HOPPE VS DOOLITTLE
Hoppe is right they way Newton was right: explanatory power with the wrong causal theory. I provided the correct causal theory. Because as a german he relied on rationalism and morality and volition, and as an anglo I rely on science and law, and force.
Source date (UTC): 2018-10-18 09:45:00 UTC
ANSWERING MISUNDERSTANDINGS AND THE FOLLY OF CULTS.
With Giego Caleiro
( @Giego : I think your pm put out your objection pretty clearly, so hopefully this is a good start to working through the details. -Curt)
—“There are fewer influx of defectors in islands, in isthmuses with mountains on the other side etc….”—
Yes. Geography provides a discount in defense against competition by war, trade capture, immigration, conversion, defection, and malinformation.
–“Religion is a unifying force for systems with constant influx and outflux, it is a process, and adaptive process.”—
Religion is a form of education that in the past used storytelling (suggestion) and ritual (suggestibility) to train the intuition (pre-rational brain), to conform to general rules of conduct that advanced the group’s market (evolutionary) strategy in a period of near zero change, among people who lacked ability and experience to reason, calculate, and compute. And where our knowledge of physical forces and properties of the universe was profoundly limited, and our concept of time was an imitation of the seasons: repeating.
We are no longer in those conditions.
—“The truth is not a process, it’s just a bunch of facts. “—
Truth is a process of due diligence that maintains continuous relations between reality, perception, cognition, memory, forecasting, description, negotiation, and advocacy: perception, frame, > display + word + deed.
Truth always was, and always will be a test of one’s testimony consisting of consistency, correspondence, and coherence with reality: “the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth”. “That which is laundered and warranted against imaginary content.”
We use the word “True/False” like “yes/no” or “agree/disagree” as consent/disagreement in the context of Truth independent of all else, Good by both our standards of measure, Preference by one’s own measure, Utility and actionability as whether possible or not. The fact that we conflate all those different conditions is a matter of colloquial illiteracy and habit, not because we are conscious of the difference between terms. (The same way we use reasonable, rational, logical as appeals to authority by exaggerating our claims.)
—“When you’re 95%Han or 95% Jap and your frontiers are negligible, you can do without God. “—
When you are strong enough you can do without frauds. You resort to lies when you are weak. Fraud is a cheap means of governing ignorant people. Law is the cheapest means of governing skilled people. Violence is an expensive means of governing internal and external peoples as a means of replacing the order (status quo). The romans used law and violence, and oath to the emperor. The egyptians, mesopotamians, and syrians used cults because they conquered inferior people lacking ability and knowledge. The Jews used it to cause defection in women, and slaves (the underclasses) and then in a period of weakness, an emperor with a jewish (christian) mother from the lower classes, imposed it on the western empire, insuring it’s submission, by exiting its aristocracy from rule.
You can rule imbeciles, the weak, and the unskilled with religion, but they are a dead weight. They were not a dead weight in antiquity since nearly all wealth was agrarian production. How do you rule the current working, middle, professional, and financial classes with superstitious nonsense?
—“But the mythology and ritualistic training of religion are filters for those who come in with a smaller proportion of, say, white genes, but who can still be fixed, as well as a creator of a transcendental morale that invites men to go to war to defend their land (Crusades). “—
One needs the power to enforce such a thing. How does one get that power? It’s not like the arabs,the turkics, the europeans, or even the africans are sufficientlly ignorant that the lies of the monotheistic era can persist. Islam offers the lowest of the low a pretty complete network of decidabilty. What will you offer those people instead, and why would they choose it over a god that gives them whatever they ask for in exchange for obedience?
—“You can do your propertarianism in Australia, Japan, China, India, Denmark, and if you kick or kill sufficiently many, and bomb the tunnel, in England (start by nuking london)”—
No one has to understand propertarianism at all except for a few elites. The entire process boils down to expansion of the law such that false speech is prosecutiable as theft from or damage to the commons just as we currently do with products and services. All this does is use the existing system to suppress abrahamism in the old and current forms, so that alternative non-false ‘mythologies’ can emerge (reach the stars, transcendence, etc).
—“But you cannot do it in contiguous eurasian land with easy access, north africa, middle east, Brazil, south america (except Chile). “—
That’s the thing. It’s trivial. Because the incentives I’ve proposed are purely economic and political and effectively pays people to end what they see is oppression by extraction and deception. There is nothing to ‘believe’. Only whether the proposed constitutional changes will produce a superior order for all. And the rewards are so substantial that it’s very difficult for people to argue against them other than to justify theft and fraud – which simply licenses violence against them.
—“It just doesn’t work.”—
You mean, your presumption that propertarianism is a philosophy or religion (Positiva) rather than a science and logic of social science and the law (negativa).
—“Jesus saves foreigners sometimes, trains their kids. Makes european women output 2.1+ babies. “—
So does eliminating interest, eliminating the cost of education, eliminating financialization, redistributing central government and spending authority to the states, and creating the greatest reallocation of opportunity capital in human history. This means that people will bear children earlier, pay less for their production, be more dependent upon them in retirement again, and exit their child-rearing years without debt and as homeowners with 20+ years to consume, save, or invest.
People don’t need to ‘believe’. They just need to undrestand the material solution to their problems was science not cults.
—“And it makes men go to arms for the land, for the country, for the race, for the family, and, above all, for God.”–
Men go to arms for profit opportunity, exit of boredom, seeing the world, and the opportunity to steal, plunder, rape, pillage, obtains laves, and murder in vast numbers. The decoration is just an excuse to do so for the common good. Any illusion otherwise is a product of the success of the nation state in ritualizing the Peace of Westphalia which ended with Isis, Iran, and Putin. The european era is over, and we are back to guerrilla warfare and a war of all against all which states can no longer contain.
Cheers.
Source date (UTC): 2018-10-17 15:04:00 UTC
October 15th, 2018 10:52 AM THOSE WHO WOULD DEFEND THE SOPHISM OF POSTMODERNISM WITH THE SOPHISM OF CRITIQUE“The Sophism of Critique.” [I]t does not matter ‘what you intend’ or ‘what you mean’ it matters what changes in state occur (consequences) because of your display word and deed (actions and consequences). If I speak in poetry (loading/framing), or code (symbolism/parsimony), or science (existential description), I can say the same things in different terms and frames. If I act according to the instructions or consequences of deductions and inferences therein, my actions are what are caused by the prose. The Grammar of Postmodernism (semantic content and limits; its’ consistency, correspondence, non-operational prose; coherence; its rules of continuously recursive disambiguation) are simply a continuation of the evolution of the Sophisms of: Pilpul (justification), Critique (Straw Manning), Suggestion(appeal to cognitive bias), Overloading (of cognition), and Obscurantism (untestability); … used in: the Abrahamic (and other) religions > Platonism (Idealism/Obscuring one’s ignorance) > Rabbinical Judgement (Pilpul/Justification) > Christian Justificationism (theology) > Rousseauian (French) Moralism (Justification) > Kantian Rationalism (Pilpul/Justification) > Marxist/Freudian/Boasian/Frankfurt Pseudoscience, Justification, and Critique > and French Postmodernism (Critique). These Grammars are all forms of sophistry. What they are not is math(measurement), logic (internal consistency), empirical (externally correspondent), scientific(warranty of due diligence), economics(rationality), law (reciprocity), and history(evidence), that is commensurable and testable because it is consistent, correspondent, operationally stated (existentially possible), consisting of rational choice, limited to reciprocal actions, coherent, fully accounted (against cherry picking, and complete in scope (against cherry picking). Critique Consists in: disapproval, shaming, ridicule, gossiping, rallying, straw manning, reputation destruction, of enemies, and heaping of undue praise of allies, and a failure to address the truth or falsehood of the central arguments, and their outcomes, rather than proposing an alternative, superior, competitively superior, solution that is actionable, and produces superior outcomes and externalities. Peterson cannot say in his venues anything sufficiently complex that he would lose the relatively mainstream audience. I can. Because it’s my specialty to debunk sophism (psedorationalism: pilpul, critique, loading/framing/overloading/obscurantism), supernaturalism, pseudoscience, and deceit. Postmodernism is yet another sophism in the long line of deceits that evolved through history to compete with testimonial truth in law, and the evolution of the tools by which we limit one another to that which is testifiable, rational, and reciprocal, and therefore a truth candidate. In other words, Postmodernism is just another cult-of-lies. Like Marxism before it. Like Rationalism before it. Like Theology Before it. Like Occult before it: a means of coercing the simple to conform to the demands of the Herd. Whereas speech that is testifiable, rational, reciprocal, and stated in operational (existentially possible) prose, like all the grammars of testimony (math, logic, empiricism, science, economics, law, and history) is and always has been, and always will be the means of DECIDING between differences of argument and opinion. Thus Endeth the Lesson. Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=26fIBA7O5Ag
October 15th, 2018 10:52 AM THOSE WHO WOULD DEFEND THE SOPHISM OF POSTMODERNISM WITH THE SOPHISM OF CRITIQUE“The Sophism of Critique.” [I]t does not matter ‘what you intend’ or ‘what you mean’ it matters what changes in state occur (consequences) because of your display word and deed (actions and consequences). If I speak in poetry (loading/framing), or code (symbolism/parsimony), or science (existential description), I can say the same things in different terms and frames. If I act according to the instructions or consequences of deductions and inferences therein, my actions are what are caused by the prose. The Grammar of Postmodernism (semantic content and limits; its’ consistency, correspondence, non-operational prose; coherence; its rules of continuously recursive disambiguation) are simply a continuation of the evolution of the Sophisms of: Pilpul (justification), Critique (Straw Manning), Suggestion(appeal to cognitive bias), Overloading (of cognition), and Obscurantism (untestability); … used in: the Abrahamic (and other) religions > Platonism (Idealism/Obscuring one’s ignorance) > Rabbinical Judgement (Pilpul/Justification) > Christian Justificationism (theology) > Rousseauian (French) Moralism (Justification) > Kantian Rationalism (Pilpul/Justification) > Marxist/Freudian/Boasian/Frankfurt Pseudoscience, Justification, and Critique > and French Postmodernism (Critique). These Grammars are all forms of sophistry. What they are not is math(measurement), logic (internal consistency), empirical (externally correspondent), scientific(warranty of due diligence), economics(rationality), law (reciprocity), and history(evidence), that is commensurable and testable because it is consistent, correspondent, operationally stated (existentially possible), consisting of rational choice, limited to reciprocal actions, coherent, fully accounted (against cherry picking, and complete in scope (against cherry picking). Critique Consists in: disapproval, shaming, ridicule, gossiping, rallying, straw manning, reputation destruction, of enemies, and heaping of undue praise of allies, and a failure to address the truth or falsehood of the central arguments, and their outcomes, rather than proposing an alternative, superior, competitively superior, solution that is actionable, and produces superior outcomes and externalities. Peterson cannot say in his venues anything sufficiently complex that he would lose the relatively mainstream audience. I can. Because it’s my specialty to debunk sophism (psedorationalism: pilpul, critique, loading/framing/overloading/obscurantism), supernaturalism, pseudoscience, and deceit. Postmodernism is yet another sophism in the long line of deceits that evolved through history to compete with testimonial truth in law, and the evolution of the tools by which we limit one another to that which is testifiable, rational, and reciprocal, and therefore a truth candidate. In other words, Postmodernism is just another cult-of-lies. Like Marxism before it. Like Rationalism before it. Like Theology Before it. Like Occult before it: a means of coercing the simple to conform to the demands of the Herd. Whereas speech that is testifiable, rational, reciprocal, and stated in operational (existentially possible) prose, like all the grammars of testimony (math, logic, empiricism, science, economics, law, and history) is and always has been, and always will be the means of DECIDING between differences of argument and opinion. Thus Endeth the Lesson. Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=26fIBA7O5Ag
THOSE WHO WOULD DEFEND THE SOPHISM OF POSTMODERNISM WITH THE SOPHISM OF CRITIQUE
“The Sophism of Critique.”
It does not matter ‘what you intend’ or ‘what you mean’ it matters what changes in state occur (consequences) because of your display word and deed (actions and consequences).
If I speak in poetry (loading/framing), or code (symbolism/parsimony), or science (existential description), I can say the same things in different terms and frames. If I act according to the instructions or consequences of deductions and inferences therein, my actions are what are caused by the prose.
The Grammar of Postmodernism (semantic content and limits; its’ consistency, correspondence, non-operational prose; coherence; its rules of continuously recursive disambiguation) are simply a continuation of the evolution of the Sophisms of:
Pilpul (justification), Critique (Straw Manning), Suggestion(appeal to cognitive bias), Overloading (of cognition), and Obscurantism (untestability);
… used in:
the Abrahamic (and other) religions > Platonism (Idealism/Obscuring one’s ignorance) > Rabbinical Judgement (Pilpul/Justification) > Christian Justificationism (theology) > Rousseauian (French) Moralism (Justification) > Kantian Rationalism (Pilpul/Justification) > Marxist/Freudian/Boasian/Frankfurt Pseudoscience, Justification, and Critique > and French Postmodernism (Critique).
These Grammars are all forms of sophistry. What they are not is math(measurement), logic (internal consistency), empirical (externally correspondent), scientific(warranty of due diligence), economics(rationality), law (reciprocity), and history(evidence), that is commensurable and testable because it is consistent, correspondent, operationally stated (existentially possible), consisting of rational choice, limited to reciprocal actions, coherent, fully accounted (against cherry picking, and complete in scope (against cherry picking).
Critique Consists in: disapproval, shaming, ridicule, gossiping, rallying, straw manning, reputation destruction, of enemies, and heaping of undue praise of allies, and a failure to address the truth or falsehood of the central arguments, and their outcomes, rather than proposing an alternative, superior, competitively superior, solution that is actionable, and produces superior outcomes and externalities.
Peterson cannot say in his venues anything sufficiently complex that he would lose the relatively mainstream audience. I can. Because it’s my specialty to debunk sophism (psedorationalism: pilpul, critique, loading/framing/overloading/obscurantism), supernaturalism, pseudoscience, and deceit.
Postmodernism is yet another sophism in the long line of deceits that evolved through history to compete with testimonial truth in law, and the evolution of the tools by which we limit one another to that which is testifiable, rational, and reciprocal, and therefore a truth candidate.
In other words, Postmodernism is just another cult-of-lies. Like Marxism before it. Like Rationalism before it. Like Theology Before it. Like Occult before it: a means of coercing the simple to conform to the demands of the Herd. Whereas speech that is testifiable, rational, reciprocal, and stated in operational (existentially possible) prose, like all the grammars of testimony (math, logic, empiricism, science, economics, law, and history) is and always has been, and always will be the means of DECIDING between differences of argument and opinion.
Thus Endeth the Lesson.
Curt Doolittle
The Propertarian Institute
Kiev, Ukraine.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=26fIBA7O5Ag
Source date (UTC): 2018-10-15 10:52:00 UTC
October 13th, 2018 4:24 AM THOSE WITH A HISTORY OF SLAVERY AND PEASANTRY USE FEMININE REASONING
—“lots of words, lots of confusion mixed with lots of true facts which are unfortunately unrelated to the topic. It’s all very simple: The essence of Marx and Marxism is economic class. Marx and real Marxists focus on economic class–rich vs. poor, owners vs. employees, etc. Real Marxists call themselves “Marxists”. So-called “cultural Marxists” do not call themselves “cultural Marxists”, and they mainly ignore economic class. They focus instead on everything BESIDES economic class. Their thinking is in many important ways the OPPOSITE of Marxism. It’s very simple. I don’t know why so many people refuse to even acknowledge these basics.”– Illarion B. Bykov
[B]ecause you’re confusing what people intend with what occurs. Instead it matters: 1) What method of argument (sophism, and self deception) 2) Whether they are making true or false claims on true or false premises, 3) What people intend(or claim) vs the operations and consequences that they produce, 4) Whether they are advocating reciprocity and production and eugenics, or proportionality, parasitism, and dysgenics. IT DOESN’T MATTER WHAT YOU MEAN. It matters what you do, and the consequences of doing so. and whether you’re advocating theft and dysgenia, or reciprocity and eugenia. 1) People were not oppressed. inferior humans were incrementally domesticated just like all other animals, in the most peaceful way possible: manorialism, criminal prosecution, incompetence in the face of nature, and winter, disease, and war weeding them. And; 2) The classes exist because of competency despite nepotism and regression to the mean, because (a) we are materially different in the distribution of personality traits, and weighted to the bottom without continuous eugenic administration; (b) we are different in utility to one another due to Pareto distribution of ability (ten percent of people do half the work, recursively unto the last person); and (c) man MUST organize by Pareto (power) distributions for the same reason that the Iron Law of Oligarchy exists: decisions must be made from a distribution of coincidences of wants. And; 3) There are only three means of organizing people with those traits: force, remuneration (reward), and ostracization (conformity vs reputation destruction). And; 4) There are only three means of transforming the universe for our use: labor (physical transformation), calculation (numbers, science, etc), organization (priests, managers, executives), and rule (force law violence war). The use of which means of coercion (force/law/truth/science, religion/philosophy/ideology, commerce/law/credit) can be specialized into a monopoly (east), specialized into a market (west), or conflated into a monopoly (egypt, mesopotamia. 5) We do not believe, and the evidence is, marxists-postmodernist-feminists (and the feminine equalitarian mind in general) does not, possess the AGENCY (self awareness) to understand what they do, only what the experience and intuit and therefore seek to justify. It is inconceivable to a masculinist (conservative, aristocracy, meritocracy, reciprocity, loyalty, purity) how much time and effort marxist/postmodernist/feminist/ex-serf/slave (liberal, socialist, equalitarian, proportionality, individualist, devotional, impurist) worries about ‘being left behind’ (equality). Why? The pack can intuit the herd, but the herd can’t intuit the pack. Masculine Great Ape Packs, Female Great Ape Herds. And our minds (brains) are structured (evolved) for each bias. SO YES IT’S SIMPLE: IT DOESN’T MATTER WHAT EXCUSES YOU MAKE FOR THE ARGUMENTS, ACTIONS, AND OUTCOMES YOU ADVOCATE.
UNPACKING “DEMOCRACY REQUIRES HOMOGENEITY”
by Richard Nikoley
—“Markets allow us to cooperate on means despite disparate ends. Democracy, only on same ends. Democracy requires homogeneity.”— CD
Let me unpack this a bit for those unfamiliar.
Markets, or trade, is inherently win-win or the trade doesn’t happen and there is no market. When you buy a pound of apples for $1, it’s because you want the apples more than you want the dollar and the tradesman wants the dollar more than he wants the pound of apples.
This happens billions of times a day, globally. How many trades do you do in a single day, on average? 5-10, maybe? Multiply that by 7 Billion. That’s upwards of 70 billion trades daily and as a win-win, that’s a lot of happiness. We should be thankful.
Moreover, markets are typically ideologically, racially, gender, culturally, etc. agnostic or neutral. It’s the great mediator. Traders tend not to care a bit who the other person is or what they believe, and yet they serve each other. How amazing. How fortunate we are.
Now, contrast that with democracy. Democracy is winner take all. Either you keep your dollar AND get his pound of apples, or he keeps his apples and gets your dollar. It’s windfall win-lose.
It only tends to work reasonably well in homogenous populations or institutions. Think Japan and Scandinavian counties (as they used to be before the Muslim influx). Relatively small populations of largely the same race, culture, national history. Or, consider a large public company where directors are elected quasi-democratically by shareholders, but everyone is more or less on the same page of making capital gains and paying dividends.
Democracy does not scale to something like a European Union or a United States.
Totally dumb idea, especially extending the franchise to those with no stake (no property, no financial assets, no business concern with employees, etc.).
Source date (UTC): 2018-10-13 16:18:00 UTC
October 11th, 2018 5:34 PM POSTMODERN, CRITIQUE, PILPUL: HICKS, MACDONALD, AND DOOLITTLE Understanding of Postmodernism spreads via Hicks. Critique by Macdonald. And I (Curt) do the history of Pilpul (sophism), Critique(gossip), the Fictionalisms (pseudoscience, pseudorationalism-sophism, and supernaturalism-occultism) and their use as vehicles for loading, framing, overloading, and suggestion for the purpose of generating moral hazard that can be profited from by fraud. This includes Abrahamism, Marxism, Postmodernism, and Feminism. Now, we know what the left does now and how they do it – and we have produced a science out of testimony to stop it. The only challenge left is extending the law of involuntary warranty from goods and services to speech – thereby limiting public speech to that which is warrantable, and restoring defamation. This will reverse the century and a half of the industrialization of lying.
October 11th, 2018 3:31 PM COUNTERING RIGHT CRITICISM OF CULTURAL MARXISM ( In response to: https://www.facebook.com/pepe.escobar.77377/posts/10156644462266678 ) So you didn’t actually make an argument I can counter, other than “Misinterpreted” – when the universal criticism of the left is that while the right can understand the left (rationally) the left cannot comprehend the right (intuitionistically) and resorts to psychologisms (Critique). What outcomes, arguments, propositions, assumptions were misinterpreted? THE UNDERLYING ARGUMENT Pilpul consists of a technique using sophisms (“justificationism”). Critique consists of a technique by which straw-man criticism without providing an alternative construction, for the opposition to criticize, substitutes for argument. And Feminine Competitive Instinct relies on disapproval, shaming, ridicule, rallying, gossip, straw manning, and reputation destruction instead of competing with (answering) the objections put forth in the argument. Feminine group strategy relies on prosecution of reciprocity in support of advancing proportionality indirectly. These are all methods of sophomoric rhetorical fraud. They are instinctual. And they appear to have evolved to control alphas (reproductive choice). Whereas Aristotelianism, Empiricism, Scientific method, Economics, and Rule of law require Operational Language (Testimony), warranty, demonstrated due diligence, and active suppression against ignorance, error, bias, wishful thinking, suggestion, obscurantism, fictionalisms, and deceit as means of demanding reciprocity. Conversely, Abrahamism (pilpul, critique, false history, supernaturalism), reformed into Marxism-Boasianism-Freudianism-(even Cantorian sets)-Adorno/Frankfurt practice of pseudoscience that advances the feminine reproductive and competitive strategy and the feminine method of speech, to undermine reciprocity and testability in order to prevent full accounting of merit. And when the pseudoscientific(marxist analysis) and pseudo-rational (dialectic) argument failed, the French postmodernists reformed into (resorted to) outright Denialism (iq, race, gender, culture, class, causality, truth, un- decidability etc). Which is what the Right Refers to as “Cultural Marxism” and the Academy, Media, State complex make use of these narratives (propaganda, cult mythology) in combination with the downward expansion of college and university education, to fund teaching of, research into, and the production of literature, and the creation multiple generations of new ‘cultists’.â¨â¨This activism resulted in the successful displacement of the aristocracy (military) from political rule, and the replacement of the church with the academy/media/state complex. And resulted in the incremental (quite intentional) selection of cases brought before the Supreme Court in order to undermine the constitution (via legislation from the bench) due to the weakness of the constitution not providing a vehicle for return of undecidable propositions to the legislature. The right has consistently resisted, and held onto the moral argument sufficiently to deny political power, (albeit in archaic enlightenment prose), but the left achieved through single motherhood expansion and underclass immigration, and involuntary transfer of reproduction to the lower classes through taxation, that which they could not achieve by ideas. This has resulted in a Racial Polity, and the racialization of both parties with single white women and vulnerable underclasses as the only race-defectors. So, the Right argument (Aristocratic-hierarchical, Meritocratic, Market, Rule of Law, Reciprocity, Truth, and Duty, and Eugenic), is not that there is some vast left conspiracy – because the right doesn’t believe the left (Feminine, Herd, Dysgenic) mind possesses any agency whatsoever (hence the evolution of the Useful Idiot label into the NPC Meme). But instead that the cult of supernaturalism was replaced first by a cult of pseudoscience, and having failed at pseudoscience, replaced by a cult of outright denialism. The fact that these sophomoric arguments (pilpul) were all produced using Critique, in support of the feminine reproductive strategy (proportionality of the herd), in order to circumvent rule of law by reciprocity (ancient customary law of tort), and to enforce discretionary rule instead,(despite that the country was designed as a ‘third way’ between authoritarian discretion of the aristocracy, and authoritarian socialism of the church.) Democracy is (majoritarian monopoly) little more than the search for power external to the market. The right attempts to preserve the market (meritocracy and reciprocity of the pack) while the left attempts to circumvent the market (equality and proportionality of the herd.) Yes there are the Soros’ of the world that do this by intent. By by and large the left is just lacking the right’s Agency, which is what separates right and left: Agency. [Left: Female Reproductive Strategy]: Consumption : Equality Devotion Proportionality [Libertarian: Unfranchised Male Reproductive Strategy]: Production: Reciprocity, Liberty [Conservative: Franchised (established) Male Reproductive Strategy]: Conservation: Reciprocity Hierarchy/Loyalty, Purity.â¨â¨ Arguably only libertarians only have any agency since they are the only faction with sufficient understanding of both economics and rule of law to possess it, but as a minority they are ineffective outside of think tanks and policy influence. The conservatives however remain dedicated to the individual as the central object of the law of tort; the family as the central unit of policy; and the civic order as the central unit of commons production; and the state limited to service as the insurer of last resort. Since this combination is a prescription for a eugenic social order, and that eugenic order (“manorialism”) was successful in both the far east and far west in sufficiently eugenic limitations on reproduction to produce a nearly completely middle class polity, this social order is both the origin of east and west prosperity, but in conflict with the expansion of single mothers, and third worlder underclasses without such genetic cultural traditional, and institutional histories. We provide agency through science: the use of correspondence with reality, using operational language to produce consistency between existence, action, perception, and intuition. And we use the scientific method to insure that the frauds sophisms, fictionalism, and outright deceits so common outside of the west, are incrementally suppressed. Unfortunately the continentals and the mesopotamians retain their sophisms, pseudosciences, and supernaturalisms, and their desperate followers try to bring moral FICTIONS into reality by the act of chanting them. “Thus endeth the lesson.” Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine
October 11th, 2018 5:34 PM POSTMODERN, CRITIQUE, PILPUL: HICKS, MACDONALD, AND DOOLITTLE Understanding of Postmodernism spreads via Hicks. Critique by Macdonald. And I (Curt) do the history of Pilpul (sophism), Critique(gossip), the Fictionalisms (pseudoscience, pseudorationalism-sophism, and supernaturalism-occultism) and their use as vehicles for loading, framing, overloading, and suggestion for the purpose of generating moral hazard that can be profited from by fraud. This includes Abrahamism, Marxism, Postmodernism, and Feminism. Now, we know what the left does now and how they do it – and we have produced a science out of testimony to stop it. The only challenge left is extending the law of involuntary warranty from goods and services to speech – thereby limiting public speech to that which is warrantable, and restoring defamation. This will reverse the century and a half of the industrialization of lying.