“your material values”—, or —“your bourgeoise values”—
Um. My interest in material values lies in the fact that one must have wealth to afford to invent the technology, with which to arm your people, so that you may defeat enemies both biological, animal, human, conceptual, and the universe itself.
I don’t like the church because I know it is (((a church))) not a sacred grove. I and I know it relies on conflationary (((abrahamic))) fictionalism (lies), rather than
The greeks innovated – particularly with aristotle, zeno, and epicurus, but the athenians (unlike the spartans) were weak. It was the spartans and the Romans that invented modernity, and the greeks ‘moved eastward’ more closely to the persians, semites, and anatolians. What the Spartans and the Athenians held separately the romans combined and eliminated the weaknesses: spartan ‘pragmatism’ and athenian navy and commerce, and aristotelian/stoic(zeno) law. But they abandoned sparta’s economics, abandoned greek idealism, and abandoned stoic ‘individualism’. We are the remains of greek ‘technology’ but roman civilization, which more generally reflects germanic civilization. and I have only come recently to understand how much influence the vikings had. We tend to remember what is written, not what changed state. The vikings ‘resurrected’ europe from defeat by byzantium by the church by giving rise to the Hansa and the north sea trade route and it’s overlands to byzantium and venice.
The romans had it right. More right than the chinese. More right than anyone else ever: (a) aristocracy performed rituals (submission) as a civic obligation, so that people could abandon their hierarchies, for which they obtained status so that others wished to do so as well. (b) the calendar was built to serve the seasons and festivals (celebration) so that the people could abandon their ‘hierarchies’. (c) the polytheistic temple system so that there were ‘gods and demigods and heroes’ for all men of all stations in that hierarchical division of labor. And so that all men could retain gods for their profession, their tribe and their nations, giving only fealty to the polity (empire) through its anthropomorphic representative in the emperor.
They just overextended. We didn’t over extend in the prewar era of colonialism as so much as commit fratricide in our great civil war by the alliance of britain and france and russia against germany. Britain and france with their overseas colonies, russia with her asian colonies, and germany seeking to take the eastern european and some african colonies. This was the mistake: not forcing russia south and assisting germany in expanding east as she had been (and was good for the people).
As far as I can tell, the difference between roman civilization and chinese civilization, is that china’s coastal farming was productive enough and concentrated enough, that they could unite and wall off their empire from the steppe, desert, and jungle peoples. When china over extended she stopped. When she tried to expand (prior to the european expansion) she withdrew to defend her walls from the Mongols. And she discovered enough about the world that she found nothing valuable in it enough to risk her home and her people and her civilization. The chinese are not heroic, risk-embracing and ambitious as much as defensively proud and ambitious.
So I think as a general, not as a soldier or citizen, and this is why you see my materialism: generals worry about technology, strategy, supply lines, and training and equipping men. The truth is that men in battle are marginally indifferent in war. It is the wealth that purchases the equipment, training, supply lines, and the wealth that makes continuous research and development of technology possible that makes the difference in war.
A soldier should defend his people with zeal perhaps – but pursue war to defend his life and kin, and for the spoils and booty that advance him as ordinary commerce cannot.
The peace of westphalia has ended. War is a for profit industry.
I understand the common man.
***But one panders to the common man. One speaks truth to power. And, one does not pander to himself if he wishes to be powerful. And saving and advancing ones people requires power.***
Curt Doolittle
The Propertarian Institute
Kiev Ukraine
Source date (UTC): 2017-07-26 07:08:00 UTC