CHRISTIANITY WAS A GAMBLE. by Daniel Jordan Christianity was a gamble. Like all things ironically we can judge them by their results (by their fruits). The good that we see is largely confirmation bias. The harm is in the category of unknown for most people due to chaos of measurement. But for those committed to truth and logic it’s hard not to see the sophistry as a major step back from the path Aristotle and Pythagoras were on. The group strategy as it turns out is probably more a biological strategy of high trust peoples evolving over time. Why do we label it as Christian when we have empirical evidence of optimum group strategies from Rome and Greece?
Form: Mini Essay
-
Christianity Was a Gamble.
CHRISTIANITY WAS A GAMBLE. by Daniel Jordan Christianity was a gamble. Like all things ironically we can judge them by their results (by their fruits). The good that we see is largely confirmation bias. The harm is in the category of unknown for most people due to chaos of measurement. But for those committed to truth and logic it’s hard not to see the sophistry as a major step back from the path Aristotle and Pythagoras were on. The group strategy as it turns out is probably more a biological strategy of high trust peoples evolving over time. Why do we label it as Christian when we have empirical evidence of optimum group strategies from Rome and Greece?
-
Fallacy of White Privilege: Demanding Ingroup Benefits While Maintaining Outgroup Status.
FALLACY OF WHITE PRIVILEGE: DEMANDING INGROUP BENEFITS WHILE MAINTAINING OUTGROUP STATUS. by Bill Joslin (via Justin Allred) (canon) Better stated as in-group members pay for membership via opportunity cost to not betray in-group trust. The incentive is clear. The benefits of maintaining membership outweighs the opportunity costs of not betraying trust of the in-group. This framing now includes class. Lower classes are on the cusp of this equation where betraying ingroup trust outweighs membership (i.e. crime and fraud). And outgroup members have no benefit of membership so have no incentive to take on the opportunity cost. “White privilege” distills down to outgroup con-artistry for why they should have ingroup benefits without paying the cost of membership…. And now we have the crux of the liberal philosophy and the common interests between lower class, migrants, academics and unassimilated sub-groups… All demanding ingroup benefits while maintaining outgroup status. Edit
-
We Can only Be Equal in Morality and The Law to Enforce It
WE CAN ONLY BE EQUAL IN MORALITY AND THE LAW TO ENFORCE IT by Dr. Richard T. Hünerkoch Equality is an artifice, it’s a concept, an “ideal” and the problem with ideals is that they are not obtainable by mortals. Perfection does not exist in the mortal realm. Equality in it’s most literal definition is an impossibility it’s an idealistic but unrealistic goal. —“If you start with a faulty premise and try to solve problems within that premise you find that none of your solutions work. The faulty premise is “equality” and everyone proposes solutions within that world view. The people you call “racist” are trying to explain this to you.”— The best thing that you can hope to achieve is as much legal equality as you possibly can but make no mistake it’s not the similarities that make us similar it’s the differences that make us different. Men are not even equal to other men so how could women possibly measure up? Equality as the left defines it means iniquity between “privileged” and “victims.” They want to make you dumb, hamstring your physicality and put a paper bag over your head so that the smart, strong and beautiful are “equal” to the stupid, weak and ugly. That’s what they mean. Equality is a worthy goal in and of itself but the only way things can be equal is through homogeneity. The closer we get to a homogenous culture, the closer we can get to equality. If the United States has the homogeneity of Iceland, we could be closer to equals. However though, because of diversity and heterogeneity, we have to adjust our target baseline of equality because we have to account for many extraneous variables. If we didn’t need to adjust for IQ differences that are miles apart, we could all be more equal. The only kind of equality that exists on Earth is the equality of mortality. We will all die someday and while we all have that in common, that is where the similarities end. The social terrorist left is trying to make us all “mortally equal” because that’s the only equality that truly exists in the mortal realm. Needless to say, the fact that we will all die someday is not enough reason to throw away our culture with reckless abandon. In case I haven’t made my point enough. Equality, as defined by the social terrorist left, is simply just communism masquerading as compassion. Don’t fall for this facade, the true visage behind the mask is the ugly bloated face of Karl Marx himself.
-
We Can only Be Equal in Morality and The Law to Enforce It
WE CAN ONLY BE EQUAL IN MORALITY AND THE LAW TO ENFORCE IT by Dr. Richard T. Hünerkoch Equality is an artifice, it’s a concept, an “ideal” and the problem with ideals is that they are not obtainable by mortals. Perfection does not exist in the mortal realm. Equality in it’s most literal definition is an impossibility it’s an idealistic but unrealistic goal. —“If you start with a faulty premise and try to solve problems within that premise you find that none of your solutions work. The faulty premise is “equality” and everyone proposes solutions within that world view. The people you call “racist” are trying to explain this to you.”— The best thing that you can hope to achieve is as much legal equality as you possibly can but make no mistake it’s not the similarities that make us similar it’s the differences that make us different. Men are not even equal to other men so how could women possibly measure up? Equality as the left defines it means iniquity between “privileged” and “victims.” They want to make you dumb, hamstring your physicality and put a paper bag over your head so that the smart, strong and beautiful are “equal” to the stupid, weak and ugly. That’s what they mean. Equality is a worthy goal in and of itself but the only way things can be equal is through homogeneity. The closer we get to a homogenous culture, the closer we can get to equality. If the United States has the homogeneity of Iceland, we could be closer to equals. However though, because of diversity and heterogeneity, we have to adjust our target baseline of equality because we have to account for many extraneous variables. If we didn’t need to adjust for IQ differences that are miles apart, we could all be more equal. The only kind of equality that exists on Earth is the equality of mortality. We will all die someday and while we all have that in common, that is where the similarities end. The social terrorist left is trying to make us all “mortally equal” because that’s the only equality that truly exists in the mortal realm. Needless to say, the fact that we will all die someday is not enough reason to throw away our culture with reckless abandon. In case I haven’t made my point enough. Equality, as defined by the social terrorist left, is simply just communism masquerading as compassion. Don’t fall for this facade, the true visage behind the mask is the ugly bloated face of Karl Marx himself.
-
And You Will Know Good and Evil
AND YOU WILL KNOW GOOD AND EVIL by Predmetsky Rosenborg Early Gnostic texts portray the serpent and Eve (sometimes almost conflating them) as positive messengers of truth and God as evil. In the case of Marcion, at least, it was the Old Testament God who was evil. What’s interesting is that the New Testament portrays Satan as a liar and the father of lies, but in the text of Genesis, God seems to acknowledge that Satan was telling the truth after all. “For God knows that when you eat from it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil” (Gen. 3:5) “Then the Lord God said, “Behold, the man has become like one of us in knowing good and evil. Now, lest he reach out his hand and take also of the tree of life and eat, and live forever—”(Gen. 3:22).
-
And You Will Know Good and Evil
AND YOU WILL KNOW GOOD AND EVIL by Predmetsky Rosenborg Early Gnostic texts portray the serpent and Eve (sometimes almost conflating them) as positive messengers of truth and God as evil. In the case of Marcion, at least, it was the Old Testament God who was evil. What’s interesting is that the New Testament portrays Satan as a liar and the father of lies, but in the text of Genesis, God seems to acknowledge that Satan was telling the truth after all. “For God knows that when you eat from it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil” (Gen. 3:5) “Then the Lord God said, “Behold, the man has become like one of us in knowing good and evil. Now, lest he reach out his hand and take also of the tree of life and eat, and live forever—”(Gen. 3:22).
-
John Mark Explains My Position on Christianity
JOHN MARK EXPLAINS MY POSITION ON CHRISTIANITY (core)(important) To John’s Thoughts, I’ll add this:
- SUPPRESSION OF FALSEHOOD AND ITS CONSEQUENCES – My work has a nearly single minded objective, and that ending lying in public speech. So, I’m not complaining about just christianity, but the falsehoods by which the abrahamic religions are constructed, the means of conveying those falsehoods, the consequences of teaching christians how to lie using the abrahamic method, and the consequences of christians lying using the abrahamic method, that makes the entire polity vulnerable to marxist, feminine, postmodern pseudoscience, sophism and denial, just as christianity judaism and islam were spread by supernaturalism, sophism, and denial of reality. As such my objective is the opposite of Augustine and Aquinas, which is to integrate greek reason into christianity on supernatural terms, and instead integrate christianity into western science and reason on scientific terms.
A POLITICAL RELIGION – Christianity, when expressed in secular scientific terms, is in fact an optimum SOCIAL and adequate PERSONAL religion even if it is not an optimum POLITICAL religion -which is why it failed to achieve what islam and judaism did, and why it has declined rapidly in the modern era. My goal is to license political religion so that we cannot be undermined again.
RESTORING A STATE RELIGION TO EXLUDE OTHERS – I’m trying to discover a way to make christianity a state religion by converting it to secular terms – this is possible because christianity and only christianity among the abrahamic religions is compatible with natural law. Christians despise the fact that the lessons of christianity in scientific terms, are optimum strategies for social cooperation at least at interpersonal scale. Because the magic and ‘woo woo’ is lost by doing so restoring dependence upon reason, instead of allowing us to fall into pacifist intuition where we can abandon reason. (which is why religions work to sedate humans.) So over the long term I work to produce a christian law that is inviolate, like sharia, so to speak, from the natural law, and the christian extension of the natural law, by the exhaustion of forgiveness before retaliation or prosecution.
RESTORING THE BALANCE OF POWERS – If I can convert Christianity to secular terms I can restore the church as the political agency responsible for the individual and family, limiting the government to the material, and restore competition between family-church and commerce-government, and military-state. It is this division and competition i’m seeking to restore. (I don’t tell you these things because they taint the audience by letting them know my purposes. I only explain afterward, so that my attacks on any given subject make sense in retrospect. In other words, I’m a scientist. I run tests. The public willing to engage in intellectually honest discourse serves as my testing laboratory.)
MULTIPLE CLASSES MULTIPLE RELIGIONS, SAME MESSAGE – All religions are class religions. Westerners practice a personal religion of Jesus (lower), a social religion of christianity (middle), an secular religion of philosophy (upper middle), a political religion of the law and the sciences that extend the law (upper). The Chinese have confucianism, the Dao, and buddhism, nationalism and familialism. Every culture other than judaism and islam have class religions. And we have and need our class religions.
MULTIPLE GENDERS: ADD MASCULINITY TO RELIGION – There are those of us for whom the philosophy of secular christianity – it’s cooperation – is merely valuable, but for whom our ancestors, culture, nation, civilization are more precious than the false promise of an evil semitic god. And so if we categorize heathenry as the thanks to nature not denial of it, and paganism as thanks to heroes of our history, and the archetypes that are non-submissive to nature and heroic in achievement rather than heroic in tolerance. So I am continuing my process of investigation into whether it is possible to unite these scientific, natural, and christian, traditions in a constitution, that prohibits competition by which to undermine them. And whether they can be practiced together or separately. So again, I see myself trying to unite western civilization against further destruction. And I am doing so by the same means as did those great men who came before me, in every great time of change.
THE METHOD TO THE APPARENT MADNESS There is a deep method to the appearance of my madness. Do not assume you grasp what I am doing. Much of what I do requires I maintain your ignorance of what I am doing, in order to ensure I collect quality information from the population. This is how all behavioral science must be conducted. And it’s how I conduct it.
- Curt
-
John Mark Explains My Position on Christianity
JOHN MARK EXPLAINS MY POSITION ON CHRISTIANITY (core)(important) To John’s Thoughts, I’ll add this:
- SUPPRESSION OF FALSEHOOD AND ITS CONSEQUENCES – My work has a nearly single minded objective, and that ending lying in public speech. So, I’m not complaining about just christianity, but the falsehoods by which the abrahamic religions are constructed, the means of conveying those falsehoods, the consequences of teaching christians how to lie using the abrahamic method, and the consequences of christians lying using the abrahamic method, that makes the entire polity vulnerable to marxist, feminine, postmodern pseudoscience, sophism and denial, just as christianity judaism and islam were spread by supernaturalism, sophism, and denial of reality. As such my objective is the opposite of Augustine and Aquinas, which is to integrate greek reason into christianity on supernatural terms, and instead integrate christianity into western science and reason on scientific terms.
A POLITICAL RELIGION – Christianity, when expressed in secular scientific terms, is in fact an optimum SOCIAL and adequate PERSONAL religion even if it is not an optimum POLITICAL religion -which is why it failed to achieve what islam and judaism did, and why it has declined rapidly in the modern era. My goal is to license political religion so that we cannot be undermined again.
RESTORING A STATE RELIGION TO EXLUDE OTHERS – I’m trying to discover a way to make christianity a state religion by converting it to secular terms – this is possible because christianity and only christianity among the abrahamic religions is compatible with natural law. Christians despise the fact that the lessons of christianity in scientific terms, are optimum strategies for social cooperation at least at interpersonal scale. Because the magic and ‘woo woo’ is lost by doing so restoring dependence upon reason, instead of allowing us to fall into pacifist intuition where we can abandon reason. (which is why religions work to sedate humans.) So over the long term I work to produce a christian law that is inviolate, like sharia, so to speak, from the natural law, and the christian extension of the natural law, by the exhaustion of forgiveness before retaliation or prosecution.
RESTORING THE BALANCE OF POWERS – If I can convert Christianity to secular terms I can restore the church as the political agency responsible for the individual and family, limiting the government to the material, and restore competition between family-church and commerce-government, and military-state. It is this division and competition i’m seeking to restore. (I don’t tell you these things because they taint the audience by letting them know my purposes. I only explain afterward, so that my attacks on any given subject make sense in retrospect. In other words, I’m a scientist. I run tests. The public willing to engage in intellectually honest discourse serves as my testing laboratory.)
MULTIPLE CLASSES MULTIPLE RELIGIONS, SAME MESSAGE – All religions are class religions. Westerners practice a personal religion of Jesus (lower), a social religion of christianity (middle), an secular religion of philosophy (upper middle), a political religion of the law and the sciences that extend the law (upper). The Chinese have confucianism, the Dao, and buddhism, nationalism and familialism. Every culture other than judaism and islam have class religions. And we have and need our class religions.
MULTIPLE GENDERS: ADD MASCULINITY TO RELIGION – There are those of us for whom the philosophy of secular christianity – it’s cooperation – is merely valuable, but for whom our ancestors, culture, nation, civilization are more precious than the false promise of an evil semitic god. And so if we categorize heathenry as the thanks to nature not denial of it, and paganism as thanks to heroes of our history, and the archetypes that are non-submissive to nature and heroic in achievement rather than heroic in tolerance. So I am continuing my process of investigation into whether it is possible to unite these scientific, natural, and christian, traditions in a constitution, that prohibits competition by which to undermine them. And whether they can be practiced together or separately. So again, I see myself trying to unite western civilization against further destruction. And I am doing so by the same means as did those great men who came before me, in every great time of change.
THE METHOD TO THE APPARENT MADNESS There is a deep method to the appearance of my madness. Do not assume you grasp what I am doing. Much of what I do requires I maintain your ignorance of what I am doing, in order to ensure I collect quality information from the population. This is how all behavioral science must be conducted. And it’s how I conduct it.
- Curt
-
Corporatism as A Vehicle for Understanding All Political History
Oct 15, 2019, 9:43 AM I want to disambiguate corporatism into a spectrum so that the criticisms are decidable by definition rather than by free-association. In other words, corporatism vs what?
- Corporatism. Bottom up: control of the state by economic common-interest groups vs Top down: the state’s organization of and control of the polity into economic common-interest groups.
Corporatism arose from indo-european economic tripartism in the cooperative division of labor between military, administrative(educated), and laboring classes. The reason why it evolved in a militial order is obvious. The current “neo-corporatist” condition consists of negotiations between state(homogenous) labour (homogenous), and business (heterogeneous) to establish policy. This is the origin of social democracy. However, social democracy with forcible redistribution violates the ancestral paternalism, by putting control of common sproduction in the hands of the majority, and thereby taking away business’ necessity of care taking of labor as extension of family, and treating labor as resource rather than family members. (See pre-unification german industry, esp. Krupp). Heterogeneity of polity increases incentive to defect from this model, thereby producing the problems of the middle east and steppe, and the low trust of the far east (china) – all of which practice clan(kinship)-corporatism instead of economic interest corporatism. So I’ll cast social corporatism as rule of law, paternalism, and kinship, vs kinship by clan interests – vertical and hostile – rather than economic interests (esp class) – horizontal and interdependent. ie: economic produces economic trust, kinship produces clan trust. And the results are rather obvious. And so once again I’ll cast communism as monopoly underclass rule, libertarianism as monopoly middle class rule, and neoconservativsm as monopoly upper class rule, and cast tripartism as a division of labor between the classes for collective good. Socialism was a french invention largely a continuation of the extermination of the protestants (middle class) and the aristocracy (upper class). With new leadership merely rotating in to those positions and forcing out the economic middle that emerged in the anglo civilization (and which increased insecurity while increasing opportunity.) Fascism in Spain, Italy, and Germany was an attempt to Resist both communism (underclass monopoly) and french socialism (constraint of the middle class by the upper class for labor’s benefit), but not russian-jewish socialism (eradication of the middle class, and the upper class). And I’ll cast the term corporatism as an obscurant that relies upon suggestion by free association conveying no information other than “something bad”. So we have at least the pair of traditional axis: (a) rule for profit by individual or oligarchy(dictatorship, kinship, oligarchy), rule by collective classes(market), rule by monopoly classes (communism, russian-socialism, chinese socialism) and (b) clan corporatism (nationalism) vs economic corporatism (state), vs military corporatism (empire). So rule of law will result in market (economic corporatism) and nationalism (clan corporatism) or statism (state corporatism), with the possibility of paternalism (voluntary caretaking between the classes requiring nationalism. That is probably a distillation of everything meaningful that can be debated in the question of the organization of polities by criteria of decidability. And everything else is some form of bias coercion or deceit. I don’t think the above can be falsified. And it prevents our interpretation of history by eliminating contrary proposition (and definitions).