Form: Critique

  • We Know Quite Well What Postmodernism, Communism, and Abrahamism “Are”: Lying.

    October 8th, 2018 11:48 AM WE KNOW QUITE WELL WHAT POSTMODERNISM, COMMUNISM, AND ABRAHAMISM “ARE” (“Consist Of”) (CD: Important piece on intellectual history) In response to a criticism of Hicks’ Postmodernism:

    —“Hicks …. When you don’t know what communism or postmodernism is.”— Anon

    Which I’ll counter with “When you know exactly what Abrahamism, Communism, Postmodernism, and Feminism consist of: Counter-Revolutions Against Truth and Reason.” GRAMMARS OF COERCION: There are only three means of coercion: 1 – Violence, 2 – Remuneration, and; 3 – Ostracization (Shaming/Endearing (Gossip)). We have invented: 1 – Law and War for Violence. 2 – Markets and Corruption for Remuneration, 3 – and a host of grammars of persuasion for inclusion (insurance) versus ostracization (risk). ABRAHAMISM, COMMUNISM, POSTMODERNISM VS TECHNOLOGY, MARKETS, AND TRUTH. We see the evolution of law of western peoples: 1 – Sovereignty, (individualism is incorrect). 2 – Tort, and thang, court, senate, 3 – Martial Truth (MIlitary ‘Reporting’), and the demand for speaking martial truth regardless of the consequences to the dominance (competency) hierarchy. 4 – Reason, rationalism, empiricism, and science as a consequence. 5 – Markets and competing intellectual disciplines rather than authority and mono-disciplines (ie: religion). These choices are the consequences of mixed, metalworking, agrarian, cattle herders, requiring large well defended territories, that must self finance their military capability, because they lack any means of concentrating capital and taxation cheaply as did the irrigationist in the flood river valleys. They developed ‘Contractual Civilization’. But we also see: 1 – Abrahamic fiction and supernaturalism of the pastoralists against the reason and realism of the agrarians and metallurgists; 2 – Pseudoscientific Communism as a restatement of Jewish separatism using class warfare; and; 3 – Postmodernism as a pseudo-rational restatement of marxism-communism using ethnic warfare. WHERE 1 – Superstition (Judaism, Christianity, Islamism) evolved into ==> 2 – pseudoscience (w Jewish Critique) evolved into ==> 3 – pseudo rationalism (w Jewish Pilpul) (French > German > Jewish), USING Each time increasing in rhetorical complexity but using the same techniques in each of the sophisms: 1 – Justification (Pilpul) and Poisoning the Straw Man (Critique) then adding incremental techniques of: a) Fictionalism (Fictional History > Mythology), b) Supernaturalism, c) Pseudoscience, and; d) Pseudo Rationalism, and at present e) Simple Denialism. (Race, IQ, Homogeneity, Markets) LYING BY SUGGESTION It took me less than a year of relatively hard work to disassemble the techniques into grammars and enumerate and articulate all of them. But no matter the depth of analysis, lying by art of suggestion by overloading is still lying by abuse of the human process of continuous recursion in streams of memory producing what we call Meaning, and our suggestibility and suspension of disbelief in that state. DEFENSE AGAINST FALSEHOOD Realism, Reason, Calculation and Computation in all their forms, are defenses against this suggestion, loading, overloading by the use of correspondence and operational possibility, but take disciplined training and a minimum intellectual ability. Because we have a host of cognitive and moral (reproductive) biases that influence our choices without the discipline and training to prevent them from doing so. RULES OF ORDER The Ancient World civilizations each produced means of producing sufficient meaning (rules) for local preservation of cooperation: Rome (Realism), Athens (Idealism(abstract)), Anatolian (lost), Babylon (Ideal Monotheism(supernatural)), Jerusalem (Authoritarian Reactionary Monotheism), Beka Valley (Authoritarian Expansionary Monotheism), Memphis (Pragmatic Ritual Polytheism), Indus (Pragmatic Narrative Polytheism), and Yellow River (Confucian Rationalism, hierarchy and harmony), Lao Tsu’s “balance and reasonableness”, and the utility of Buddhism in Ritual. With only the Japanese THE GREAT CONFLICT OF HUMAN HISTORY The homogeneous masculine eugenic pack of hunters and farmers were able to produce high trust commons, versus the heterogeneous feminine dysgenic universalist herd and herders were unable to produce high trust commons. (Cain and Able is the literary example of the Pastoralists hatred of the wealthier and urbanized Agrarians and Metalworkers). But the question is not Athens vs Jerusalem, since both ideal democracy and supernatural universalism have been the greatest failures of all of the world civilizations, causing the destruction of every great ancient civilization and bringing about the Abrahamic Dark Age and it’s 750M dead; as well as the current 150 Year attempt at recreating another Abrahamic Dark Age — this time by Rousseau, Kant, Marx, Boas, Freud, Cantor, Adorno and co., and their 100M dead. Followed by the inventiveness of the French and their conspirators: Derrida, Foucault, Rorty et al. And the feminists that followed from them: each trying to produce a monopoly as a means of avoiding markets for cooperation, because they are unable to compete in those markets for pareto optimums, only nash equilibriums In the ancient world, overextension of the empires to eliminate local frictions (taxes, rents) on trade, and profit from those efficiencies, produced travel, communication, trade, and infrastructure that made possible the jewish and christian invasion of the western empire; intentional fomenting of underclass resistance against the aristocratic civilization; and then Byzantine forcible conversion of the entirety of the population in order to end Reason, Law, and Aristocratic Rule. The same technique is being used in this current era: invade, rebel, rally underclasses, import underclasses, and then seek power by numbers, using fairy tales desirable by those underclasses using the sophisms those underclasses are defenseless against, and which the Aristocracy tolerates or finds useful until the society has been destroyed by it. ORIGINS Gobekli Tepe is the oldest Temple complex we find to date, and predates all other monolithic works by thousands of years. It is also just south of one of the world’s greatest hunting gardens teeming with life at the origin of the Euphrates – an Eden if there ever was one. As far as we know, from there, at the nexus of the continents, near the center of trade between them, on the highways of the main rivers, the idea spread from the monoliths of the Atlantic peoples to the advanced stone of the egyptians. It was an early and effective tool of social order. Most likely because it predicted seasons. Once those skills existed, the construction revolution bloomed. THE WEST THAT THE REST REBELS AGAINST: While Myth, Ritual, and Oath are necessary components of demand for neural economy (computational efficiency) in the production of rules of social order, how we communicate those rules, the group evolutionary strategies in those rules, and the outcomes that are produced as externality by those rules, are not only means of internal persistence, but external competition. Only one set of those rules produces reciprocally beneficial outcomes: Western Truth, Duty, Reciprocity, Sovereignty, Reason, Science, Rule of Law, and Competitive Markets in Everything gave the world nearly everything that raised man out of ignorance, superstition, poverty, hard labor, starvation, disease, suffering, child mortality, early death, and the dangers of nature. Western Civilization consists of The Continuous Calculation by Competitive Trial and Error, of our Ascent into the Gods we imagine. Western civilization was and until recently, was organized to continuously produce Agency at the cost of eugenia, whereas the middle civilizations were organized to limit agency in exchange for dysgenia. Without Manorialism and Markets (East Asia, Europe) the dysgenia defeats all attempts at preservation of gains. It is not malthus’ numbers that cause dark ages. It is the end of eugenic limitations, let loose by unregulated innovations, that feed regression to the mean, and brought about the Bronze age, Iron Age, and the present Steel Age collapses. That is why the enlightenment project failed to create either an aristocracy of everyone (british), a middle class of everyone (french and german), or an underclass of everyone (jewish and russian). In europe and east asia, after more than a thousand years of manorialism, war, disease, and extremely aggressive criminal prosecution, the consequential upward redistribution of reproduction led to distributions that allowed pareto organization of populations where the ratio of the middle and upper was sufficient to produce surpluses necessary to concentrate capital in multipliers (commons). But both hindus (which have yet failed in their project), east asians (who succeeded under our pressures), and westerners (who succeeded because of our tradition of empirical law), had an advantage. The chinese conquered and colonized all border people. The Western Indo Europeans conquered (exterminated) and colonized all border people, and both europe and east asia produced homogenous eugenic, agrarian, metalsmithing societies. Either one is eugenic or dysgenic. The red queen cannot be defeated by any other means. It takes 95 to follow simple instructions, 105 to repair a machine, 115 to learn on one’s own by reading, 120 to design a machine, 130+ to synthesize and communicate ideas, 140+ to invent new ideas. Everyone below that who cannot be put into labor that does not require continuous learning and adaptation. This is social science. Everything else is religion. BIOLOGICAL ORIGINS: HOW MUCH AGENCY DO WE HAVE? The broader question is, how much agency do we have? Women and men demonstrably think very differently because of the difference between utility and truth, and between proportionality and reciprocity, and between dysgenia and eugenia. Why do we assume that this same cognitive bias is limited to gender rather than a balance between the genders, and that different groups don’t just demonstrate the male cognitive bias or the female cognitive bias? Truth, Reciprocity, and Physical Violence that Ends when Ended, VERSUS Fraud, Proportionality, and Reputation Destruction that Never Ends until Destroyed. Violence and Threats VERSUS Shaming, Ridicule, Gossip, Straw Manning, Rallying, and Reputation Destruction. Those are the Male versus female competitive strategies. HERD <—————> PACK Utility <—————> Truth Proportionality <——> Reciprocity Equality <————-> Meritocracy Dysgenia <———–> Eugenia r <——————–> K F<——————–> M There is nothing in mankind that is complicated other than the lies we tell ourselves and others in order to achieve our desired ends. Male and female reproductive strategies are at odds. And we have little agency in the choice of those strategies, at the individual, group, civilizational levels. Everything else is a consequence. We are just another self-domesticating animal. Some of us more successful at it than others. Nothing more complex is at work. Curt Doolittle The Evolutionary Strategy of Europeans The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine

  • We Know Quite Well What Postmodernism, Communism, and Abrahamism “Are”: Lying.

    October 8th, 2018 11:48 AM WE KNOW QUITE WELL WHAT POSTMODERNISM, COMMUNISM, AND ABRAHAMISM “ARE” (“Consist Of”) (CD: Important piece on intellectual history) In response to a criticism of Hicks’ Postmodernism:

    —“Hicks …. When you don’t know what communism or postmodernism is.”— Anon

    Which I’ll counter with “When you know exactly what Abrahamism, Communism, Postmodernism, and Feminism consist of: Counter-Revolutions Against Truth and Reason.” GRAMMARS OF COERCION: There are only three means of coercion: 1 – Violence, 2 – Remuneration, and; 3 – Ostracization (Shaming/Endearing (Gossip)). We have invented: 1 – Law and War for Violence. 2 – Markets and Corruption for Remuneration, 3 – and a host of grammars of persuasion for inclusion (insurance) versus ostracization (risk). ABRAHAMISM, COMMUNISM, POSTMODERNISM VS TECHNOLOGY, MARKETS, AND TRUTH. We see the evolution of law of western peoples: 1 – Sovereignty, (individualism is incorrect). 2 – Tort, and thang, court, senate, 3 – Martial Truth (MIlitary ‘Reporting’), and the demand for speaking martial truth regardless of the consequences to the dominance (competency) hierarchy. 4 – Reason, rationalism, empiricism, and science as a consequence. 5 – Markets and competing intellectual disciplines rather than authority and mono-disciplines (ie: religion). These choices are the consequences of mixed, metalworking, agrarian, cattle herders, requiring large well defended territories, that must self finance their military capability, because they lack any means of concentrating capital and taxation cheaply as did the irrigationist in the flood river valleys. They developed ‘Contractual Civilization’. But we also see: 1 – Abrahamic fiction and supernaturalism of the pastoralists against the reason and realism of the agrarians and metallurgists; 2 – Pseudoscientific Communism as a restatement of Jewish separatism using class warfare; and; 3 – Postmodernism as a pseudo-rational restatement of marxism-communism using ethnic warfare. WHERE 1 – Superstition (Judaism, Christianity, Islamism) evolved into ==> 2 – pseudoscience (w Jewish Critique) evolved into ==> 3 – pseudo rationalism (w Jewish Pilpul) (French > German > Jewish), USING Each time increasing in rhetorical complexity but using the same techniques in each of the sophisms: 1 – Justification (Pilpul) and Poisoning the Straw Man (Critique) then adding incremental techniques of: a) Fictionalism (Fictional History > Mythology), b) Supernaturalism, c) Pseudoscience, and; d) Pseudo Rationalism, and at present e) Simple Denialism. (Race, IQ, Homogeneity, Markets) LYING BY SUGGESTION It took me less than a year of relatively hard work to disassemble the techniques into grammars and enumerate and articulate all of them. But no matter the depth of analysis, lying by art of suggestion by overloading is still lying by abuse of the human process of continuous recursion in streams of memory producing what we call Meaning, and our suggestibility and suspension of disbelief in that state. DEFENSE AGAINST FALSEHOOD Realism, Reason, Calculation and Computation in all their forms, are defenses against this suggestion, loading, overloading by the use of correspondence and operational possibility, but take disciplined training and a minimum intellectual ability. Because we have a host of cognitive and moral (reproductive) biases that influence our choices without the discipline and training to prevent them from doing so. RULES OF ORDER The Ancient World civilizations each produced means of producing sufficient meaning (rules) for local preservation of cooperation: Rome (Realism), Athens (Idealism(abstract)), Anatolian (lost), Babylon (Ideal Monotheism(supernatural)), Jerusalem (Authoritarian Reactionary Monotheism), Beka Valley (Authoritarian Expansionary Monotheism), Memphis (Pragmatic Ritual Polytheism), Indus (Pragmatic Narrative Polytheism), and Yellow River (Confucian Rationalism, hierarchy and harmony), Lao Tsu’s “balance and reasonableness”, and the utility of Buddhism in Ritual. With only the Japanese THE GREAT CONFLICT OF HUMAN HISTORY The homogeneous masculine eugenic pack of hunters and farmers were able to produce high trust commons, versus the heterogeneous feminine dysgenic universalist herd and herders were unable to produce high trust commons. (Cain and Able is the literary example of the Pastoralists hatred of the wealthier and urbanized Agrarians and Metalworkers). But the question is not Athens vs Jerusalem, since both ideal democracy and supernatural universalism have been the greatest failures of all of the world civilizations, causing the destruction of every great ancient civilization and bringing about the Abrahamic Dark Age and it’s 750M dead; as well as the current 150 Year attempt at recreating another Abrahamic Dark Age — this time by Rousseau, Kant, Marx, Boas, Freud, Cantor, Adorno and co., and their 100M dead. Followed by the inventiveness of the French and their conspirators: Derrida, Foucault, Rorty et al. And the feminists that followed from them: each trying to produce a monopoly as a means of avoiding markets for cooperation, because they are unable to compete in those markets for pareto optimums, only nash equilibriums In the ancient world, overextension of the empires to eliminate local frictions (taxes, rents) on trade, and profit from those efficiencies, produced travel, communication, trade, and infrastructure that made possible the jewish and christian invasion of the western empire; intentional fomenting of underclass resistance against the aristocratic civilization; and then Byzantine forcible conversion of the entirety of the population in order to end Reason, Law, and Aristocratic Rule. The same technique is being used in this current era: invade, rebel, rally underclasses, import underclasses, and then seek power by numbers, using fairy tales desirable by those underclasses using the sophisms those underclasses are defenseless against, and which the Aristocracy tolerates or finds useful until the society has been destroyed by it. ORIGINS Gobekli Tepe is the oldest Temple complex we find to date, and predates all other monolithic works by thousands of years. It is also just south of one of the world’s greatest hunting gardens teeming with life at the origin of the Euphrates – an Eden if there ever was one. As far as we know, from there, at the nexus of the continents, near the center of trade between them, on the highways of the main rivers, the idea spread from the monoliths of the Atlantic peoples to the advanced stone of the egyptians. It was an early and effective tool of social order. Most likely because it predicted seasons. Once those skills existed, the construction revolution bloomed. THE WEST THAT THE REST REBELS AGAINST: While Myth, Ritual, and Oath are necessary components of demand for neural economy (computational efficiency) in the production of rules of social order, how we communicate those rules, the group evolutionary strategies in those rules, and the outcomes that are produced as externality by those rules, are not only means of internal persistence, but external competition. Only one set of those rules produces reciprocally beneficial outcomes: Western Truth, Duty, Reciprocity, Sovereignty, Reason, Science, Rule of Law, and Competitive Markets in Everything gave the world nearly everything that raised man out of ignorance, superstition, poverty, hard labor, starvation, disease, suffering, child mortality, early death, and the dangers of nature. Western Civilization consists of The Continuous Calculation by Competitive Trial and Error, of our Ascent into the Gods we imagine. Western civilization was and until recently, was organized to continuously produce Agency at the cost of eugenia, whereas the middle civilizations were organized to limit agency in exchange for dysgenia. Without Manorialism and Markets (East Asia, Europe) the dysgenia defeats all attempts at preservation of gains. It is not malthus’ numbers that cause dark ages. It is the end of eugenic limitations, let loose by unregulated innovations, that feed regression to the mean, and brought about the Bronze age, Iron Age, and the present Steel Age collapses. That is why the enlightenment project failed to create either an aristocracy of everyone (british), a middle class of everyone (french and german), or an underclass of everyone (jewish and russian). In europe and east asia, after more than a thousand years of manorialism, war, disease, and extremely aggressive criminal prosecution, the consequential upward redistribution of reproduction led to distributions that allowed pareto organization of populations where the ratio of the middle and upper was sufficient to produce surpluses necessary to concentrate capital in multipliers (commons). But both hindus (which have yet failed in their project), east asians (who succeeded under our pressures), and westerners (who succeeded because of our tradition of empirical law), had an advantage. The chinese conquered and colonized all border people. The Western Indo Europeans conquered (exterminated) and colonized all border people, and both europe and east asia produced homogenous eugenic, agrarian, metalsmithing societies. Either one is eugenic or dysgenic. The red queen cannot be defeated by any other means. It takes 95 to follow simple instructions, 105 to repair a machine, 115 to learn on one’s own by reading, 120 to design a machine, 130+ to synthesize and communicate ideas, 140+ to invent new ideas. Everyone below that who cannot be put into labor that does not require continuous learning and adaptation. This is social science. Everything else is religion. BIOLOGICAL ORIGINS: HOW MUCH AGENCY DO WE HAVE? The broader question is, how much agency do we have? Women and men demonstrably think very differently because of the difference between utility and truth, and between proportionality and reciprocity, and between dysgenia and eugenia. Why do we assume that this same cognitive bias is limited to gender rather than a balance between the genders, and that different groups don’t just demonstrate the male cognitive bias or the female cognitive bias? Truth, Reciprocity, and Physical Violence that Ends when Ended, VERSUS Fraud, Proportionality, and Reputation Destruction that Never Ends until Destroyed. Violence and Threats VERSUS Shaming, Ridicule, Gossip, Straw Manning, Rallying, and Reputation Destruction. Those are the Male versus female competitive strategies. HERD <—————> PACK Utility <—————> Truth Proportionality <——> Reciprocity Equality <————-> Meritocracy Dysgenia <———–> Eugenia r <——————–> K F<——————–> M There is nothing in mankind that is complicated other than the lies we tell ourselves and others in order to achieve our desired ends. Male and female reproductive strategies are at odds. And we have little agency in the choice of those strategies, at the individual, group, civilizational levels. Everything else is a consequence. We are just another self-domesticating animal. Some of us more successful at it than others. Nothing more complex is at work. Curt Doolittle The Evolutionary Strategy of Europeans The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine

  • A POMO CRITICISM OF HICKS’ POSTMODERNISM By Curt Doolittle, The Propertarian Ins

    https://youtu.be/EHtvTGaPzF4ANSWERING A POMO CRITICISM OF HICKS’ POSTMODERNISM

    By Curt Doolittle, The Propertarian Institute.

    ( REGARDING https://youtu.be/EHtvTGaPzF4 ) @[507283246:2048:Stephen Hicks]

    1) Does this need a criticism? Sophism. Word as Real and Imagination as Primary, vs the parsimony of existence as real, and man slowly developing agency as he reframes his animal perceptions evolved at observable scale to correspondent consistent and coherent with reality at post human scales.

    2) So, yet another an analysis of what he-said-she-said on the terms of their intentions, versus what they say contrast to the parsimony of consistent, correspondent, operational, rational choice, reciprocity, and coherence with reality. I am more articulate but that is his point.

    3) And this use of “Critique” merely confirms HIcks’ proposition. It does not matter what one intends. Only (a) it’s correspondence and consistency with reality and (b) the incentives to produce that which is not. IOW: lost is that Reason, Empiricism, and Science are results of western LAW (tort) of sovereign men.

    4) Whereas the sophisms of Postmodernism, like the sophisms of theology, rationalism, platonism and abrahamism whose methods it continues making excuses for a discontinuity with reality and naive motive, Law does the opposite enforcing continuity and identifying motive for fraud.

    5) So reductively, the Sophists trees, versus the Legal forest.

    6) Begging a FRAME of the speaker rather than the frame of reality to test him is merely another example of sophism in the forms of Pilpul(justificationism) and Critique (verbalism, shaming, rallying, gossiping, reputation destruction, straw manning and heaping undue praise.)

    7) Hicks addresses the history of the evolution of thought. The more precise critique that amends Hicks, is a study of the methods of argument: reciprocity, law (tort), reason, empiricism, versus the sophist, literary and fictional. In other words, through the Law, POMO is FRAUD.

    8) Liability. Is a Marx responsible for the 100M deaths in his name? Are the POMO’s responsible for the collapse of western civilization? Who is responsible for the gains of Legal-rational-scientific thought in the ancient world and the modern? Who is responsible for the suppression of legal-rational-scientific thought in the ancient world, and who replicates it in the modern? By the same means of collapsing the Roman empire these public intellectuals of pseudo rationalism are no different from priests of supernaturalism in the past.

    9) So one trained in ‘literature’ and ‘literary philosophy’ and ‘theology’ using pilpul, idealism, and critique (FRAUD), is at odds with those who struggle incrementally to produce consistency, correspondence, operational language, rational choice,reciprocity with reality in LAW.

    10) Which is what Hicks is referring to when he references ignoring other traditions being ignored. This is a polite way of calling POMO a revolution in literary fraud as an alternative to pseudoscientific fraud (marxism), as a an alternative to fraud by idealism(Platonism), and fraud by supernaturalism (abrahamism: pilpul and critique): the literature of the weak.

    11) My work is specifically in the study of the evolution of fraud (fictional speech) in competition with the evolution of law (scientific speech). And moreover how the various sophisms and fictionalisms use suggestion and overloading to circumvent correspondence with reality.

    12) Scientific thinkers are PROSECUTORS of ignorance, error, bias, fraud, and deceit. Literary thinkers are AUTHORS of fraud and deceit. And that, and the master-slave moralities each relies upon, describe all of intellectual history. The only question is whether POMO fraud exists by lack of agency (failure of due diligence), or by exercise of agency (criminality).

    13) Law seeks to suppress lies. Literature to produce them. History, Economics, and Law describe man as he is – to prevent parasitism. Fictionalisms describe man as he is not to create opportunities for parasitism (Moral Hazard). And few writers, philosophers, and theologians in history would survive prosecution other than aristotle.

    14) STUDY LAW NOT LIT. Science, Economics, Law, and History. The rest are just fictionalisms: Magic, Pseudoscience, Moral Fictionalism, Scripturalism, and Mythology.

    Those of us with ancestors worth worshiping do so. Those without ancestors worth worshipping invented them. If you must invent fictions, that in of itself is evidence of the failure of your civilization.

    -Fin-Updated Oct 6, 2018, 6:28 AM


    Source date (UTC): 2018-10-06 06:28:00 UTC

  • Nietzsche vs Doolittle

    NIETZSCHE VS DOOLITTLE : Critique vs Science. Value vs Truth. Inspiration vs Institutions. [I] need to address this issue again for the little boys in the audience. What I take from Nietzsche is his attack on supernaturalism, and submission, and his attempt to restore classicism – which is also what I am also trying to do: discover our origins (I have), and solve the institutional problem (i think I have) of restoring them. Nietzsche created a Critique of semitic religion, and tried to articulate and express the ethic of the classical tradition (heroism, the dominance of man over nature) but was unable to solve the problem of how – just as many post-darwinist were. Unfortunately the abrahamists have nearly won again with marxism, feminism, and postmodernism. And they have won by continuing his technique: abrahamic critique. —“Nietzsche’s thought after Hegel was to incorporate Evolution and to reverse everything possible in prior thinkers. So he reverses Hegel by searching for a way for the Noble to have self-consciousness. He reverses Schopenhauer by attempting to be positive about life and its prospects. He reverses Wagner by rejecting the Christianization of the Pagan mythologies. Of course he then reverses many long held beliefs that were unquestioned within the western worldview such as the necessity to kow tow to Christianity as a religious belief system. … So basically Nietzsche went after as many Sacred Cows of the European tradition as he could”— Kent Palmer I systematically attack all our sacred cows and falsehoods – just as he did. Not for VALUE but for TRUTH. I look for everything FALSE not everything we VALUE. However, I attempt to restore classicism through formal INSTITUTIONS rather than the usual german sophomoric philosophy that is little other than a desperate attempt to restore the ‘woo’ of christian submission by rational sophistry rather than supernatural sophistry. As for ‘spirit’ I see nietzsche’s ‘spirit’ as a choice, and an individual choice, not a truth,or a political movement, or an institutional solution – and I see nietzsche as having failed to discover a solution. And worse, I find his silly german ‘suffering'(struggling) abhorrent – the voice of the weak. The strong do not struggle they just do. Nietzsche was prescient precisely because he FAILED. As did all german thinkers – desperate provincial romanticists appealing to the heartstrings of the pubescent. I see nietzsche as ‘weak’. A polemicist. Like say, Rand, he is a gateway that gives you permission to abandon traditional religion, just as rand is a gateway to abandon traditional political ethics. But they are … childish … works by childish people. Which is fine, because we all work at some level of sophistication available to us at our own stage of maturity. Nietzsche’s rant against his status who is nothing more than what all adolescent men do: express their identities and autonomy as unbound by parental debts, when they reach some level of agency. But in the end, he just was an insightful polemicists that failed to provide a solution other than infinite skepticism and a return to a celebration of life. A pair of sentiments otherwise politically inactionable. Nietzsche practiced critique: he remained an abrahamist. He offered us nothing to supplant the past. And understood the classical civilization only in silly germanic romantic and literary terms – rather than the tedious administration of half domesticated man by the use of military, law, bureaucracy, commerce, and education. Rome was the adult that athens matured into. We are only now, right now, restoring the state of development at which rome fell.

  • Nietzsche vs Doolittle

    NIETZSCHE VS DOOLITTLE : Critique vs Science. Value vs Truth. Inspiration vs Institutions. [I] need to address this issue again for the little boys in the audience. What I take from Nietzsche is his attack on supernaturalism, and submission, and his attempt to restore classicism – which is also what I am also trying to do: discover our origins (I have), and solve the institutional problem (i think I have) of restoring them. Nietzsche created a Critique of semitic religion, and tried to articulate and express the ethic of the classical tradition (heroism, the dominance of man over nature) but was unable to solve the problem of how – just as many post-darwinist were. Unfortunately the abrahamists have nearly won again with marxism, feminism, and postmodernism. And they have won by continuing his technique: abrahamic critique. —“Nietzsche’s thought after Hegel was to incorporate Evolution and to reverse everything possible in prior thinkers. So he reverses Hegel by searching for a way for the Noble to have self-consciousness. He reverses Schopenhauer by attempting to be positive about life and its prospects. He reverses Wagner by rejecting the Christianization of the Pagan mythologies. Of course he then reverses many long held beliefs that were unquestioned within the western worldview such as the necessity to kow tow to Christianity as a religious belief system. … So basically Nietzsche went after as many Sacred Cows of the European tradition as he could”— Kent Palmer I systematically attack all our sacred cows and falsehoods – just as he did. Not for VALUE but for TRUTH. I look for everything FALSE not everything we VALUE. However, I attempt to restore classicism through formal INSTITUTIONS rather than the usual german sophomoric philosophy that is little other than a desperate attempt to restore the ‘woo’ of christian submission by rational sophistry rather than supernatural sophistry. As for ‘spirit’ I see nietzsche’s ‘spirit’ as a choice, and an individual choice, not a truth,or a political movement, or an institutional solution – and I see nietzsche as having failed to discover a solution. And worse, I find his silly german ‘suffering'(struggling) abhorrent – the voice of the weak. The strong do not struggle they just do. Nietzsche was prescient precisely because he FAILED. As did all german thinkers – desperate provincial romanticists appealing to the heartstrings of the pubescent. I see nietzsche as ‘weak’. A polemicist. Like say, Rand, he is a gateway that gives you permission to abandon traditional religion, just as rand is a gateway to abandon traditional political ethics. But they are … childish … works by childish people. Which is fine, because we all work at some level of sophistication available to us at our own stage of maturity. Nietzsche’s rant against his status who is nothing more than what all adolescent men do: express their identities and autonomy as unbound by parental debts, when they reach some level of agency. But in the end, he just was an insightful polemicists that failed to provide a solution other than infinite skepticism and a return to a celebration of life. A pair of sentiments otherwise politically inactionable. Nietzsche practiced critique: he remained an abrahamist. He offered us nothing to supplant the past. And understood the classical civilization only in silly germanic romantic and literary terms – rather than the tedious administration of half domesticated man by the use of military, law, bureaucracy, commerce, and education. Rome was the adult that athens matured into. We are only now, right now, restoring the state of development at which rome fell.

  • DONE BUT THE TIME FOR UNDERSTANDING HAS PASSED Regarding: Well done. This is per

    https://medium.com/intellectual-explorers-club/memetic-tribes-and-culture-war-2-0-14705c43f6bbWELL DONE BUT THE TIME FOR UNDERSTANDING HAS PASSED

    Regarding: https://medium.com/intellectual-explorers-club/memetic-tribes-and-culture-war-2-0-14705c43f6bb

    Well done. This is perhaps the best work, and possibly the only meaningful work, I have seen on the ‘Tribes’. (I’ve written about the right tribes as a class hierarchy. I haven’t worked on the left’s Tribes but I suppose it’s obvious.)

    By way of compliment, If I could add any value to your work at all, it’s:

    a) As we grow wealthier (less constrained) we are all seeking divergence (specialization) that exercises our preferences rather than the predicted convergence on a uniform preference.

    b) That we can AFFORD to diverge (specialize or speciate) because we are wealthy enough to produce commons serving our interests.

    c) That the Tribes reflect the spectrum from the feminine (herd, proportionality, equality) to masculine (pack, reciprocity, meritocracy-hierarchy) reproductive strategies. And therefore we are both able to seek and it’s in our reproductive interests (and therefore our psychological demands, expressed as political demands) to seize the opportunity for speciation.

    d) That majority Democracy, and particularly first-past-the-post majoritarian democracy (equality of vote) produces a monopoly of outcomes that favors the major party with cyclical rebellions against overreach by the minority party. That democracy provides only a means of resolving differences in priority but not difference in objectives. And these differences in objectives are not bridgeable because they are not arbitrary but genetic and immutable.

    e) There that the only solution to such demand is not the fallacy of continuing to ‘understand and compromise’ when ‘demand’ for OPPOSING commons simply continues to increase, but to either separate (secession) or devolve the production of commons from the federal governments to the states, so that the nationalists (masculine packs), and globalists (feminine herds) can end the artificial constraint of monopoly democracy and develop commons more suitable to their reproductive interests.

    Everyone thought they would win. The British-German belief in the aristocracy of everyone. The French-Ashkenazi murderers of aristocracy of a peasantry of everyone.

    Everyone was wrong. And we have given up attempting to reconcile our differences.

    And we are within a year or two of a civil war the scope of which has never been seen before if we continue to pursue a winner-takes-all strategy.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev Ukraine

    ( h/t: @[11019687:2048:Brandon Hayes] , @[655376421:2048:Bill Joslin] )Updated Oct 2, 2018, 10:08 PM


    Source date (UTC): 2018-10-02 22:08:00 UTC

  • Dylan Thomas’ Bias Toward Postmodernism and Authoritarianism

    Yes on content, no on criticism. Demand for monopoly of positiva is different from necessity of monopoly of negativa. Make up whatever fairy stories incels desire. There is only one truth, and it is falsehood, and everything else is simply preference that expresses one’s reproductive interests.

    42862313_299118997351664_4618817575399194624_n.jpg

    —“It’s the problem of squishy definitions like “liberalism” opposed to clear operational definitions.  Propertarianism, essentially, combines nomocracy and property, where by law is decided by calculating exchanges of demonstrated property (en toto). All the nuances and details boils down to different configurations (and preferences) in which one applies this basic fundamental notion.” — Bill Joslin —“It’s not a matter of “don’t have spiritual values.” We ALL have them. Trying to eradicate spiritual values is most likely a vain and pointless ambition.The issues are:1) It’s not always possible to meaningfully communicate spiritual values that aren’t already shared. And even when it is, it’s usually not possible to reach any sort of agreement.2) It’s very hard to check, correct, adjust, or update spiritual values that are wrong, bad, unsuitable, or out of date.Which is why maybe you might WANT a few autists around profaning the sacred with unnaturally precise and complete language.Otherwise your faulty spiritual values have no way to die, when they inevitably must, but to die with you…”—Ely Harman 

  • Dylan Thomas’ Bias Toward Postmodernism and Authoritarianism

    Yes on content, no on criticism. Demand for monopoly of positiva is different from necessity of monopoly of negativa. Make up whatever fairy stories incels desire. There is only one truth, and it is falsehood, and everything else is simply preference that expresses one’s reproductive interests.

    42862313_299118997351664_4618817575399194624_n.jpg

    —“It’s the problem of squishy definitions like “liberalism” opposed to clear operational definitions.  Propertarianism, essentially, combines nomocracy and property, where by law is decided by calculating exchanges of demonstrated property (en toto). All the nuances and details boils down to different configurations (and preferences) in which one applies this basic fundamental notion.” — Bill Joslin —“It’s not a matter of “don’t have spiritual values.” We ALL have them. Trying to eradicate spiritual values is most likely a vain and pointless ambition.The issues are:1) It’s not always possible to meaningfully communicate spiritual values that aren’t already shared. And even when it is, it’s usually not possible to reach any sort of agreement.2) It’s very hard to check, correct, adjust, or update spiritual values that are wrong, bad, unsuitable, or out of date.Which is why maybe you might WANT a few autists around profaning the sacred with unnaturally precise and complete language.Otherwise your faulty spiritual values have no way to die, when they inevitably must, but to die with you…”—Ely Harman 

  • (worth repeating) Pinker’s work misses (or artfully avoids the fact) that while

    (worth repeating)

    Pinker’s work misses (or artfully avoids the fact) that while violence has seemingly decreased, it has simply moved from physical attack on physical property to… https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=298138574116373&id=100017606988153


    Source date (UTC): 2018-09-27 17:39:16 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1045367280954200069

  • STOMPING ON THE POSTMODERN BUNNIES —“Mostly nonsense, where intelligible. But,

    STOMPING ON THE POSTMODERN BUNNIES

    —“Mostly nonsense, where intelligible. But, per usual, this man is blatantly Islamophobic. He is also misogynistic, anti-Semitic, evil and shameful. And proponents are responsible.”— Stewart Shernan

    So (a) you are historically illiterate or ignorant, (b) you have no argument in response – of course you can’t because it’s all true. And (c) you are engaging in the feminine use of disapproval rather than argument, by process of disapproval, ridicule, shaming, psychologism, gossiping and rallying.

    In other words, disapproval isn’t an argument against truth. And men do not argue as such. So you have either been born with a female brain structure, raised by a single mother, lacked a male role model and brothers, failed to serve in the military, have no experience managing people in a productive endeavor, or were indoctrinated in the postmodern cult while getting a gut-degree in something non-calculable and unscientific.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-09-21 13:11:00 UTC