photos_and_videos/TimelinePhotos_SxeO6JU-xg/46501222_10156795733877264_5477799498317037568_n_10156795733872264.jpg I’m actually a fairly nice guy. But you know, when the left retreats into socialism and shaming, the libertarian and right must retreat into fascism and threat. I restore that honesty to the discourse. So that’s what you’re seeing. Me restoring war (violence) to the discourse. It’s very hard to be a moral person and disagree with ‘markets in everything’.Stephen ThomasYou must meet violence for violence and threat for threat. Else you will be overrun by tyrants claiming to be tolerant.Nov 22, 2018, 10:14 AMNoah J RevoyMy impression is that you are primarily motivated by love with strong secondary tones of K-selected, masculine disgust for lies.Nov 22, 2018, 10:24 AMAndrew MaughanIts physics really. An object in motion will remain in motion until/unless acted upon by an EQUAL or GREATER opposing force. I find that the same goes for human emotion and behavior. The right of today seems to believe that appeasement and capitulation will somehow stave the onslaught of radical socialism which frankly goes against basic reason.Nov 22, 2018, 10:28 AMJennifer DeanWhen the left advances with replacement and genocide, we must advance with an equal threat.Nov 22, 2018, 11:01 AMSkye StewartI get the same thing all the time. People always assume the worst about us. “Conservative” bastards 🧐Nov 22, 2018, 11:19 AMCurt Doolittlepretty much, yep.Nov 22, 2018, 11:33 AMCurt Doolittle(because of childhood I also have a purely subconscious and inescapable feeling I need to protect people. So thats’ the tird leg of the cognitive stool.)Nov 22, 2018, 11:34 AMCurt DoolittleYep.Nov 22, 2018, 11:34 AMSolomon VolodymyrI get this. I’m not one of these skinhead twats who loves fighting and gets off fantasizing about genocide, far from it – by personality type, I should be a leftist and in fact was once upon a time – but I am drawn to your sort of quasi fascism. Well call me a nationalist and a pragmatist; I altogether loathe ideology.Nov 22, 2018, 12:09 PMSolomon VolodymyrSkye Stewart you’re pretty left on a few topics but you’re still on our level. There can and in fact must be dialogue between left and right but it has to be within a logical framework between sensible, non-lying people – the kind of paradigm we currently sorely lack in mainstream politics.Nov 22, 2018, 12:13 PMSkye StewartSolomon Volodymyr to which leftish propensities do you refer? Out of interest ☝🏼Nov 22, 2018, 12:20 PMSolomon VolodymyrWell generally you seem to care about stuff that alt-righters don’t. You have I’d say a more balanced view, just from what you shareNov 22, 2018, 12:22 PMAndrea RoyallPeace was never an optionNov 22, 2018, 12:56 PMMartin ŠtěpánI too was a leftist. But truth is the truth.Nov 22, 2018, 2:54 PMMartin ŠtěpánJust made me think. Contrary to what Curt says, an individual can actually speak no only honestly but also truthfully, provided he only speaks in tautologies. It’s probably not a very useful insight…Nov 22, 2018, 2:57 PMMartin ŠtěpánDepends. We all have some left-wing ideas to someone who understands right-wing as libertarianism. Like welfare for the childless.Nov 22, 2018, 3:22 PMSkye StewartMartin Štěpán https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z31FQ1_jjlQNov 22, 2018, 3:29 PMCurt DoolittleThat’s not contrary to what I say. On the other hand, speaking exclusively in tautologies is hard to imagine, although different descriptions of the same operations are technically tautologies.Nov 22, 2018, 3:38 PMMartin ŠtěpánIt is what it is.Nov 22, 2018, 3:42 PMJames SantagataNoah J Revoy that’s a great insight but I think most of us, hate the fact that these lies are so bald-faced, and so blatant as to be insulting. And then when we expose the liars as lairs, their arrogance and supremacist chutzpah is so great, so beyond that pale, that it boils the blood.Nov 22, 2018, 5:46 PMNoah J RevoyJames Santagata Don’t take our intolerance for lies for granted. So many people prefer lies, no matter how offensive, rather than a truth that requires them to take an unpleasant action.
We who love truth and hate lies of all sorts. We who would rather suffer the pain of truth than live comfortably in lies. We are the minority and we will remain so for generations to come. We are going to have to drag the masses out of the darkness of their decadent lies by force.Nov 22, 2018, 5:51 PMJames SantagataNoah J Revoy e.g, “can’ t we all just get along”, “be nice”, “let it go”, etc.Nov 22, 2018, 6:35 PMCurt DoolittleWhy can’t we just escalate instead? lolzNov 22, 2018, 7:01 PMJames SantagataCurt Doolittle We should. We should welcome conflict.Nov 22, 2018, 7:17 PMNicola WrightI have an acquaintance who identifies as an actual communist. Even he is labelled a ‘racist nazi’ because he’s outspoken against SJW rhetoric. The racist nazi label used as silencing tactic is quickly losing it’s power.Nov 23, 2018, 2:47 AMSkye StewartArguably the most famous communist/philosopher in the world is Slavoj Žižek. He deconstructs postmodern and SJW beliefs and tendencies better than many anti-communist Right wingers.Nov 23, 2018, 10:46 AMI’m actually a fairly nice guy. But you know, when the left retreats into socialism and shaming, the libertarian and right must retreat into fascism and threat. I restore that honesty to the discourse. So that’s what you’re seeing. Me restoring war (violence) to the discourse. It’s very hard to be a moral person and disagree with ‘markets in everything’.
In every great era of transformation men must be reminded that while we pursue ideals together to improve current conditions, that we must not, by doing so, lose our comprehension of the real. And by the real, i mean, that cooperation is merely one of the means of conflict, and that either we are pushing people out of the bottom of our group, or pushing other groups out of the bottom of all groups, but that we are always and everywhere in competition as the optimum evolutionary means of conflict. Hence why we have the generational need for warriors to write reminders of how to fight, lest we fall under the illusion that no fight exists, or that others will not resort to non-cooperationg, and warfare by all means possible at all times.
THere are many dead gods, for all the peoples who are dead.
The military mind is easy to identify. The law enforcement mind is easy to identify. The bureaucratic mind is easy to identify. The house-spook or field-spook mind is easy to identify. The entrepreneurial mind is easy to identify. The working class mind is easy to identify. The labor mind is easy to identify. The (((tribal))) and female minds are easy to identify – on the use of frame alone, and the age and generation minds are easy to identify. The ease of identifying a class of mind is merely experience in doing so and reading the tells. You learn by LISTENING.
As far as I know, economics ‘went wrong’ when “the republican income statement no longer propagated to the monarchical balance sheet.” In other words, when we failed to account for ALL capital changes, including territorial, genetic, cultural, normative, knowledge, and institutional, and therefore treated economics as a means of pseudo-scientific cherry-picking of measurements, under the pretense that such capital was being mobilized rather than consumed (or simply lost or destroyed).
The postwar era, by the pseudoscientific taboo against the darwinian revolution and the necessity of continuing 3500 years of environmental eugenics, and 1600 years of manorial eugenics, and 800 years of juridical eugenics, converted the discipline into the means by which to conduct war against civilization: the incremental domestication of animal man into equilibrium with his productive technologies, and his means of calculating a survivable future with them: sovereignty, reciprocity, law (tort), markets in everything, property, money, prices.
Economics is either a measure of cooperation, and therefore, reciprocity, and therefore political economy, and as such Law (tort – dispute resolution), Legislation (commons production and defense), and regulation (prior restraint by the insurer of last resort), and attendant standards of measurement, or it is merely an innumerate pseudoscience to justify the consumption of accumulated capital in pursuit of slow reversal of eugenic evolution, regression to the ancient mean, and the source of the justification for the consequente devolution of civilization and man.
Efficiency is a rather ridiculous pursuit unbound by justification for less visible capital destruction , just as is legislation is a pursuit unbound by rules of contract.
The Market Failure hypothesis is rather ridiculous since if the market produces proceeds sufficient to subsidize goods services and information, and distorting that market harmful to it.
And a hundred other nonsense-schemes we use to obscure the reversal of eugenic evolution, or the returns on conquest and sale of continents, or the conversion of intergenerational lending to temporal redistribution and the price of that risk, or the transition from physical money to digital record of credit and debt, and the end of necessity or value of distribution of liquidity through the financial system, and the inability to reconstruct that capital without such chaos we dare not speak of it.
Science is not kind. We have yet to have the necessary revolution in economics by its reunification with the law. As far as I know there is only one social science – the law (tort), legislation (contracts for the commons) and regulation (insurance) and the rest is measurement of its consequence.
This was the difference between the austrian (rule of law), chicago (rule of law insured) and saltwater (return to arbitrary rule of man) schools of economics. Today, post 2008, it is very difficult to see much more than “I dunno what to do know” from the profession, except to permute as do the physicists on dark matter, because we lack the instrumentation necessary to obtain the information sufficient to correct our theories, and therefore limited to failure (collapse) and therefore desperate incentive to correct these errors, rather than falsify the 20th century social pseudosciences in economics as we are doing in psychology and sociology, with cognitive sciences and genetics.
The Worm Turns, and as Hayek warned but could not himself answer: the 20th will be remembered as an era of the restoration of mysticism – which we more correctly state as platonism, idealism, sophism, innumeracy, and pseudoscience.
Patriarchy is older than humans. Patriarchy evolves naturally because nature rewards ability and action (and nothing else).
Patriarchy is driven by female sexual selection in all animals (including humans until the counter culture). Females with offspring produce demands (food, protection, shelter etc). Males provide supply (build shelters, provide protection, find food etc) and limits to consumption.
Men are better equipped to secure communities (and nations) than women. Further to that men are expendable (do not produce children, can mate in seconds then die etc – where as women need gestation time and to raise children i.e. expensive) thus men are a better choice for dangerous work (protections, hunting, high-risk occupations). Women who chose men who are better able to provide and this increase their likelihood to survive. Those who choose differently will not thrive. Those men better disposed to these task will rise above others. This results in patriarchy.
Patriarchy will always rise, if not explicitly it will be implicit (even the modern feminist manifestation only exists because of the support by a stack of powerful men )
When our laws take in consideration natural phenomena and also what undergirds these phenomena (survival strategies) then a proper patriarchy will be restored. A proper aristocracy will be restored.
Islam won’t do this. Why? It’s a River Delta survival strategy adapted to a desert people (raider’s strategy). It scales up well, but crumbles under its own weight and tends to destroy human flourishing.
Anglos got it right – velocity via natural law (judge discovered law), empiricism and shallow -via negativa- moral foundations (which results in velocity). This produces the best survival strategy
Where this has failed has been universalism and idealistic moral foundations both of which are a result of Abrahamic rhetoric – the first middle eastern invasion of Europe .
CIVIL WARS AROUND THE WORLD DO NOT RELY ON DEMONSTRATIONS IN THE STREETS – THOSE ARE EASILY QUELLED
If you look around the world, men don’t buy supplies for civil war. Money has no meaning when there are a thousand of you. Power has no meaning when there are ten thousand of you. Resistance has no meaning when there are one million of you. In fact, the central problem is retaining enough small units such that the territory can replenish, while the urban centers do not. Logistics (feeding, organizing) quickly becomes a negative when you centralize too many men. Defeat becomes a possibility when you centralize too many men. Being ‘annoying’ everywhere is the most certain strategy to bring about revolutionary change. We take our order for granted, but if a civil war can keep pressure on the supply lines (economy) for over ninety days the patterns of sustainable specialization and trade cannot be restored (supply lines will collapse).
HERE IS THE MAGIC BIT TO SOLVE:
A mob is very easy to mobilize once together.
But mobilizing a lot of smaller mobs is much harder.
Understanding the white counter-narrative: we compete by high quality commons – that is our civilizational strategy.
In urban density, where we not only have to domesticate our own underclasses over whom we have “some” status signal leverage, but vast immigrant underclasses, over whom we have “no” status signal leverage, we are forced to flee to lower density to produce those high quality commons.
As density increases opportunity cost decreases and consequently opportunity deprivation by signaling is decreases. So normative degeneration is endemic in urban areas – because it’s affordable – while normative degeneration in less urban areas is intolerable.
Meanwhile these underclasses whether kin or not, consume those accumulated commons like locusts, leaving Baltimores, Detroits, NY’s, LA’s and Oaklands in their wake. And because we have no right of DISASSOCIATION we cannot organize to resist their consumption of those commons we produce.
The more dense the population the more the commons is “someone else’s problem”. The more sparse the population the more the commons is my problem. Hence urban demand for authority and rural demand for sovereignty.
Once you ‘see it’ you can’t ‘unsee’ it.
We are producing commons that attract wild animals, and we are forbidden by the state-academy-financial-sectors from depriving them of customers to feed on the commons we create – that none of them can.
They think they’re creating something. But they are just speed-consuming the accumulated common capital of western civilization with every breath they take.
The only solution is the restoration of voluntary disassociation and the markets will do the rest.
MEME LINGO AS AN EXPRESSION OF ASPIRATIONS TO SPECIATE
English has attained, in the post WWII world, the status of a lingua Franca, or trade/diplomatic language.
There are sound economic rationale to have such a language, and historical rationale for that language to be English. Simply put, there are a host of transaction costs that can be minimized or avoided if we adopt a common language, for common purposes.
But to those of us who speak English as a first language, there are a whole host of NEW transaction costs entailed both in being intelligible to foreigners and in foreigners being intelligible to us… Our language’s status as global lingua franca vastly aids and speeds the invasion and colonization of our lands. Our private thoughts and communications are readily understood by alien elements, at home and abroad. Our ability to discern ingroup from out is greatly degraded. Our ears are assailed by constant tirades of malicious, dishonest, out-group critique.
For all of these reasons, and more, we are rapidly evolving our own non-mutually intelligible idioms, in the form of meme lingos filled with euphemisms, jargon, and inside jokes.
And it’s not just us. My parents, who are still very much plugged into university-educated SWPL culture, have been adopting a progressively more idiosyncratic lexicon and usage my entire life, to the point that the way they talk, though still intelligible to me, sounds increasingly jarring and foreign (though it is no doubt soothing and familiar within their circles…)
This process is being accelerated by, for example, internet censorship, as we are forced to innovate especially our expressions of derision faster than that can be identified, understood, and suppressed by the implaccable racial enemy.
So my prediction is English will continue to variagate, into a standard “global” variety, and a bunch of regional and subcultural dialects, which will eventually become wholly unintelligible, separate, languages.
photos_and_videos/TimelinePhotos_SxeO6JU-xg/46383054_10156782266992264_6999890342711394304_o_10156782266987264.jpg FOR NEWBS: UNDERSTANDING PROPERTARIANISM AS THE EXTENSION OF THE SCIENCES
Propertarianism Consists of The Formal Logic of Natural Law: Psychology, Sociology, Politics, Group Evolutionary Strategy, as An Completion of The Laws of Nature.
Originally I called it “capitalismv3” until I realized how erroneous that title was: I was doing the law, and economics only a part of it. Then I moved to calling it propertarianism. Then, once I understood what I was doing, I correctly labeled it Natural Law. The problem is that “Natural Law” has a long history of appropriation like “liberalism” and false criticism like “national socialism”. And is framed as a philosophical justification(excuse) rather than a scientific decidability (truth). And we had already built a brand around Propertarianism.
So, we keep the ‘Brand’ Propertarianism for the simple reason that it was the ‘propertarians’ that I evolved the work out of, and the brand awareness is such that it’s hard to change at this point – and while it is only partially descriptive (referring to the unit of measure in psychology, sociology, ethics, politics and group strategy) , and could equally be called Testimonialism (truthful speech), or Vitruvianism or operationalism (universal system of measurement system by demonstrable human actions), or The Law of Conscious Beings (Any coopertting being must work by this set of decisions to survive), we retain Propertarianism and Natural Law out of situational convenience. ,
However, as this image illustrates, we have just COMPLETED the SCIENCES by expanding the scientific method into the social and psychological sciences.
PROPERTARIANISM = THE NATURAL LAW.
You should understand this then as the Application of the scientific method to the social sciences. and as such that we are learning a SCIENCE that will take you YEARS TO MASTER not a philosophy that you can read a book and add to your catalog of frames.
PHYSICAL LAW OF TRANSFORMATION (INVOLUNTARY) EVOLVES INTO THE NATURAL LAW OF COOPERATION (VOLUNTARY) AS AN EXTENSION OF THOSE SAME LAWS.
We can state these fundamental laws, Logically, Empirically, or operationally. Unfortunately, in the twentieth century, due to the ‘mathification’ of physics, and the ‘idealism’ of mathematics, due to the lack of a ‘model’, information has been LOST, that on the re-operationalizatoin of physics (undiscovered fundamental-wave, subatomic-particle, atomic, chemical, biological, sentient-cognizant, rational-calculable-computable), Psychology (Acquisitionism), Sociology (cooperation), law (decidability, organization), accounting-finance-economics (information, units of measure, measurements), is necessary to obtain the same benefits between sentient (feeling, evaluating, responding), aware (remembering, comparing), conscious (choosing), calculating (reasoning, calculating, computing) objects, as those objects that cannot detect and respond to changes in state.
In other words, due to a lack of a model, the model-less-ness of mathematical idealism has worked through logic, and physics, and now into philosophy, ethics, and politics. just as theology did in the ancient world – producing similar ignorances.
The Operational Movement (restoration of the model ) failed in the early part of the 20th century, and the postwar reaction against darwin (which is the model like it or not) and turing (which is the model, like it or not) because of eugenics (which is the optimum method of progression of human existence like it or not – just as was physics in the 17th-20th centuries, like it or not).FOR NEWBS: UNDERSTANDING PROPERTARIANISM AS THE EXTENSION OF THE SCIENCES
Propertarianism Consists of The Formal Logic of Natural Law: Psychology, Sociology, Politics, Group Evolutionary Strategy, as An Completion of The Laws of Nature.
Originally I called it “capitalismv3” until I realized how erroneous that title was: I was doing the law, and economics only a part of it. Then I moved to calling it propertarianism. Then, once I understood what I was doing, I correctly labeled it Natural Law. The problem is that “Natural Law” has a long history of appropriation like “liberalism” and false criticism like “national socialism”. And is framed as a philosophical justification(excuse) rather than a scientific decidability (truth). And we had already built a brand around Propertarianism.
So, we keep the ‘Brand’ Propertarianism for the simple reason that it was the ‘propertarians’ that I evolved the work out of, and the brand awareness is such that it’s hard to change at this point – and while it is only partially descriptive (referring to the unit of measure in psychology, sociology, ethics, politics and group strategy) , and could equally be called Testimonialism (truthful speech), or Vitruvianism or operationalism (universal system of measurement system by demonstrable human actions), or The Law of Conscious Beings (Any coopertting being must work by this set of decisions to survive), we retain Propertarianism and Natural Law out of situational convenience. ,
However, as this image illustrates, we have just COMPLETED the SCIENCES by expanding the scientific method into the social and psychological sciences.
PROPERTARIANISM = THE NATURAL LAW.
You should understand this then as the Application of the scientific method to the social sciences. and as such that we are learning a SCIENCE that will take you YEARS TO MASTER not a philosophy that you can read a book and add to your catalog of frames.
PHYSICAL LAW OF TRANSFORMATION (INVOLUNTARY) EVOLVES INTO THE NATURAL LAW OF COOPERATION (VOLUNTARY) AS AN EXTENSION OF THOSE SAME LAWS.
We can state these fundamental laws, Logically, Empirically, or operationally. Unfortunately, in the twentieth century, due to the ‘mathification’ of physics, and the ‘idealism’ of mathematics, due to the lack of a ‘model’, information has been LOST, that on the re-operationalizatoin of physics (undiscovered fundamental-wave, subatomic-particle, atomic, chemical, biological, sentient-cognizant, rational-calculable-computable), Psychology (Acquisitionism), Sociology (cooperation), law (decidability, organization), accounting-finance-economics (information, units of measure, measurements), is necessary to obtain the same benefits between sentient (feeling, evaluating, responding), aware (remembering, comparing), conscious (choosing), calculating (reasoning, calculating, computing) objects, as those objects that cannot detect and respond to changes in state.
In other words, due to a lack of a model, the model-less-ness of mathematical idealism has worked through logic, and physics, and now into philosophy, ethics, and politics. just as theology did in the ancient world – producing similar ignorances.
The Operational Movement (restoration of the model ) failed in the early part of the 20th century, and the postwar reaction against darwin (which is the model like it or not) and turing (which is the model, like it or not) because of eugenics (which is the optimum method of progression of human existence like it or not – just as was physics in the 17th-20th centuries, like it or not).
