(star wars. in russian. director did his job capturing the feeling of the franchise. felt forced and contrived. felt anti-white. looked pretty. not morally moving or inspiring. positivistic soap opera. But I didn’t want to walk out.
Source date (UTC): 2015-12-20 14:37:00 UTC
Reading Bergson (French and Jewish) and like Kant (who he seeks to reform) its just layer upon layer of justificationary nonsense seeking authoritarian prescription.
Propertarianism is so simple. Testimonialism is so simple. And all these philosophers are but prophets relying upon artful language.
Source date (UTC): 2015-12-20 14:17:00 UTC
THE GREAT PSEUDOSCIENTIFIC DECEIT: PSYCHOLOGIZING
Once you learn propertarianism’s basic principles: acquisition, property en toto, inventory, transaction cost, opportunity cost, cooperation, suppression of free riding, reproductive strategy and group evolutionary strategy, and all speech as negotiation for acquisition… you replace totalitarian Freudian psychology and cosmopolitan sociology with universal amoral, unloaded, rational incentives.
And when you do that you see all psychologism get as a vast language of deception and manipulation for encouraging parasitism and consumption.
Humanity like all other creatures exists in the physical universe, and has evolved the means of estimating the future and acting to change it, capturing the difference for his benefit.
The only ‘shame’ is theft.
The only oath, not to steal.
Source date (UTC): 2015-12-20 05:42:00 UTC
(important piece) (progress on the cosmopolitan method of lying) [K]rugman is one of the most artful liars in the modern world. We tend to criticize him on his errors. But casting his work as error is too generous: he is simply an extremely artful liar. If you could ask the Genii how to create the world’s most objectively evil lie, it would include the use of half truth, used as a means of suggestion, to evoke a moral altruistic response, to force an intertemporal predictive bias, that obscured the loss of difficult-to-measure-capital, as an increase in current consumption. You would convince the lion to eat it’s tail. This is Krugman’s technique. That this subtle technique is the origin of The Monotheistic Lie, (The First Great Lie), as well as the 19th-20th century cosmopolitan pseudo-sciences: Boaz, Freud, Cantor, Marx-Keynes (The Second Great Lie), should not surprise us. What Marx achieved through loading, framing, overloading, and suggestion in dialectic, Keynes achieved by abandoning loading, and relying upon framing, overloading and suggestion, with innumeracy. This is Keynes’ achievement: to convert the pseudo-moral, into the pseudo-scientific. But the result is the same: obscuring the consumption of capital accumulated over millennia (k-selection for eugenic quality) into short term consumption (r-selection for dysgenic quantity). In other words, the Cosmopolitan’s second attempt at The Great Lie using the same means. In 2009 I wanted to start blogging about his technique, but rapidly I realized his ability to generate deceit was inexpensive, and the required effort to demonstrate the construction of his lies was terribly expensive. So I’m thrilled that those more capable of it – Bob Murphy – are doing it instead. Once you understand the mechanism of Krugman’s deception is merely an instance of the Great Lie Technique applied to economics, and his use of suggestion on one hand, and ridicule on the other, you realize he’s just using moral cognitive biases as a very sophisticated slight of hand by which to justify, encourage, and obscure the transfer of capital to consumption, so that the state can expand and the unproductive can obtain commission on the redistribution of capital to consumption. We can only do what we did in the past, and use science – the discipline of truth telling – to over come the Great Lies. Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine
(important piece) (progress on the cosmopolitan method of lying) [K]rugman is one of the most artful liars in the modern world. We tend to criticize him on his errors. But casting his work as error is too generous: he is simply an extremely artful liar. If you could ask the Genii how to create the world’s most objectively evil lie, it would include the use of half truth, used as a means of suggestion, to evoke a moral altruistic response, to force an intertemporal predictive bias, that obscured the loss of difficult-to-measure-capital, as an increase in current consumption. You would convince the lion to eat it’s tail. This is Krugman’s technique. That this subtle technique is the origin of The Monotheistic Lie, (The First Great Lie), as well as the 19th-20th century cosmopolitan pseudo-sciences: Boaz, Freud, Cantor, Marx-Keynes (The Second Great Lie), should not surprise us. What Marx achieved through loading, framing, overloading, and suggestion in dialectic, Keynes achieved by abandoning loading, and relying upon framing, overloading and suggestion, with innumeracy. This is Keynes’ achievement: to convert the pseudo-moral, into the pseudo-scientific. But the result is the same: obscuring the consumption of capital accumulated over millennia (k-selection for eugenic quality) into short term consumption (r-selection for dysgenic quantity). In other words, the Cosmopolitan’s second attempt at The Great Lie using the same means. In 2009 I wanted to start blogging about his technique, but rapidly I realized his ability to generate deceit was inexpensive, and the required effort to demonstrate the construction of his lies was terribly expensive. So I’m thrilled that those more capable of it – Bob Murphy – are doing it instead. Once you understand the mechanism of Krugman’s deception is merely an instance of the Great Lie Technique applied to economics, and his use of suggestion on one hand, and ridicule on the other, you realize he’s just using moral cognitive biases as a very sophisticated slight of hand by which to justify, encourage, and obscure the transfer of capital to consumption, so that the state can expand and the unproductive can obtain commission on the redistribution of capital to consumption. We can only do what we did in the past, and use science – the discipline of truth telling – to over come the Great Lies. Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine
[R]othbard “appropriated” the term “libertarianism” and instead gave us anarcho capitalism as the reinterpretation of cosmopolitan ethics of the eastern european borderlands, under Russian, Lithuanian, and Polish rule. It is the ethic of the ghetto. Of the people who do not produce commons or defense. There is nothing ‘libertarian’ in Rothbarianism, and nothing moral in his or Block’s attempt to construct moral and legal rules. The word “is” remains extremely confusing for english speakers, since it refers both to “exists as”, and can be used as a shortcut for AVOIDING or CONFLATING, or DECEIVING the method by which something exists. So I prefer to state libertarianism as the reciprocal insurance of all individuals in a polity against the undesired imposition of costs upon that which has been transformed at the cost of individual actions or inactions – whether that cost be imposed by an individual(violence, theft, fraud, externality) a group of individuals (conspiracy), or an organization devoted to the construction of commons (government). Liberty can only be constructed by this means: mutual insurance against the involuntary imposition of costs. There is no free lunch. And arguments in favor of ‘belief’ in liberty, or belief that we should leave one another alone, are merely fraudulent attempts to obtain the experience of liberty without paying the very high cost of both insuring one another against impositions of costs, and the high cost of refraining from imposing costs upon others, and the high cost of creating commons that produce disproportionate returns, including the commons of Liberty itself. And as empirical evidence we should note that the cosmopolitans lost eastern Europe just as their ancestors lost Spain and Jerusalem. There are no free rides. Liberty is rare because it is expensive. And because only a militia of warriors possesses the incentive to construct it. But the returns on the high trust society warrant it. Because westerners dragged man out of ignorance, mysticism, disease, and poverty in the ancient and modern worlds because of it. Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine SOURCE http://ex-army.blogspot.com/…/running-libertarianism-into-g…? AND ORIGINAL POST http://www.everyjoe.com/…/pol…/why-im-no-longer-libertarian/
[R]othbard “appropriated” the term “libertarianism” and instead gave us anarcho capitalism as the reinterpretation of cosmopolitan ethics of the eastern european borderlands, under Russian, Lithuanian, and Polish rule. It is the ethic of the ghetto. Of the people who do not produce commons or defense. There is nothing ‘libertarian’ in Rothbarianism, and nothing moral in his or Block’s attempt to construct moral and legal rules. The word “is” remains extremely confusing for english speakers, since it refers both to “exists as”, and can be used as a shortcut for AVOIDING or CONFLATING, or DECEIVING the method by which something exists. So I prefer to state libertarianism as the reciprocal insurance of all individuals in a polity against the undesired imposition of costs upon that which has been transformed at the cost of individual actions or inactions – whether that cost be imposed by an individual(violence, theft, fraud, externality) a group of individuals (conspiracy), or an organization devoted to the construction of commons (government). Liberty can only be constructed by this means: mutual insurance against the involuntary imposition of costs. There is no free lunch. And arguments in favor of ‘belief’ in liberty, or belief that we should leave one another alone, are merely fraudulent attempts to obtain the experience of liberty without paying the very high cost of both insuring one another against impositions of costs, and the high cost of refraining from imposing costs upon others, and the high cost of creating commons that produce disproportionate returns, including the commons of Liberty itself. And as empirical evidence we should note that the cosmopolitans lost eastern Europe just as their ancestors lost Spain and Jerusalem. There are no free rides. Liberty is rare because it is expensive. And because only a militia of warriors possesses the incentive to construct it. But the returns on the high trust society warrant it. Because westerners dragged man out of ignorance, mysticism, disease, and poverty in the ancient and modern worlds because of it. Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine SOURCE http://ex-army.blogspot.com/…/running-libertarianism-into-g…? AND ORIGINAL POST http://www.everyjoe.com/…/pol…/why-im-no-longer-libertarian/
http://ex-army.blogspot.com/2015/12/running-libertarianism-into-ground.htmlRUNNING LIBERTINISM INTO THE GROUND…
Um…
Rothbard “appropriated” the term “libertarianism” and instead gave us anarcho capitalism as the reinterpretation of cosmopolitan ethics of the eastern european borderlands, under Russian, Lithuanian, and Polish rule. It is the ethic of the ghetto. Of the people who do not produce commons or defense.
There is nothing ‘libertarian’ in Rothbarianism, and nothing moral in his or Block’s attempt to construct moral and legal rules.
The word “is” remains extremely confusing for english speakers, since it refers both to “exists as”, and can be used as a shortcut for AVOIDING or CONFLATING, or DECEIVING the method by which something exists.
So I prefer to state libertarianism as the reciprocal insurance of all individuals in a polity against the undesired imposition of costs upon that which has been transformed at the cost of individual actions or inactions – whether that cost be imposed by an individual(violence, theft, fraud, externality) a group of individuals (conspiracy), or an organization devoted to the construction of commons (government).
Liberty can only be constructed by this means: mutual insurance against the involuntary imposition of costs.
There is no free lunch. And arguments in favor of ‘belief’ in liberty, or belief that we should leave one another alone, are merely fraudulent attempts to obtain the experience of liberty without paying the very high cost of both insuring one another against impositions of costs, and the high cost of refraining from imposing costs upon others, and the high cost of creating commons that produce disproportionate returns, including the commons of Liberty itself.
And as empirical evidence we should note that the cosmopolitans lost eastern Europe just as their ancestors lost Spain and Jerusalem.
There are no free rides.
Liberty is rare because it is expensive.
And because only a militia of warriors possesses the incentive to construct it.
But the returns on the high trust society warrant it.
Because dragged man out of ignorance, mysticism, disease, and poverty in the ancient and modern worlds because of it.
Curt Doolittle
The Propertarian Institute
Kiev, Ukraine
SOURCE
http://ex-army.blogspot.com/2015/12/running-libertarianism-into-ground.html?
AND
ORIGINAL POST
http://www.everyjoe.com/2014/05/07/politics/why-im-no-longer-libertarian/
Source date (UTC): 2015-12-16 10:22:00 UTC
HOW PAUL KRUGMAN USES THE BIG LIE
(important piece) (progress on the cosmopolitan method of lying)
Krugman is one of the most artful liars in the modern world. We tend to criticize him on his errors. But casting his work as error is too generous: he is simply an extremely artful liar.
If you could ask the Genii how to create the world’s most objectively evil lie, it would include the use of half truth, used as a means of suggestion, to evoke a moral altruistic response, to force an intertemporal predictive bias, that obscured the loss of difficult-to-measure-capital, as an increase in current consumption. You would convince the lion to eat it’s tail.
This is Krugman’s technique.
That this subtle technique is the origin of The Monotheistic Lie, (The First Great Lie), as well as the 19th-20th century cosmopolitan pseudo-sciences: Boaz, Freud, Cantor, Marx-Keynes (The Second Great Lie), should not surprise us.
What Marx achieved through loading, framing, overloading, and suggestion in dialectic, Keynes achieved by abandoning loading, and relying upon framing, overloading and suggestion, with innumeracy.
This is Keynes’ achievement: to convert the pseudo-moral, into the pseudo-scientific. But the result is the same: obscuring the consumption of capital accumulated over millennia (k-selection for eugenic quality) into short term consumption (r-selection for dysgenic quantity). In other words, the Cosmopolitan’s second attempt at The Great Lie using the same means.
In 2009 I wanted to start blogging about his technique, but rapidly I realized his ability to generate deceit was inexpensive, and the required effort to demonstrate the construction of his lies was terribly expensive. So I’m thrilled that those more capable of it – Bob Murphy – are doing it instead.
Once you understand the mechanism of Krugman’s deception is merely an instance of the Great Lie Technique applied to economics, and his use of suggestion on one hand, and ridicule on the other, you realize he’s just using moral cognitive biases as a very sophisticated slight of hand by which to justify, encourage, and obscure the transfer of capital to consumption, so that the state can expand and the unproductive can obtain commission on the redistribution of capital to consumption.
We can only do what we did in the past, and use science – the discipline of truth telling – to over come the Great Lies.
Curt Doolittle
The Propertarian Institute
Kiev, Ukraine
Source date (UTC): 2015-12-16 03:25:00 UTC
THERE ARE STILL POOR MISGUIDED LIBERTINES OUT THERE
—I find it interesting that Objectivists claim that all knowledge is empirical (a performative contradiction)—Daniel Rothschild
This is a common misinterpretation of the word ’empirical’. When someone says all knowledge is empirical, it means everything we remember is constructed from the senses. As far as I know very few philosophers dispute this. So, ’empirical’ in the sciences means observable. And to prevent error, by extension it means only “consistently observable, measurable, and recordable”. Consistent correspondence with reality.
The question of empiricism has largely been one of whether the apriori holds the same utility as the empirical. And for the purpose of hypothesis generation it seems to. For the purpose of deduction it appears not, since in all but reductio examples, we can construct no unlimited propositions of reality that we can as in, say, mathematics, which must introduce scale (‘the axiom of choice”) and time in order to restore correspondence. But because of the determinism of the universe it’s relatively scale independent for the purposes of human action and cognition.
So in this sense, neither the empirical nor the aprior allow for deduction of apodeitically certain (axiomatic) answers. Instead, both the empirical and the apriori allow us to construct hypotheses which we can criticize and see if they survive as truth candidates.
Although, I didn’t know the philosophers of the libertarian era personally (I came into this work a bit late) the last century had a great deal of difficulty with philosophy, and libertarians were not immune to it. Perhaps less immune to it.
When making such claims as the libertarians do, most of it is not defensible. I won’t go into the history of it here, but they were trying to construct some equivalent to talmudic law – and failed. Law is justificationary, contractual, and deductive – . Truth is critical and evolutionary – it survives criticism, and we warrant its survival of criticism when we make a promise of truth claim.
Source date (UTC): 2015-12-13 10:42:00 UTC