Form: Outline

  • Notes On Various Topics

    Sep 04, 2016 12:26pm NOTES FOR YOUR USE: PROPERTY IN TOTO – The academy uses ‘reported’ vs ‘stated’ preference. We correctly use ‘demonstrated’ preference. – Why do you have the right to depreciate the normative values others have invested in as a flag? I mean, if I bore a cost to create a norm, and there is nothing false in the norm, then why is it you can cause damage to the norm? This is how people treat symbols. So if free speech is lmited to truthful speech, then these are not questions any longer. – Natural Property = that which we expend time, effor,t resources, risk, to obtain without imposing costs upon that which otheres have expended time, effort, resources, risk, to obtain – Starting with the choice of predation, parasitism, boycott, cooperation, or buying options on future cooperation. – The strong are always paying the cost of non-parasitism, non-predation upon you. THe only reason to refrain from non-parasitism and non-predation is if you boycott, cooperate, or buy options on the future of cooperation. The question is, then, what’s the limit of things you agree not to engage in non-parasitism and non-predation against? Well, it depends upon the terms of your existing social order. If you have a low trust order with no commons, or a high trust order with lots of commons, you defend that what you’ve invested in. If you’ve invested in high trust high commons society, then you defend those things that comprise it. If you don’t then you don’t defend, and you act parasiticall against them. This is what high trust people object to: parasitism upon their investment in the high trust commons. And high trust peoples are stronger for the simple reason that they are wealthier and can produce more competitive commons – not the least of which is warfare. This is why polities with different (lower and higher) property definitions are not compatible. TESTIMONIAL TRUTH The purpose of testimonial Truth: To state how to construct contract, legislation, and law, and how to promote contract, legislation, and law, such that it is almost impossible to engage in error, bias, wishful thinking, suggestion, obscurantism, pseudoscience, propaganda, and deceit. Once we have testimonial truth, we can treat information – like air, land, and water – as a commons. We can grant people universal standing in matters of the commons. And preserve universal applicability to all people. This creates a market with both opportunity to issue ideas, and juridical defense against fraudulent and harmful ideas. (scientists do this already really). We could not limit speech to truthful speech without a legally testable criteria. Testimonialism provides lawyers, prosecutors, juries and judges with criteria that can be stated in law and adjudicated like many other laws. Normative adoption of testimonialism would produce giant gains equal to *science over mysticism*. We are feeling the effects of the second great deception. The first was monotheistic utopian mysticism, and the second has been pseudoscientific utopianism. So it’s not just that I want to eliminate error. It’s that I want to eliminate deception in all its unconsious, justifiationary, wishful, and intentional forms. THat requires we elminate error, bias, wishful thinking, suggestion, obscurantism, pseudoscience, propagandizing and deceit. MORALISMS(APPROVAL) VS EMPIRICISM (TRUTH) Separating approval and disapproval, truth and falsehood, so that we can conduct trades. Approval is on ly necessary in small groups. Everything else requries just truth and exchange. The reason we must engage in approval and disapproval, is only when we are determining the use of common property. If we are discussing private property then approval is irrelevant. If we are trying to determine the use of common property at scale, we can only do that through truth and trade and full accounting, not approval or disapproval. BLOCK’S IMMORALITY Even if we say that someone has the right to use drugs, does that mean you have the right to SELL them drugs? So if you grow your own pot, smoke it at home, and don’t operate machinery or impose sound or light or behavioral costs on your neighbors, then that’s fine. I am not sure how one could make the argument that he has the right to sell goods that will lead to harm regardless of the individual’s volition. This same strategy applies to copyrights and the creative commons licenses. I can understand prohibiting profiting from the creative works of others, but I can’t understand how you can prohibit someone from copying something for personal use. Conversely, I don’t see how you can claim you have a right to profit from creations of ideas – unless the polity has provided off book compensation to if you’re conducting basic research. INCREMENTAL SUPPRESSION The use of the natural, common, judge-discovered law, markets for reproduction(marriage), markets for goods and services, markets for commons, allows for the most rapid identification of new forms of parasitism and predation, and their immediate prohibition with the first case adjudicated. This allows societies to adapt positively (markets) and negatively (courts) faster than any OTHER POSSIBLE method of cooperation. Furthermore, since there are not AGGREGATES involved in the prodcess of case by case adjudication, and no CONSENT necessary for the production of reproduction, consumption, and commons, then public discourse an remain EMPIRICAL rather than AGGREGATE (moral, religious, allegorical). So this is the reason that the west developed FASTER in the ancient and modern worlds, than the rest of the world. This is the secret of the west. Sovereignty, Truth, Jury, Judge, natural, jduge discovered, common law, and as a consequence, the only possible means of cooperation under sovereignty, truth, jury, judge, natural, judge-discovered common law, is markets for reproduction (marriage), markets for production, markets for commons, market for dispute resolution, and the militia that fights together. Democracy then is antithetical since by eliminating the multi-house-government, and engaging in reproductoin, we have destroyed secred of the western excelllence. Thanks

  • Notes On Various Topics

    Sep 04, 2016 12:26pm NOTES FOR YOUR USE: PROPERTY IN TOTO – The academy uses ‘reported’ vs ‘stated’ preference. We correctly use ‘demonstrated’ preference. – Why do you have the right to depreciate the normative values others have invested in as a flag? I mean, if I bore a cost to create a norm, and there is nothing false in the norm, then why is it you can cause damage to the norm? This is how people treat symbols. So if free speech is lmited to truthful speech, then these are not questions any longer. – Natural Property = that which we expend time, effor,t resources, risk, to obtain without imposing costs upon that which otheres have expended time, effort, resources, risk, to obtain – Starting with the choice of predation, parasitism, boycott, cooperation, or buying options on future cooperation. – The strong are always paying the cost of non-parasitism, non-predation upon you. THe only reason to refrain from non-parasitism and non-predation is if you boycott, cooperate, or buy options on the future of cooperation. The question is, then, what’s the limit of things you agree not to engage in non-parasitism and non-predation against? Well, it depends upon the terms of your existing social order. If you have a low trust order with no commons, or a high trust order with lots of commons, you defend that what you’ve invested in. If you’ve invested in high trust high commons society, then you defend those things that comprise it. If you don’t then you don’t defend, and you act parasiticall against them. This is what high trust people object to: parasitism upon their investment in the high trust commons. And high trust peoples are stronger for the simple reason that they are wealthier and can produce more competitive commons – not the least of which is warfare. This is why polities with different (lower and higher) property definitions are not compatible. TESTIMONIAL TRUTH The purpose of testimonial Truth: To state how to construct contract, legislation, and law, and how to promote contract, legislation, and law, such that it is almost impossible to engage in error, bias, wishful thinking, suggestion, obscurantism, pseudoscience, propaganda, and deceit. Once we have testimonial truth, we can treat information – like air, land, and water – as a commons. We can grant people universal standing in matters of the commons. And preserve universal applicability to all people. This creates a market with both opportunity to issue ideas, and juridical defense against fraudulent and harmful ideas. (scientists do this already really). We could not limit speech to truthful speech without a legally testable criteria. Testimonialism provides lawyers, prosecutors, juries and judges with criteria that can be stated in law and adjudicated like many other laws. Normative adoption of testimonialism would produce giant gains equal to *science over mysticism*. We are feeling the effects of the second great deception. The first was monotheistic utopian mysticism, and the second has been pseudoscientific utopianism. So it’s not just that I want to eliminate error. It’s that I want to eliminate deception in all its unconsious, justifiationary, wishful, and intentional forms. THat requires we elminate error, bias, wishful thinking, suggestion, obscurantism, pseudoscience, propagandizing and deceit. MORALISMS(APPROVAL) VS EMPIRICISM (TRUTH) Separating approval and disapproval, truth and falsehood, so that we can conduct trades. Approval is on ly necessary in small groups. Everything else requries just truth and exchange. The reason we must engage in approval and disapproval, is only when we are determining the use of common property. If we are discussing private property then approval is irrelevant. If we are trying to determine the use of common property at scale, we can only do that through truth and trade and full accounting, not approval or disapproval. BLOCK’S IMMORALITY Even if we say that someone has the right to use drugs, does that mean you have the right to SELL them drugs? So if you grow your own pot, smoke it at home, and don’t operate machinery or impose sound or light or behavioral costs on your neighbors, then that’s fine. I am not sure how one could make the argument that he has the right to sell goods that will lead to harm regardless of the individual’s volition. This same strategy applies to copyrights and the creative commons licenses. I can understand prohibiting profiting from the creative works of others, but I can’t understand how you can prohibit someone from copying something for personal use. Conversely, I don’t see how you can claim you have a right to profit from creations of ideas – unless the polity has provided off book compensation to if you’re conducting basic research. INCREMENTAL SUPPRESSION The use of the natural, common, judge-discovered law, markets for reproduction(marriage), markets for goods and services, markets for commons, allows for the most rapid identification of new forms of parasitism and predation, and their immediate prohibition with the first case adjudicated. This allows societies to adapt positively (markets) and negatively (courts) faster than any OTHER POSSIBLE method of cooperation. Furthermore, since there are not AGGREGATES involved in the prodcess of case by case adjudication, and no CONSENT necessary for the production of reproduction, consumption, and commons, then public discourse an remain EMPIRICAL rather than AGGREGATE (moral, religious, allegorical). So this is the reason that the west developed FASTER in the ancient and modern worlds, than the rest of the world. This is the secret of the west. Sovereignty, Truth, Jury, Judge, natural, jduge discovered, common law, and as a consequence, the only possible means of cooperation under sovereignty, truth, jury, judge, natural, judge-discovered common law, is markets for reproduction (marriage), markets for production, markets for commons, market for dispute resolution, and the militia that fights together. Democracy then is antithetical since by eliminating the multi-house-government, and engaging in reproductoin, we have destroyed secred of the western excelllence. Thanks

  • Sovereignty: Requires Markets In Everything

    LIBERTY (SOVEREIGNTY): MARKETS IN EVERYTHING

    • Survival (competition)
    • Reproduction (Marriage)
    • Production (economy)
    • Commons (market govt)
    • Displute Resolution (natural law)
    • Group Evolutionary Strategy (Polities)

    Hayek was right of course. He could have taken it even farther. But he was right. The answer to Keynes(demand/spending) and Hayek(disinformation/misallocation) is solved by credit cards from the treasury – assuming liquidity isn’t predictable. It needs to remain a lottery of uncertainty. The problem they were struggling with was distribution. The financial system is a corrupt distributor, and state spending is even worse distributor of corruption.

  • Sovereignty: Requires Markets In Everything

    LIBERTY (SOVEREIGNTY): MARKETS IN EVERYTHING

    • Survival (competition)
    • Reproduction (Marriage)
    • Production (economy)
    • Commons (market govt)
    • Displute Resolution (natural law)
    • Group Evolutionary Strategy (Polities)

    Hayek was right of course. He could have taken it even farther. But he was right. The answer to Keynes(demand/spending) and Hayek(disinformation/misallocation) is solved by credit cards from the treasury – assuming liquidity isn’t predictable. It needs to remain a lottery of uncertainty. The problem they were struggling with was distribution. The financial system is a corrupt distributor, and state spending is even worse distributor of corruption.

  • Overview of Propertarianism’s Main Themes

    OVERVIEW OF PROPERTARIANISM’S MAIN THEMES Quick Note Turned into a Post. If you watch (1) the intertemporal division of perception, (2) the intercultural division of perception (circumpolar people), and (3) listen to this podcast (civilizational strategies); And if you catch that consistently across the personal, interpersonal, national, and civilizational strategies, that I CONSISTENTLY try to draw your attention to the three possible means of governance (coercion): religion/gossp/ostracization, trade/remuneration, and law/order/violence, you will begin to see the pattern that I work with that is VERY DIFFERENT from the idealism of ‘equality’ or even near equality. And if you then grasp that all human intuition, mind, emotion, reason, exists for the simple purpose of acquisition. And our intuitions vary only be reproductive strategy(gender) and our desirability(class). And that our emotional reward system is nothing more than evidence of changes in the state of property. And that we act to acquire property in toto. And that we negotiate for acquiring what we desire to fulfill our strategy. And that we signal by a thousand means in order to improve our negotiating position. And if you are enough of a philosopher to grasp that I divide categories of argument into the equivalent of increasingly articulate mathematical disciplines. (see my hierarchies of argument) – and we use them to honestly, dishonestly, wishfully, foolishly, and rarely truthfully, use them to negotiate with one another. And if you then you bring in the various dimensions by which I ask we test propositions (testimonialism’s six dimensional tests of due diligence necessary for warranty of propositions), And that the only way we make use of information across all our perceptions, is when we cooperate (Trade) voluntarily. And then that we can ‘calculate’ together fastest, most competitively, if we make use of (1)natural, judge-discovered, common law, jury, (2) a market for reproduction (marriage and family), (3) a market for the production of good and services in support of the market for reproduction, (4) and a market for the production of commons. And that we have domesticated mankind through incremental suppression of parasitism thereby enforcing production. And that we have only now to expand our suppression of parasitism to counter the development of media, so that we prevent propaganda and deceit in every walk of life. Then you have social science as I describe it in Propertarianism. (Natural Law), and the solutions to the majority of current problems. Stop lying, stop parasitism, and stop involuntary association, and that’s what it takes. My next series of thought will be criticisms of the attempt to preserve the monopoly of territory on the continent by the federal government. And I will continue to work on religion while I do that.

  • Overview of Propertarianism’s Main Themes

    OVERVIEW OF PROPERTARIANISM’S MAIN THEMES Quick Note Turned into a Post. If you watch (1) the intertemporal division of perception, (2) the intercultural division of perception (circumpolar people), and (3) listen to this podcast (civilizational strategies); And if you catch that consistently across the personal, interpersonal, national, and civilizational strategies, that I CONSISTENTLY try to draw your attention to the three possible means of governance (coercion): religion/gossp/ostracization, trade/remuneration, and law/order/violence, you will begin to see the pattern that I work with that is VERY DIFFERENT from the idealism of ‘equality’ or even near equality. And if you then grasp that all human intuition, mind, emotion, reason, exists for the simple purpose of acquisition. And our intuitions vary only be reproductive strategy(gender) and our desirability(class). And that our emotional reward system is nothing more than evidence of changes in the state of property. And that we act to acquire property in toto. And that we negotiate for acquiring what we desire to fulfill our strategy. And that we signal by a thousand means in order to improve our negotiating position. And if you are enough of a philosopher to grasp that I divide categories of argument into the equivalent of increasingly articulate mathematical disciplines. (see my hierarchies of argument) – and we use them to honestly, dishonestly, wishfully, foolishly, and rarely truthfully, use them to negotiate with one another. And if you then you bring in the various dimensions by which I ask we test propositions (testimonialism’s six dimensional tests of due diligence necessary for warranty of propositions), And that the only way we make use of information across all our perceptions, is when we cooperate (Trade) voluntarily. And then that we can ‘calculate’ together fastest, most competitively, if we make use of (1)natural, judge-discovered, common law, jury, (2) a market for reproduction (marriage and family), (3) a market for the production of good and services in support of the market for reproduction, (4) and a market for the production of commons. And that we have domesticated mankind through incremental suppression of parasitism thereby enforcing production. And that we have only now to expand our suppression of parasitism to counter the development of media, so that we prevent propaganda and deceit in every walk of life. Then you have social science as I describe it in Propertarianism. (Natural Law), and the solutions to the majority of current problems. Stop lying, stop parasitism, and stop involuntary association, and that’s what it takes. My next series of thought will be criticisms of the attempt to preserve the monopoly of territory on the continent by the federal government. And I will continue to work on religion while I do that.

  • Thoughts On  The Emerging New Right

    Aug 24, 2016 2:06pmCENTRAL ARGUMENTS 1) We can no longer hold any belief that we can integrate the postwar generations into the ‘aristocracy of everyone’ including the absolute nuclear family, individual accountability, the civic society, and rule of law. Where we were not defeated ideologically, despite the monopoly conversion of the academy, media, and state bureaucracy, we were defeated by importing millions of the underclasses that the founder sought to leave behind in Europe. 2) When the Jewish cosmopolitan left invented pseudosciences in the mid 1800-1900’s: Boazian anthropology, Marxist social science and economics, Freudian psychology, Cantorian mathematical platonism, and Frankfurtian cultural anti-Europeanism, Randian-Rothbardian libertarianism, and Straussian neo-conservatism, and combined these pseudosciences with media, propaganda, and academy – our ‘liberal’ middle-class takeover of government was divided into the feminine-caretaking-underclass-progressive, and the masculine-empirical martial-class conservative. Abandoning rule of law on the left for discretionary rule and individualism, and holding to the natural law, rule of law, and the institution of the family on the right. The left abandoning that the purpose of policy was the development of strong families, and the embrace that the purpose of policy was the development of individuals regardless of they or their family merits. Our aristocratic European empirical philosophers and scientists could not create a rational but unempirical counter argument to counter the pseudoscientific propaganda so appealing to underclasses first liberated by the industrial revolution. These underclasses could not imagine that they had not so much been kept down, but domesticated over millennia in the hope that they might one day join civil society. Nor could the intellectuals, whose aristocratic political methodology was never written down in conflated form, merging both religion and law as had other civilizations. But by the 1980’s with the failure of the great society programs world wide. The visible failure of communism, we saw emergence of a new generation of conservative think tanks, and the ambition of creating an inclusive monopolistic society. By the end of the 1990’s the combination of computers, imaging, and genetic research, and now culminating in the second decade of this century, we have found that the cosmopolitan pseudoscientific program and its puritan post-christian political correctness wing, have been completely repudiated by the scientific research, and at this point we see desperate media attempts to hold to these falsehoods out of some ‘moral’ justification (meaning revenue defense). This supplied the Right (aristocratics) with the empirical evidence that they were correct, and that the left has done nothing but lie for the purpose of destroying good families, rule of law, meritocracy, and the civic society. So we see a new generation of thinkers in every social class, from very sophisticated institutional solutions to our political problems, to educational, to critical, to simply rebellious, all emboldened and determined to either correct, reform, restore, demand restitution for, and if possible punish those who have done their families, civilization, and traditions so much harm. 3) The New Right, consists, like all previous generations of cultural movements, of classes (compare with jewish neo-con, libertine-libertarian, and socialist), And each class uses the techniques of rebellion that are appropriate to their capacity for argument: Philosophy and Institutions, Education and information, criticism and analysis, rebellion and ridicule, information and physical warfare.. That these classes reflect, loosely, the capabilities of individuals at every ten points of IQ, from 140 on down, doesn’t surprise anyone on the right – because that is how society is structured genetically, reproductively, culturally, economically, and politically. WHAT DOES THIS MEAN FOR ATTEMPTS TO FRAME THE RIGHT? It means we have a large movement underway that is currently abandoning the ‘hopeful right’ of the postwar and certainly post-Vietnam period, and adopting the ‘hopeless’ position that we cannot compromise with people who are effectively our enemies, and whose policies while well intentioned, have destroyed black families, and is in the process of destroying white – turning north America into south American favelas one urban district at a time, from the northeast coast to the west. We are the emerging new right. We make political decisions on empirical evidence, not on pseudoscience pseudorationalism, propaganda, and deceit. We fight with institutional solutions, we fight with education and information, we fight with criticism, we fight with ridicule, and if necessary we fight with force. The old right will die thankfully with America’s WORST GENERATION (the boomers). And we repair this government, this culture, and this civilization…. … or we will break it all to pieces. Curt Doolittle The Philosophy of Aristocracy The Propertarian Institute


    NOTE: I organize these classes by argumentative technique and audience it appeals to. That says nothing about the people who lead them, and produce the argments.  That’s because it’s usually the middle class that constructs these arguments. THE CLASSES ——————– ARISTOCRATIC (JUDICIAL) RIGHT (institutions – law,philosophy) Curt Doolittle (and friends), Propertarianism, (left equivalent Rawls, although I suppose I could critique each of them. That would be an interesting exercise.) UPPER MIDDLE CLASS NEW RIGHT (education – information – analysis) (the slowly converting anglo libertarians) Stefan Molyneux Tom Woods (left equivalent is the top 20 mainstream left-writers) MIDDLE CLASS NEW RIGHT (resistance – criticism – analysis) (Here we begin the Alt-right)(NRx) Ramsey Paul LOWER MIDDLE CLASS NEW RIGHT (rebellion – ridicule) (Right) Christopher Cantwell (Left Equivalent social justice warriors) WORKING CLASS NEW RIGHT (information warfare – aggression) (traditional hard right) (Alt-Right-foot soldiers) The inequalitarians The racists The Fashy Militants (left equivalent = anarchists)

  • Thoughts On  The Emerging New Right

    Aug 24, 2016 2:06pmCENTRAL ARGUMENTS 1) We can no longer hold any belief that we can integrate the postwar generations into the ‘aristocracy of everyone’ including the absolute nuclear family, individual accountability, the civic society, and rule of law. Where we were not defeated ideologically, despite the monopoly conversion of the academy, media, and state bureaucracy, we were defeated by importing millions of the underclasses that the founder sought to leave behind in Europe. 2) When the Jewish cosmopolitan left invented pseudosciences in the mid 1800-1900’s: Boazian anthropology, Marxist social science and economics, Freudian psychology, Cantorian mathematical platonism, and Frankfurtian cultural anti-Europeanism, Randian-Rothbardian libertarianism, and Straussian neo-conservatism, and combined these pseudosciences with media, propaganda, and academy – our ‘liberal’ middle-class takeover of government was divided into the feminine-caretaking-underclass-progressive, and the masculine-empirical martial-class conservative. Abandoning rule of law on the left for discretionary rule and individualism, and holding to the natural law, rule of law, and the institution of the family on the right. The left abandoning that the purpose of policy was the development of strong families, and the embrace that the purpose of policy was the development of individuals regardless of they or their family merits. Our aristocratic European empirical philosophers and scientists could not create a rational but unempirical counter argument to counter the pseudoscientific propaganda so appealing to underclasses first liberated by the industrial revolution. These underclasses could not imagine that they had not so much been kept down, but domesticated over millennia in the hope that they might one day join civil society. Nor could the intellectuals, whose aristocratic political methodology was never written down in conflated form, merging both religion and law as had other civilizations. But by the 1980’s with the failure of the great society programs world wide. The visible failure of communism, we saw emergence of a new generation of conservative think tanks, and the ambition of creating an inclusive monopolistic society. By the end of the 1990’s the combination of computers, imaging, and genetic research, and now culminating in the second decade of this century, we have found that the cosmopolitan pseudoscientific program and its puritan post-christian political correctness wing, have been completely repudiated by the scientific research, and at this point we see desperate media attempts to hold to these falsehoods out of some ‘moral’ justification (meaning revenue defense). This supplied the Right (aristocratics) with the empirical evidence that they were correct, and that the left has done nothing but lie for the purpose of destroying good families, rule of law, meritocracy, and the civic society. So we see a new generation of thinkers in every social class, from very sophisticated institutional solutions to our political problems, to educational, to critical, to simply rebellious, all emboldened and determined to either correct, reform, restore, demand restitution for, and if possible punish those who have done their families, civilization, and traditions so much harm. 3) The New Right, consists, like all previous generations of cultural movements, of classes (compare with jewish neo-con, libertine-libertarian, and socialist), And each class uses the techniques of rebellion that are appropriate to their capacity for argument: Philosophy and Institutions, Education and information, criticism and analysis, rebellion and ridicule, information and physical warfare.. That these classes reflect, loosely, the capabilities of individuals at every ten points of IQ, from 140 on down, doesn’t surprise anyone on the right – because that is how society is structured genetically, reproductively, culturally, economically, and politically. WHAT DOES THIS MEAN FOR ATTEMPTS TO FRAME THE RIGHT? It means we have a large movement underway that is currently abandoning the ‘hopeful right’ of the postwar and certainly post-Vietnam period, and adopting the ‘hopeless’ position that we cannot compromise with people who are effectively our enemies, and whose policies while well intentioned, have destroyed black families, and is in the process of destroying white – turning north America into south American favelas one urban district at a time, from the northeast coast to the west. We are the emerging new right. We make political decisions on empirical evidence, not on pseudoscience pseudorationalism, propaganda, and deceit. We fight with institutional solutions, we fight with education and information, we fight with criticism, we fight with ridicule, and if necessary we fight with force. The old right will die thankfully with America’s WORST GENERATION (the boomers). And we repair this government, this culture, and this civilization…. … or we will break it all to pieces. Curt Doolittle The Philosophy of Aristocracy The Propertarian Institute


    NOTE: I organize these classes by argumentative technique and audience it appeals to. That says nothing about the people who lead them, and produce the argments.  That’s because it’s usually the middle class that constructs these arguments. THE CLASSES ——————– ARISTOCRATIC (JUDICIAL) RIGHT (institutions – law,philosophy) Curt Doolittle (and friends), Propertarianism, (left equivalent Rawls, although I suppose I could critique each of them. That would be an interesting exercise.) UPPER MIDDLE CLASS NEW RIGHT (education – information – analysis) (the slowly converting anglo libertarians) Stefan Molyneux Tom Woods (left equivalent is the top 20 mainstream left-writers) MIDDLE CLASS NEW RIGHT (resistance – criticism – analysis) (Here we begin the Alt-right)(NRx) Ramsey Paul LOWER MIDDLE CLASS NEW RIGHT (rebellion – ridicule) (Right) Christopher Cantwell (Left Equivalent social justice warriors) WORKING CLASS NEW RIGHT (information warfare – aggression) (traditional hard right) (Alt-Right-foot soldiers) The inequalitarians The racists The Fashy Militants (left equivalent = anarchists)

  • The Fifth Wave Of Anti-Aristocratic Religion (Lies)

    THE JEWISH COSMOPOLITAN UTOPIAN PROGRAM IS THE FIFTH WAVE OF ANTI-ARISTOCRATIC RELIGION (LIES) 1 – the Zoroastrian Reaction (The creation of religion in response to the development of the Aryanism (heroism). 2 – The Jewish Reaction (the creation of Judaism in imitation of Egyptian monotheism as a means of claiming property upon the departure of the Persians and enforcing solidarity against them.)

    3 – The Christian reaction (the creation of Christianity in response to the roman conquest, moral law, and greek reason – the weaponization of the underclasses) 4 – The Muslim Reaction (the weaponization of reproduction) 5 – The Cosmopolitan Reaction (the replacement of mysticism with pseudoscience- Boaz, Marx, Freud, Cantor, Frankfurt). ALL THESE MOVEMENTS HAVE RESISTED OUR DOMESTICATION OF MAN AND HIS TRANSCENDENCE It’s not just ourselves we must save. It’s humanity.
  • The Fifth Wave Of Anti-Aristocratic Religion (Lies)

    THE JEWISH COSMOPOLITAN UTOPIAN PROGRAM IS THE FIFTH WAVE OF ANTI-ARISTOCRATIC RELIGION (LIES) 1 – the Zoroastrian Reaction (The creation of religion in response to the development of the Aryanism (heroism). 2 – The Jewish Reaction (the creation of Judaism in imitation of Egyptian monotheism as a means of claiming property upon the departure of the Persians and enforcing solidarity against them.)

    3 – The Christian reaction (the creation of Christianity in response to the roman conquest, moral law, and greek reason – the weaponization of the underclasses) 4 – The Muslim Reaction (the weaponization of reproduction) 5 – The Cosmopolitan Reaction (the replacement of mysticism with pseudoscience- Boaz, Marx, Freud, Cantor, Frankfurt). ALL THESE MOVEMENTS HAVE RESISTED OUR DOMESTICATION OF MAN AND HIS TRANSCENDENCE It’s not just ourselves we must save. It’s humanity.