If you have a free speech platform it will tend to attract taboo discussions that can’t be had otherwise. And yes, Jewish thought leadership is largely behind the postwar destruction of western civilization, and there is a long literature on the subject, and it’s almost entirely true. Is it a conspiracy? Like all political movements, it’s a conspiracy of common interest, perpetuating the Jewish group strategy, pursued with excellence and diligence by elites, which is what has caused their (entirely justified) persecution across time. That (warfare) strategy is the use of undermining using social construction, of false promise, baiting into hazard, under plausible deniability, escaping warranty and liability. It is the only group that has institutionalized the female group evolutionary strategy. Given that it’s the female strategy – and entirely biological – then the question is whether Jewish group strategy is by design, by cultural evolution, or by genetic adaptation or all of the above. And it is likely all of the above. We are unaware of the uniqueness of western civilization. So we don’t defend it. My work explains the success of the west compared to all the rest, and why we are vulnerable to the Jewish method of warfare by the female strategy of undermining, by the social construction of false promise of freedom from the logical, physical, behavioral, cooperative, and evolutionary laws of the universe. And I and others have documented the evolution of this war against western civilization from within. The difference is we know how to stop it now by law rather than continuing the long tradition of exterminating them for their crimes.
Form: Mini Essay
-
Of Course Gab Will Attract Taboo Conversations
If you have a free speech platform it will tend to attract taboo discussions that can’t be had otherwise. And yes, Jewish thought leadership is largely behind the postwar destruction of western civilization, and there is a long literature on the subject, and it’s almost entirely true. Is it a conspiracy? Like all political movements, it’s a conspiracy of common interest, perpetuating the Jewish group strategy, pursued with excellence and diligence by elites, which is what has caused their (entirely justified) persecution across time. That (warfare) strategy is the use of undermining using social construction, of false promise, baiting into hazard, under plausible deniability, escaping warranty and liability. It is the only group that has institutionalized the female group evolutionary strategy. Given that it’s the female strategy – and entirely biological – then the question is whether Jewish group strategy is by design, by cultural evolution, or by genetic adaptation or all of the above. And it is likely all of the above. We are unaware of the uniqueness of western civilization. So we don’t defend it. My work explains the success of the west compared to all the rest, and why we are vulnerable to the Jewish method of warfare by the female strategy of undermining, by the social construction of false promise of freedom from the logical, physical, behavioral, cooperative, and evolutionary laws of the universe. And I and others have documented the evolution of this war against western civilization from within. The difference is we know how to stop it now by law rather than continuing the long tradition of exterminating them for their crimes.
-
If you have a free speech platform it will tend to attract taboo discussions tha
If you have a free speech platform it will tend to attract taboo discussions that can’t be had otherwise.
And yes, Jewish thought leadership is largely behind the postwar destruction of western civilization, and there is a long literature on the subject, and it’s almost entirely true. Is it a conspiracy? Like all political movements, it’s a conspiracy of common interest, perpetuating the Jewish group strategy, pursued with excellence and diligence by elites, which is what has caused their (entirely justified) persecution across time. That (warfare) strategy is the use of undermining using social construction, of false promise, baiting into hazard, under plausible deniability, escaping warranty and liability. It is the only group that has institutionalized the female group evolutionary strategy. Given that it’s the female strategy – and entirely biological – then the question is whether Jewish group strategy is by design, by cultural evolution, or by genetic adaptation, or all of the above. And it is likely all of the above. We are unaware of the uniqueness of western civilization. So we don’t defend it. My work explains the success of the west compared to all the rest, and why we are vulnerable to the Jewish method of warfare by the female strategy of undermining, by the social construction of false promise of freedom from the logical, physical, behavioral, cooperative, and evolutionary laws of the universe. And I and others have documented the evolution of this war against western civilization from within. The difference is we know how to stop it now by law rather than continuing the long tradition of exterminating them for their crimes.
Source date (UTC): 2021-03-11 14:33:12 UTC
Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/105871651172726907
-
THE VALUE OF ART EDUCATION. 1) I was trained in art history, art theory, art cri
THE VALUE OF ART EDUCATION.
1) I was trained in art history, art theory, art criticism, and far less so in the craft itself. In effect my education was in the philosophy of art. I don’t think you can get a decent theory education any longer. If you can I don’t know where.2) So imagine sitting in a u-shaped set of desks three hours a day, critiquing (in the art sense) art from every period and movement, and being required to state a meaningful judgement and explain that judgement on each piece. (More like law school interrogation of students.)
3) Imagine going to a review at the end of the semester and being eviscerated by the profs and more than half of the students leaving the room in tears. This was ‘adversarialism’ in art education.
4) The value in learning to criticize art is that it’s criticizing taste, and you quickly learn that taste consists of not only your own metaphysics, the relationship you identify between yourself, the art, the venue, the context, and the polity, and your relative ignorance.
6) So you learn about yourself, others, your people, civilizations, and all mankind through art and art criticism BEFORE you learn about economics, and politics, and norms traditions, and values. You learn through aesthetics. And in adversarial conditions where you can’t ‘cheat’.
7) So this is probably one of the reasons why I have an easier time isolating intuition (aesthetics) with facts. I started with war, history science, and art, and only then politics, economics, and law.
And this is the education of ARISTOCRACY: Rule. Not governance, but RULE.
Source date (UTC): 2021-03-11 00:24:12 UTC
Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/105868312762519584
-
NBC “DEBRIS” Sci Fi Show Feedback Absolutely love it. Thrilled. Terrified that l
NBC “DEBRIS” Sci Fi Show Feedback
Absolutely love it. Thrilled. Terrified that like most ‘tv for smart folk’ this will meet an early demise.
I can see where they are taking the metanarrative of Debris and its analysis of mankind and it’s relatively novel and brilliant. But there is a difference between a script, the reveal-mystery plot, the various arcs, the characters that walk us through it … and the directing (which is ok, other than careless cardboard cutout treatment of extras), the production (good enough), the casting (below), and the acting (adequate) – although the clone-actor in the second episode is fabulous. And the promotion. Which was non-existent. I only found out about it because Russian tech nerds were talking about streaming it. Right now Russia is producing much better Sci-Fi than the west. Why? Sci Fi is naturally heroic. The western ‘commentariat’ has gone full anti-heroic, fulfilling the postmodern threat of destroying culture from within. But enough of that:
Usual failures that I see in Debris:
1) Casting working-class actors for upper-middle-class roles. Compare with x-files or firefly casting of the leads. This is partly a side effect of the steady ‘lower classing’ of the television industry seeking to resonate with the wrong audience while alienating all.
2) Overplaying personal drama. These characters aren’t that interesting. This plot device keeps production costs down, tries to develop characters external to the plot instead of in concert with the plot. Compare with Law and Order. This is not an x-files/Law-and-order context, not an Expanse or Dark Matter context.
3) The female lead is talented but not for this role. The male lead has proven himself in the industry and he can pull off the acting easily. But the director (or the script) is overplaying the american ordinary guy archetype vs brit that makes him AND the female lead competitive with the suspension of disbelief. Besides, anyone with experience with British culture knows that brit working class are even worse(trashier), not better than the American working class. While the actors work well together they don’t ‘sell’ the brit/us conflict.
That said (given that I was trained as an art critic) the concept will fly. My suspicion is production is so far ahead, that the mistakes I’m seeing might burn out the audience before the second season can be greenlit and the writing, costume (et all),
Source date (UTC): 2021-03-10 19:37:14 UTC
Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/105867184311635168
-
Fascism vs Roman Dicatorship in War. Same thing.
It is extremely difficult to find something that the fascists were ‘wrong’ about other than dependence on a dictator rather than rule of law by natural law. In other words, ‘rule of law fascism’ (meaning zero tolerance) is the optimum polity for homogenous, domesticated peoples. If you want to confuse fascism with two sides of the coin, that’s claiming that fascism is other than a war footing, just like the romans’ used dictators in war.
(a)Germans were right to seek to restore greater german civilization after the Napoleonic destruction of Europe,
(b) germans were right to join other Europeans in colonial expansion
(c) Communism was a threat to europeans.
(d) Anglo civ’s liberalism (or Swiss) is only suitable for Island/naval/marine states with natural borders, whereas germans require Ordnung and ‘to compete better than others’ given that they are territorial, surrounded, and have fewer resources other than TALENT.
(e) So Rule of Man Fascism is simply necessary in time of war, and Rule of Law fascism is simply the optimum in time of peace, given that Europe is bounded on the east and south by anti-european civilizations that cannot integrate into or compete with European civilization.
(f) but there are no conditions under which anything other than zero tolerance for irreciprocity in european civilization is ‘tolerable’ or even ‘utilitarian’ except to ‘fund the enemy’.
-
Fascism vs Roman Dicatorship in War. Same thing.
It is extremely difficult to find something that the fascists were ‘wrong’ about other than dependence on a dictator rather than rule of law by natural law. In other words, ‘rule of law fascism’ (meaning zero tolerance) is the optimum polity for homogenous, domesticated peoples. If you want to confuse fascism with two sides of the coin, that’s claiming that fascism is other than a war footing, just like the romans’ used dictators in war.
(a)Germans were right to seek to restore greater german civilization after the Napoleonic destruction of Europe,
(b) germans were right to join other Europeans in colonial expansion
(c) Communism was a threat to europeans.
(d) Anglo civ’s liberalism (or Swiss) is only suitable for Island/naval/marine states with natural borders, whereas germans require Ordnung and ‘to compete better than others’ given that they are territorial, surrounded, and have fewer resources other than TALENT.
(e) So Rule of Man Fascism is simply necessary in time of war, and Rule of Law fascism is simply the optimum in time of peace, given that Europe is bounded on the east and south by anti-european civilizations that cannot integrate into or compete with European civilization.
(f) but there are no conditions under which anything other than zero tolerance for irreciprocity in european civilization is ‘tolerable’ or even ‘utilitarian’ except to ‘fund the enemy’.
-
THE CAUSE OF DIVERSITY FRICTIONS Woke is a desperate attempt to preserve the pse
THE CAUSE OF DIVERSITY FRICTIONS
Woke is a desperate attempt to preserve the pseudoscientific anti-Darwinian movement. IQ, Sex, Class, Race differences are all true. BUT, due to delta in underclass size and resulting culture – and a problem of CLASS, kin-preference, culture, immigration, integration – not race.
Sex value of Race(neoteny) will exist. Kin bias will exist. Power-seeking by kin bias will exist. But differences in political demand by kin preference are due to differences in size of classes. ie; only groups w/ same class sizes, same culture, reduce kin friction.
This isn’t an ‘opinion’ or a ‘preference’ or an ‘ambition’. it’s a law of evolutionary biology, a law of nature, and it will never, ever change.
If we discuss race differences we are discussing conflicts due to kin preference under different genetic distributions.
Source date (UTC): 2021-03-06 18:10:22 UTC
Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/105844193549224298
-
Yes, we know what consciousness consists of.
Of course we know what consciousness consists of. We’ve known for at least the past ten years. The effort of teaching the average person enough neurology so that can they understand it is a bit of work, but I’m producing a course on it, and the research is all out there. Even a populist like Michio Kaku answers the question. Kuhn makes a living NOT answering the question of consciousness, and interviewing marginal characters (mostly old folks) and many of whom are intellectually embarrassing (philosophers and theologians) – thereby preserving the supernatural bias in the majority population while satisfying curiosity among both materialists, idealists, and supernaturalists. Roger Penrose has a particular strength in that he follows einstein and uses mental models in addition to his mathematics. But otherwise, Roger is a mathematical platonist. Most physicists are stuck in what we call ‘mathiness’ – no mental model. The research on consciousness is done today by those of us who rely on both neurology and computer science to reproduce it. In simple terms, consciousness is just the merger of sensation with memory of memory into a competitive set of predictions. Qualia is just a vast parallel hierarchy of variations on embodiment. Consciousness is simple. Most of our brain predicts a continuously updated (revised) world model, then indexes salient experiences as episodes, and predicts candidate episodes from a competition between episodes, and we regulate that function with attention. When people say consciousness is an illusion that implies an observer that doesn’t exist. The only observer is a hierarchy of memory that we perceive as constant, just like we perceive movies as constant. The root “you” is in the brain stem that’s concerned about orientation, homeostasis, and reward-seeking. All the “you” in the sense you know yourself is distributed around the neocortex as memories. The experience of being you is integrated across the brain and organized into the hippocampal region. Qualia is rather trivial to explain from there onward. If you were to ask if other species would experience the same qualia we can only say that their qualia would be understandable if they were at least able to communicate at our level. But that vibrations in the universe whether through solids, gasses, space, and from subsonic to sonic to electromagnetic, would be the same. Some people see impossible colors even today. Some are color blind. A different creature might experience time differently (faster or slower), or instead of having two hemispheres might have, four, or six, or eight (or more) – and that would be the only substantive difference. But to ACT in the real world generates demand for convergence on similar range of senses and qualia.
-
Yes, we know what consciousness consists of.
Of course we know what consciousness consists of. We’ve known for at least the past ten years. The effort of teaching the average person enough neurology so that can they understand it is a bit of work, but I’m producing a course on it, and the research is all out there. Even a populist like Michio Kaku answers the question. Kuhn makes a living NOT answering the question of consciousness, and interviewing marginal characters (mostly old folks) and many of whom are intellectually embarrassing (philosophers and theologians) – thereby preserving the supernatural bias in the majority population while satisfying curiosity among both materialists, idealists, and supernaturalists. Roger Penrose has a particular strength in that he follows einstein and uses mental models in addition to his mathematics. But otherwise, Roger is a mathematical platonist. Most physicists are stuck in what we call ‘mathiness’ – no mental model. The research on consciousness is done today by those of us who rely on both neurology and computer science to reproduce it. In simple terms, consciousness is just the merger of sensation with memory of memory into a competitive set of predictions. Qualia is just a vast parallel hierarchy of variations on embodiment. Consciousness is simple. Most of our brain predicts a continuously updated (revised) world model, then indexes salient experiences as episodes, and predicts candidate episodes from a competition between episodes, and we regulate that function with attention. When people say consciousness is an illusion that implies an observer that doesn’t exist. The only observer is a hierarchy of memory that we perceive as constant, just like we perceive movies as constant. The root “you” is in the brain stem that’s concerned about orientation, homeostasis, and reward-seeking. All the “you” in the sense you know yourself is distributed around the neocortex as memories. The experience of being you is integrated across the brain and organized into the hippocampal region. Qualia is rather trivial to explain from there onward. If you were to ask if other species would experience the same qualia we can only say that their qualia would be understandable if they were at least able to communicate at our level. But that vibrations in the universe whether through solids, gasses, space, and from subsonic to sonic to electromagnetic, would be the same. Some people see impossible colors even today. Some are color blind. A different creature might experience time differently (faster or slower), or instead of having two hemispheres might have, four, or six, or eight (or more) – and that would be the only substantive difference. But to ACT in the real world generates demand for convergence on similar range of senses and qualia.