1) I won’t talk about a strategy and tactics for civil war because while part of it is obvious, the novel part of it is not. I will talk about the desirable outcome as returning to the original constitution, its imitation of the Holy Roman Empire, as independent states with a weak government. 2) And I’d beg my fellow traditionalists (constitutionalists), Romans(xians), and ‘spartans'(right) to consider we (a) convert the blue cities into ‘free cities’ (look it up), and rule, or separate and re-join the British Empire, in exchange for the reform of the Bank of England. 3) Americans are as subject to propaganda as the left is, but strategically if we did so we would effectively recreate the british empire, collapse the treasury, the federal government, the military, and ‘drive’ the ‘hostiles’ out of the core and into northeast, and southwest. 4) Combined with restoration of ‘intolerance for sedition’, the ‘good’ urbanites would flee to us. 5)This is the ‘weak-strong’ strategic objective that achieves our ambitions, because central Canada would join as well giving us a near-monopoly of food production in the world.
Form: Mini Essay
-
Strategic Objectives for Civil War
1) I won’t talk about a strategy and tactics for civil war because while part of it is obvious, the novel part of it is not. I will talk about the desirable outcome as returning to the original constitution, its imitation of the Holy Roman Empire, as independent states with a weak government. 2) And I’d beg my fellow traditionalists (constitutionalists), Romans(xians), and ‘spartans'(right) to consider we (a) convert the blue cities into ‘free cities’ (look it up), and rule, or separate and re-join the British Empire, in exchange for the reform of the Bank of England. 3) Americans are as subject to propaganda as the left is, but strategically if we did so we would effectively recreate the british empire, collapse the treasury, the federal government, the military, and ‘drive’ the ‘hostiles’ out of the core and into northeast, and southwest. 4) Combined with restoration of ‘intolerance for sedition’, the ‘good’ urbanites would flee to us. 5)This is the ‘weak-strong’ strategic objective that achieves our ambitions, because central Canada would join as well giving us a near-monopoly of food production in the world.
-
We Had Perfect Government Before the ‘Enlightenment” and Can Have It Again.
WE HAD PERFECT GOVERNMENT BEFORE THE ‘ENLIGHTENMENT” AND CAN HAVE IT AGAIN.
—Curt: What are your thoughts on the idea that only a strong government is secure enough to be a limited government?”—
1)The strongest government is a universal militia, rule of law of self-determination by sovereignty and reciprocity, defended by judiciary, using monarchy as judge of last resort, a professional cabinet, and houses for the classes as jury for proposals put forth by the cabinet. 2) This is what Sparta, Athens, Rome, Holy Roman, and British empires had in common before the French ‘enlightenment’ that converted strong adversarial government to weak distributed government. The French experiment failed. Strong government with strong juridical defense and democratic veto of policy by those with demonstrated competence (1-service-family, 2-service-biz/industry, service-3-governorship) is optimum government. it cannot be done better by humans, and can only be improved by computational assistance.
-
We Had Perfect Government Before the ‘Enlightenment” and Can Have It Again.
WE HAD PERFECT GOVERNMENT BEFORE THE ‘ENLIGHTENMENT” AND CAN HAVE IT AGAIN.
—Curt: What are your thoughts on the idea that only a strong government is secure enough to be a limited government?”—
1)The strongest government is a universal militia, rule of law of self-determination by sovereignty and reciprocity, defended by judiciary, using monarchy as judge of last resort, a professional cabinet, and houses for the classes as jury for proposals put forth by the cabinet. 2) This is what Sparta, Athens, Rome, Holy Roman, and British empires had in common before the French ‘enlightenment’ that converted strong adversarial government to weak distributed government. The French experiment failed. Strong government with strong juridical defense and democratic veto of policy by those with demonstrated competence (1-service-family, 2-service-biz/industry, service-3-governorship) is optimum government. it cannot be done better by humans, and can only be improved by computational assistance.
-
Natural Religion: The Price We Must Pay
P-Law will produce the wants of Reactionaries: “life, family, community, quality”. It will just do it using formal logic, law, and court as market for suppression of violators that is very difficult if not impossible to undermine, instead of mythology, philosophy, or religion.
Groups must use organizations and generations that require an oppressive authority to indoctrinate values. If you have a ‘book’ that is not scripture but science, not wisdom but law, then religion to indoctrinate people will evolve within it, and that law will be absorbed by it.
I’m not a storyteller but a formal scientist, and don’t see it as my job to produce mythology, religion, or indoctrination – that’s a creative enterprise, not a scientific one. My job, the P-Judiciary’s job, and P-Law’s job is to DOCUMENT the law of nature and nature’s god.
So you may not see my work as religious but that’s because a religion of man, nature, and nature’s god need contain no lies, no false promises, no sophistry, nothing supernatural, and survives by the sheer ‘wonder’ of the universe that we are born to master, transform, and rule.
So there need be no difference between truth, science, law, politics, and religion, if there are no human lies therein. And instead, our religion consists of the wonder of each of us cooperating by competing AND insuring one another as we revel in transcendence not resistance.
There is only one price to pay for such a religion and that is regulation of the reproduction of the population at the bottom, and compensating them for their ‘loss’. Most religions – all Abrahamic religions – are today devolutionary instead. Anti-man, anti-evolutionary cults.
-
Natural Religion: The Price We Must Pay
P-Law will produce the wants of Reactionaries: “life, family, community, quality”. It will just do it using formal logic, law, and court as market for suppression of violators that is very difficult if not impossible to undermine, instead of mythology, philosophy, or religion.
Groups must use organizations and generations that require an oppressive authority to indoctrinate values. If you have a ‘book’ that is not scripture but science, not wisdom but law, then religion to indoctrinate people will evolve within it, and that law will be absorbed by it.
I’m not a storyteller but a formal scientist, and don’t see it as my job to produce mythology, religion, or indoctrination – that’s a creative enterprise, not a scientific one. My job, the P-Judiciary’s job, and P-Law’s job is to DOCUMENT the law of nature and nature’s god.
So you may not see my work as religious but that’s because a religion of man, nature, and nature’s god need contain no lies, no false promises, no sophistry, nothing supernatural, and survives by the sheer ‘wonder’ of the universe that we are born to master, transform, and rule.
So there need be no difference between truth, science, law, politics, and religion, if there are no human lies therein. And instead, our religion consists of the wonder of each of us cooperating by competing AND insuring one another as we revel in transcendence not resistance.
There is only one price to pay for such a religion and that is regulation of the reproduction of the population at the bottom, and compensating them for their ‘loss’. Most religions – all Abrahamic religions – are today devolutionary instead. Anti-man, anti-evolutionary cults.
-
Quotes From Today (Election Day)
I don’t care what system of government, economy, social order, or faith that you construct – it will be governed by the laws that I state and produce the outcomes I state. There is no difference between physics and behavior except for our memory of cooperative debits and credits.
I reduced western civilization to first causes. Then discovered it was just the most conformant to the laws of the universe. It’s that tedious process that made me understand western superiority isn’t a opinon, it’s a scientific fact. We have one flaw: christian tolerance.
The Ultimate Religion is not the religion of everyone. It’s the religion of everyone capable of it. The rest, frankly, they don’t matter.
If someone can’t understand some branch of mathematics, or logic, or science they’re perfectly happy to say that it’s beyond their understanding. But as soon as we move from formal and physical science to behavioral science, everyone seems to think they have a valuable opinion.
Really I don’t have critics of the work. Just of me. That’s ok. Same for other ‘disagreeable’ people in history. This isn’t a popularity contest. Unfortunately, people intuit that formal behavioral science needs their approval as if it’s ideology or philosophy. Sorry. Wrong.
I do my job. Which is to make no presumptions, and falsify until only the truth is left standing. This is the truth that is left standing. Everyone wants me to take the shortcut. I don’t shortcut. I have to construct a proof. P-Law is constructed of proofs from first causes (first principles). If I take your shortcut (even if I intuit that you’re right) I haven’t constructed a proof. P-Law is a Formal Science. So it’s the natural endpoint of logic, science, law, and religion: the One Law, and the One Religion. The mythology is up to others to write. Although our ancestors did a pretty good job if we remove the Semitic deceits and restate christianity as science.
In the simplest of terms all political ideology, all philosophy, and theology attempts to construct some sort of scam to avoid paying the psychological cost of adherence to physical, natural, and evolutionary laws.
I should just automate this response: (A) Not an argument. (B) GSRRM because you don’t have one, (C) This is Twitter – ultra-short form. (D) And intro to behavioral economics and natural law must use simple examples that newbs can intuit. Go here for GSRRM: BTW: https://propertarianinstitute.com/2020/05/31/what-does-gsrrm-stand-for-full-version/
That’s what frustrates me. Everything good in Xianity can be counted on the fingers of one hand. And it’s SCIENTIFICALLY TRUE. But for some reason people feel this desperate need for woo that is just incomprehensible to the rest of us. Yeah. We need some kinda church. Not lies.
[They] always lie. Because the world fantasy tey desire is impossible except in their imaginations and justified by social construction, in competition with daily falsification in reality.
There isn’t any difference between left, libertarian, and right NPCs. The question isn’t whether we have free will, but just how hard and rare it is not to be a bot for your genes, repeating the hoots and whistles of your gene pool.
Androgeny to males is equal to giving it away to females. Same issue, same response. Discounts the market.
Women are attracted to their value of men, but more so to the power of women – power that they can follow, imitate, and master. Women are emotional and psychological puppeteers on one end and social superpredators on the other. Men are just resources as women are just objects. Only about 1/3 of men even exist in women’s mental world. Men are not even objects. They are potential resources or they’re threats. Women choose the best men they can get while still puppeteering. And are more driven by keeping those men from others than having them themselves.
-
Quotes From Today (Election Day)
I don’t care what system of government, economy, social order, or faith that you construct – it will be governed by the laws that I state and produce the outcomes I state. There is no difference between physics and behavior except for our memory of cooperative debits and credits.
I reduced western civilization to first causes. Then discovered it was just the most conformant to the laws of the universe. It’s that tedious process that made me understand western superiority isn’t a opinon, it’s a scientific fact. We have one flaw: christian tolerance.
The Ultimate Religion is not the religion of everyone. It’s the religion of everyone capable of it. The rest, frankly, they don’t matter.
If someone can’t understand some branch of mathematics, or logic, or science they’re perfectly happy to say that it’s beyond their understanding. But as soon as we move from formal and physical science to behavioral science, everyone seems to think they have a valuable opinion.
Really I don’t have critics of the work. Just of me. That’s ok. Same for other ‘disagreeable’ people in history. This isn’t a popularity contest. Unfortunately, people intuit that formal behavioral science needs their approval as if it’s ideology or philosophy. Sorry. Wrong.
I do my job. Which is to make no presumptions, and falsify until only the truth is left standing. This is the truth that is left standing. Everyone wants me to take the shortcut. I don’t shortcut. I have to construct a proof. P-Law is constructed of proofs from first causes (first principles). If I take your shortcut (even if I intuit that you’re right) I haven’t constructed a proof. P-Law is a Formal Science. So it’s the natural endpoint of logic, science, law, and religion: the One Law, and the One Religion. The mythology is up to others to write. Although our ancestors did a pretty good job if we remove the Semitic deceits and restate christianity as science.
In the simplest of terms all political ideology, all philosophy, and theology attempts to construct some sort of scam to avoid paying the psychological cost of adherence to physical, natural, and evolutionary laws.
I should just automate this response: (A) Not an argument. (B) GSRRM because you don’t have one, (C) This is Twitter – ultra-short form. (D) And intro to behavioral economics and natural law must use simple examples that newbs can intuit. Go here for GSRRM: BTW: https://propertarianinstitute.com/2020/05/31/what-does-gsrrm-stand-for-full-version/
That’s what frustrates me. Everything good in Xianity can be counted on the fingers of one hand. And it’s SCIENTIFICALLY TRUE. But for some reason people feel this desperate need for woo that is just incomprehensible to the rest of us. Yeah. We need some kinda church. Not lies.
[They] always lie. Because the world fantasy tey desire is impossible except in their imaginations and justified by social construction, in competition with daily falsification in reality.
There isn’t any difference between left, libertarian, and right NPCs. The question isn’t whether we have free will, but just how hard and rare it is not to be a bot for your genes, repeating the hoots and whistles of your gene pool.
Androgeny to males is equal to giving it away to females. Same issue, same response. Discounts the market.
Women are attracted to their value of men, but more so to the power of women – power that they can follow, imitate, and master. Women are emotional and psychological puppeteers on one end and social superpredators on the other. Men are just resources as women are just objects. Only about 1/3 of men even exist in women’s mental world. Men are not even objects. They are potential resources or they’re threats. Women choose the best men they can get while still puppeteering. And are more driven by keeping those men from others than having them themselves.
-
Western civilization is based not on harmony but on ADVERSARIALISM.
1.Western civilization is based not on harmony but on ADVERSARIALISM. Adversarialism allows boys and men to constantly adapt and innovate and discover their value in a hierarchy on a team. Women removed adversarialism for girls, and the state for ‘minorities’. That’s the problem.
2.”Everyone gets a prize” is a symptom of the gradual eradication of the western group evolutionary strategy of maximizing training in adaptation and innovation, thereby directing male aggression to the production of commons by externality. Markets and law follow this same logic.
3. So in pursuit of harmony (not finding the place that you can add value to the hierarchy of the team) we create people who are incompetent, overconfident, destined to fail in the market, and destined to hate the civilization’s false promise to them.
4. This results in failure of maturity (adaptation), failure to learn to adapt, failure to learn the importance of adaptation, and girls who are shallow and emotionally fragile and boys that never develop a vested (demonstrated) interest in the commons (or society).
5. The benefits of western civilization are unique and they require we pay a high cost of adaptability and conformity to physical, natural, and evolutionary laws. This means we must (a) discover our true value to others, (b) contribute using it (c) and assist or insure the weak.
6. Differences in personality traits, including that personality trait we call intelligence, are little more than measurements of our ability and rate of adaptation to the physical, natural, and evolutionary laws of the universe – despite our physical and cognitive limitations.
-
Western civilization is based not on harmony but on ADVERSARIALISM.
1.Western civilization is based not on harmony but on ADVERSARIALISM. Adversarialism allows boys and men to constantly adapt and innovate and discover their value in a hierarchy on a team. Women removed adversarialism for girls, and the state for ‘minorities’. That’s the problem.
2.”Everyone gets a prize” is a symptom of the gradual eradication of the western group evolutionary strategy of maximizing training in adaptation and innovation, thereby directing male aggression to the production of commons by externality. Markets and law follow this same logic.
3. So in pursuit of harmony (not finding the place that you can add value to the hierarchy of the team) we create people who are incompetent, overconfident, destined to fail in the market, and destined to hate the civilization’s false promise to them.
4. This results in failure of maturity (adaptation), failure to learn to adapt, failure to learn the importance of adaptation, and girls who are shallow and emotionally fragile and boys that never develop a vested (demonstrated) interest in the commons (or society).
5. The benefits of western civilization are unique and they require we pay a high cost of adaptability and conformity to physical, natural, and evolutionary laws. This means we must (a) discover our true value to others, (b) contribute using it (c) and assist or insure the weak.
6. Differences in personality traits, including that personality trait we call intelligence, are little more than measurements of our ability and rate of adaptation to the physical, natural, and evolutionary laws of the universe – despite our physical and cognitive limitations.