Curt Doolittle

Form: Critique

  • GENOCIDE Here is our license. FULL TEXT: David Cole broke down Abed’s academic p

    http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2017/08/muslim-professor-ca-university-genocide-white-racists-morally-required/RECIPROCITY: GENOCIDE

    Here is our license.

    http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2017/08/muslim-professor-ca-university-genocide-white-racists-morally-required/

    FULL TEXT:

    David Cole broke down Abed’s academic paper “The Concept of Genocide Reconsidered” which was originally published in 2006. Cole says in a Taki’s Mag post:

    Abed reasons, it’s sometimes “morally required” to commit genocide, and he hasn’t been shy about advancing that argument in a series of lectures and essays that have somehow managed to stay under the radar of the media (especially the right-leaning media) over the past few years.

    Abed lays out his central thesis in the paper’s abstract: “Genocide is not in any sense distinctively heinous. Nor is it necessarily immoral.”

    Morally justified genocide? Abed realizes this might be a tough sell:

    Many will no doubt be shocked by these claims. Surely a view that has such unsavory implications should be rejected. In fact, it ought to be condemned in no uncertain terms. Reactions of this sort are overblown.

    Of course, any such objections by fellow academics were almost certainly silenced once Abed named the skin color of the targets of his “moral genocide”:

    One can certainly concoct a hypothetical scenario in which the deliberate annihilation of a group’s way of life is a “moral and political imperative.” And there may be a case for classifying as genocide campaigns of social destruction that are widely considered to be not only excusable but morally required. The institution of slavery in the American South was, arguably, a comprehensive way of life and worldview to which many whites were profoundly attached. It would not be wildly implausible to say that their investment in the culture and norms of the slave-owning community rivaled in its social meaning and significance an individual’s affiliation with a national or religious group. But because the kidnapping, enslavement, and lifelong exploitation of innocent human beings was a constitutive and thus ineliminable feature of the life led by many Southern whites, annihilating their way of life was a moral imperative. The right course of action was to strip them of an identity that gave meaning to their lives.

    Interestingly and to no one’s shock, when Mohammad Abed was confronted about the Europeans facing extinction or at least an annihilation of their way of life after millions of Muslim migrants have flooded their countries, Abed argues that Muslims intend to adopt the customs of their host country rather than alter them. 1400 years of Islamic destruction is evidence to the contrary, but when have facts ever mattered to Islamic supremacists?

    Peculiar, secondly, because although it was no doubt the case that people were motivated to leave their countries of origin by a wide range of considerations, I suspect that the desire to make a better life for themselves and future generations of their families was one of the most common. If this is the case, then surely there must be something about the traditions, practices and norms of European countries that are valued and respected by immigrants. But then why set out to systematically undermine the social, cultural and political foundations of those societies?… Why would immigrants attempt to systematically undermine norms and institutional structures that guarantee their democratic freedoms, including their right to be culturally different and to practice their religion without hindrance?

    Mohammad Abed is a professor at a public California university who believes it’s morally required to rid the world of evil white racists but Muslims can do no wrong. In fact, he completely ignores how Islam spread from the Arabian peninsula to other nations.

    Northern Africa, Indonesia, Iran, just to name a few, were’t originally Islamic nations. They were conquered by Islamic armies. Europe will suffer the same fate as millions of Muslims flood in and out-populate the indigenous people. This Muslim invasion is a Hijrah which is jihad by emigration. Abed knows exactly what is happening, as a Hijrah is a highly meritorious act and it promises Muslims great rewards in heaven.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-08-11 13:11:00 UTC

  • Honestly. I get accused of word salad, but then some idiot or other will argue h

    Honestly. I get accused of word salad, but then some idiot or other will argue hoppe makes sense. Well, you know, that’s just because he says what you want to hear, and what you want to hear makes sense to your intuitions, and what makes sense to your intuitions is that which corresponds to your moral instincts. In other words, you are victim of suggestion using fictionalism, just as I have argued for years now. The conditions you make moral judgements by are not the conditions that exist. They are merely your cognitive biases, and your cognitive biases are merely reflections of your reproductive(survival, competitive) strategy. Meaning? Abrahamism in the ancient and the modern worlds finds useful idiots all too easily.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-08-11 09:52:00 UTC

  • INSIGHT INTO HOPPE’S FALLACY (updated for accessibility) —“All truth-claims –

    INSIGHT INTO HOPPE’S FALLACY

    (updated for accessibility)

    —“All truth-claims – all claims that a given proposition is true, false, indeterminate or un-decidable or that an argument is valid and complete or not – are raised, justified and decided upon in the course of an argumentation.”— Hans Hermann Hoppe

    This is a variation on Marx’s Dialectical Materialism (social competition).

    – It presumes that the choices in all discourse are cooperation vs non, where they are violence/predation, cooperation, or non-cooperation.

    – It presumes the existence of a contract for cooperation when none exists.

    – It presumes that the parties seek agreement to cooperate on truth rather than deception.

    – It assumes parties in dispute seek agreement rather than truth or falsehood and blame.

    – It presumes parties debate in a court that does not operate by the same terms as the parties who are debating each other.

    Courts do not seek consensus. They do not seek truth. They seek cases of falsehood, cases of deception, and cases of malincentives, and total internal and external changes in capital (property in toto). Your excuses don’t mean anything.

    CONVERSELY

    Notice that what Hoppe’s quote is NOT a statement of:

    – Personal responsibility for the truth content of one’s words.

    – Due Diligence of Testimony under law.

    – Due Diligence in Science.

    OR

    – Due Diligence in argument

    – Due Diligence in the Pursuit of Truth.

    OR

    – Modeling what people *demonstrate by their actions*.

    What is the difference? In western ethics, the consequences of deceit might mean your death. In other words: warranty of your words, because one of the outcomes may be violence.

    In other words *western ethics*.

    Whereas, Hoppe is following jewish ethics, and jewish pilpul and following the marxists, and the postmodernists into social construction by stating that we haggle our way to agreement. We do not defend our way out of violence, parasitism, and deceit.

    —-“The truth of this proposition cannot be disputed without falling into contradiction, as any attempt to do so would itself have to come in the form of an argument. Hence, the“Apriori” of argumentation.”— Hans Hermann Hoppe

    Well as far as I know I just defeated it, because the premises are false.

    TO MAKE MATTERS WORSE

    Why am I arguing against hoppe other than to prevent harm to my people who out of their high trust nature are suggestible by overloading with his nonsense prose? I am dependent upon my fellows for competitive advantage. so damage to the informational commons is an aggression against the high investment i and mine have made in the normative, informational, and institutional commons. and why do the courts not allow me and mine to seek restitution for those aggressions? They should. Because no marxist or postmodernist propaganda would survive.

    CLOSING

    In other words, Hoppe is another user of conflation, non-operationalism (which exposes these errors), and non-western european ethics.

    This is why deflationary truth, including operationalism, are so important: because there is a very big difference between the {verbal and ideal} and the {operational and real}.

    MAKE MODELS NOT ARGUMENTS.

    That’s the difference between Real (model), Ideal (argument), Supernatural (excuse). Operationalism = Real, possible, and fully accounted.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-08-11 09:31:00 UTC

  • (to boettke) An unwanted voice of dissention from the analytic philosophy of sci

    (to boettke)

    An unwanted voice of dissention from the analytic philosophy of science.

    Not that the philosophy of science (testimony) is other than a bit of hand waving in economics, and not that a rare few might understand this but here is the correct restatement of ‘validity and justification et al’:

    (a) Economics(cooperation in production of good services and information for markets both private and common) is no different from any other science (science meaning application of the scientific method – and yes, there exists a method though poorly understood.)

    (b) “Science” refers to the use of logical and physical instruments to eliminate the full range of falsehoods: ignorance, error, bias, wishful thinking, partial accounting, suggestion and obscurantism, fictionalism and deceit – from our free associations. In other words, science is a moral and legal discipline just as are weights and measures, in the market for goods, services, information, and theories (ideas).

    (c) The means by which we arrive at or justify a theory (premises) conveys no truth content (warranty of truthfulness) to scientific propositions (See Critical Rationalism and Critical Preference).

    (d) The only truth content (warranty of truthfulness) is provided by the incremental increases in the survival of the theory within the limits proposed by as premises (pre) and scope(post). (Extensive Falsification).

    (e) The function of whichever synonym you choose: praxeology, intuitionism, operationalism, or strict construction – which in economics is performed by the subjective testing of a sequence of rational(voluntary) and reciprocal(moral) choices – is to falsify that an economic proposition is operationally possible, voluntary, and reciprocal (ie: possible and moral).

    (f) To deny this warranty of due diligence (as does the mainstream) is to abandon rule of law in economics, and to abandon the notion of voluntary cooperation, and to abandon moral limits in economics – thereby converting economics from a moral(truthful) to an immoral(deceptive) discipline – ergo, converting from the (austrian) attempt to improve institutions by the compensation for informational asymmetry(truthfulness and trust), to the mainstream attempt to maximize the disinformation necessary to cause the overextension of both consumption and sustainable patterns of specialization and trade, such that booms and busts continue to accumulate in duration and scope.

    (f) To test the truthfulness of a proposition (provide a warranty of due diligence against ignorance, error, bias, wishful thinking, selective accounting, suggestion and obscurantism, fictionalism, and deceit) whether in economics or any other discipline requires that we test each dimension of actionable reality available to man – which we reduce to the common terms of consistency, correspondence, possibility, morality, full accounting including limits, and coherence (comprehensibility of the narrative),

    (g) But which more precisely refers to tests of each dimension: 1) categorical: consistency of identity, 2) logical: internal consistency, 3) empirical: externally correspondent, 4) existentially possible: operationally stated, 5) rational consistency: voluntary, 5) moral consistency: reciprocal 6) scope consistency: fully accounted including limits , and 7) coherent: narrated in coherence with all such dimensions.

    (h) if all these steps are performed we can claim we have performed due diligence against the full range of falsehoods in the full range of actionable dimensions regardless of the subject we speak of.

    The problem is, that since economics is reducible to the measurement of cooperation, even if biased toward to the production of goods and services, it is either an extension of rule of law by the natural law of reciprocity, (which is what the Austrian school attempts to confine it to, and the chicago school extends to insurance against shocks), or it is, as is the mainstream, an exercise in deception for the purpose of burning down civilizational capital by means of monetary disinformation (deception) for the purpose of purchasing virtue signals and premiums by the political, financial, and academic classes.

    My opinion, as someone who specializes in this question, is that it is the latter, and the austrians are a lone voice of morality in the cacophony of an immoral and pseudoscientific polity.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-08-09 15:38:00 UTC

  • WE AREN’T JUST AGREEING TO DISAGREE. by Eli Harman I don’t agree with your assum

    WE AREN’T JUST AGREEING TO DISAGREE.

    by Eli Harman

    I don’t agree with your assumptions. I don’t agree with your reasoning. I don’t agree with your conclusions. I don’t agree with what you think you know. I don’t agree with how you think you know it. I don’t agree that what you say you think is even what you think. I don’t agree that reality is what you think it is. I don’t agree that the facts are what you say they are. I don’t agree that your theories explain the facts. I don’t agree with your values. I don’t agree with your principles. I don’t agree with your preferences. I don’t agree with your ideals. I don’t agree with your aims. I don’t agree with your means. I don’t agree with your aesthetics. I don’t agree with what you think is beautiful. I don’t agree with what you think is inspiring. I don’t agree with what you think is good. I don’t agree with what you think is true. We have no common ground to build upon, and no common ground to build towards. Everything you say is worthless to me, and everything you do is worthless to me, and everything you are is just as worthless to me.

    –“Therefore I do not reason with you, but prosecute.”—Simon Ström

    Source date (UTC): 2017-08-09 08:45:00 UTC

  • The elegance of the peterson cult is he can make myth say whatever he wants, and

    The elegance of the peterson cult is he can make myth say whatever he wants, and circumvent suspension of disbelief if he spoke scientifically. This is why religino works. And it’s why I don’t like including religious works, and want to limit our analysis to myth and literature. Because the ‘interpreter’ can suggest truth or false good or bad – and that’s what they do: suggest bad.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-08-07 23:16:00 UTC

  • YOU ARE ATTRACTED TO MARXISM BECAUSE YOU ARE INFERIOR AND OF NO VALUE TO OTHERS

    YOU ARE ATTRACTED TO MARXISM BECAUSE YOU ARE INFERIOR AND OF NO VALUE TO OTHERS

    Marxism is false, pseudoscientific, and has empirically failed. The fact that you are genetically, physically, emotionally, intellectually inferior provides you with the incentive to surrender to abrahamic deceptions in the ancient world (judaism, christianity, and islam) by using the false promises of life after death if you rebel against those who are better than you are, just as marxism gives you the false promises that you will have economic social and political equality to yuor betters in the present word if you rebel against them. Both are simply lies. Nothing more. Lies for the weak of genes, body, emotions, and mind.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-08-07 09:44:00 UTC

  • MARXISM PROVIDES PSEUDOSCIENCE FOR MORONS JUST AS CHRISTIANITY PROVIDED PSEUDO-P

    MARXISM PROVIDES PSEUDOSCIENCE FOR MORONS JUST AS CHRISTIANITY PROVIDED PSEUDO-PHILOSOPHY FOR MORONS

    Marxist economics is a pseudoscientific restatement of history that includes the fallacy of the labor theory of value, the fallacy that labor has value in relation to organization by the use of incentives, the fallacy of equality of value of individuals to mankind or to one another, the fallacy of oppression of the good rather than domestication of the bad, the fallacy of dunning kruger competence of the laboring and underclasses, and the predictive fallacy of both underclass revolution and capitalist failure. In fact, it is equality, democracy, socialism, and communism that has failed, and it is boazian anthropology, marxist economics and sociology, freudian psychology, frankfurt ethics, and cantorian mathematics that have proven pseudoscientific and false.

    Scientific morality: reciprocity and gentle eugenics by use meritocracy to suppress reproduction produces continuous increases in condition, prosperity, eugenics and agency.

    Everything else is both false, lying, and harmful.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-08-07 09:27:00 UTC

  • THE PROSECUTOR BAITS THE PURVEYORS OF FRAUD The difference is that I do what I d

    THE PROSECUTOR BAITS THE PURVEYORS OF FRAUD

    The difference is that I do what I do to bait idiots, so that I can defraud them, just like scientists debunk supernaturalists. And Dyer is one of those frauds who has found a market for fulfilling demand for denial of reality. But once a person has descended into conflating reason and intuition in order to circumvent reason and existence (science) then the strategy of denialism (postmodernism, kantian rationalism, and abraham) has been played. The purpose of denialism, pseudo-rationalism, and experientialism, in all its forms is merely rejection of reason and reality so that the inferior need not negotiate a compromise with the superior. That’s all it is. Nothing more. An elaborate verbal deception for the purpose of leaving no option for compromise, and therefore no options but separatism and violence. You cannot enter into an exchange with a dishonest man. And all debate and discourse is either honest or not. If not honest then the only options are boycott and violence.

    I’m building an inquisition against Abrahamism in all its forms.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-08-06 12:59:00 UTC

  • POSTMODERNISM is a mid-to-late 20th century reactionary movement developed to re

    POSTMODERNISM is a mid-to-late 20th century reactionary movement developed to retaliate against and undermine scientific and political modernity by the use of skepticism, irony, ridicule, shaming, or denial, including truth denial, reason denial, science denial, objective reality denial, human nature denial (race, civilization, culture, class, gender, ability, and intelligence denial), objective morality denial, the notion of social progress denial, the notion of evolutionary progress denial, and denial of gender, economic, social, and political compromise through cooperative exchange.

    Instead, postmodernists assert – to varying degrees – that claims to knowledge and truth are products of social, historical or political discourses or interpretations, and are therefore contextual or socially constructed.

    As such, postmodern thought is characterized by uses of denial, epistemological and moral relativism, pluralism, irreverence(ridicule,shaming, and rallying and self-referentiality(circular reasoning).

    In other words postmodernism attempts to destroy all ‘discrimination and difference in value’ in political discourse through the ritualization of lying by pseudoscience, pseudo-rationalism, and fictionalization of history, and fictionalization of communication in the modern world.

    The technique functions in modernity just as Abrahamic religions (Judaism, Christianity, and Islam) fictionalized, reason, truth, and history in the ancient world – through ritualized repetition of falsehood: deception by chanting.

    Origins: The prior generations of marxism had failed in their pseudoscientific iterations, from marx, through lenin, stalin, trotsky, and through the french schools. But by the mid 20th century it was intellectually impossible to advocate marxism because of its universal failure and the catastrophes he had created. The french school switched from economic and pseudoscientific marxism of competition between the classes for economic power, to pseudo rational (fictional) competition between identities for pursue of ‘privilege’ and pure political power.

    In both cases the scientific, rational, and philosophical refutation of marxism and postmodernism lagged the success of the marxists and postmodernists at the production of propaganda – thereby illustrating that the production of lies is faster and cheaper and more effective in the short term than the production of truth.

    The strategy of postmodernists has been to immigrate third world parties, end integration into western civilization (the nuclear family, meritocracy, truth telling, rule of law, and civic responsibility), undermine rule of law via the courts through selective pursuit of marginal cases, accomplish legislation via the courts what cannot be accomplished through the established channels of government, and destroy the virtue of the family and norms, and replace it with the virtue of individualism and identitarianism (abnormal behavior).

    Source date (UTC): 2017-08-05 18:46:00 UTC