—“Evolution = God’s common law”—Simon Strรถm
Source date (UTC): 2017-03-09 15:17:00 UTC
—“Evolution = God’s common law”—Simon Strรถm
Source date (UTC): 2017-03-09 15:17:00 UTC
DARWIN VIA NEGATIVA
—“Natural selection works by Non-survival of the unfit, not survival of the fittest. The fittest merely reproduce more; the unfit become extinct.”– Brandon Vaughn
Source date (UTC): 2017-03-09 12:58:00 UTC
—“Whats funny to me is when you break down someones argument using operational language to get at the heart of their ideology, you just get accused of making word salads as if what was said made no sense. In reality you’re just eliminating the their lies which triggers them because they’ve invested so much into erudite lofty verbalism that actually carry no weight under scientific scrutiny”—Joshua Marshall
Source date (UTC): 2017-03-09 12:03:00 UTC
–“BAD IDEAS, HOWEVER SACRED, CANNOT SURVIVE THE COMPANY OF GOOD ONES FOREVER.”— Sam Harris
This statement is demonstrably false, primarily because the market for comforting falsehoods, is greater than the market for uncomfortable truths; and because the market for gossip that justifies one’s priors is greater than the market for uncomfortable truths that contradict one’s priors. Those are two empirically demonstrable statements that have been the subject of not insignificant study and debate.
We could, instead say, that in the market for weapons of argument, usable on those subjects of argument – rather than gossip and propaganda – that more truthful (and therefore scientific) arguments defeat the less truthful (rational, reasonable, pseudo-rational, pseudoscientific, and supernatural).
The problem we face is the difference in the scale and distribution of gossip, propaganda, justification and critical argument. Falsehood is a cheaper product than truth.
In other words, as intellectuals we cannot for a moment cast ourselves as ‘average persons’.
A third of the electorate (market for political choice) is fully committed to the dysgenic and feminine reproductive strategy (the left) and a third fully committed to the eugenic and masculine reproductive strategy (the right), and the third in the middle is not only uncommitted, but unconcerned, and largely uninformed, and demonstrably persuaded by what they empathize with, obtain information from friends (gossip), are exposed to the media (propaganda), and lack the general knowledge to engage in argument. (See The Myth of the Rational Voter).
Imagining that the way you think is somehow average rather than one of a host of possible outliers, is merely demonstration of the various cognitive social biases wherein we attribute to others in general what applies to us in particular.
Curt Doolittle
The Propertarian Institute
Kiev, Ukraine
Source date (UTC): 2017-03-07 16:20:00 UTC
THE LAW OF CONSERVATION OF COSTS
by Joel Davis
Much like thermodynamics – where energy cannot be created or destroyed merely transformed – in economics, cost cannot be created or destroyed, merely transferred.
The Government offsets limited liability with the cost it bares to establish the sovereignty with which it can limit liability.
Without a Sovereign Insurer, businesses which impose damages on other parties would likely face retaliation unless they compensate for their damages. The Sovereign supresses this retaliation with superior force, yet it spares the party upon whom damages have been imposed the cost of retaliation by also insuring them against these damages, albeit within limits.
Violence is just another form of labour, and a costly one at that. Just as labour has a price, so does violence.
If you don’t like it, take up arms and revolt against the Government, if you can afford it.
Source date (UTC): 2017-03-06 00:03:00 UTC
—“Are you specifically maintaining there would be no libertarianism without marx, or merely that most contemporary libertarian rhetoric derives from the marxist tradition? For example, libertarian class theory preceded marx, and marx explicitly borrowed from it.”— Skye Stewart
(a) there is no ‘libertarian’ theory that I know of prior to the 20th century, even though there were libertine and anarchist theories. (b) western liberty movements sought to preserve contractualism, but never decried commons – classical liberalism was a movement to do MORE with the commons, rather than privatize it by the nobility. To gain peerage with the nobility. An aristocracy of everyone.
The western liberty movement peaks under jefferson’s natural law contractualism. And the rent seeking began all over again.
But Marx restated jewish history “of the unwanted” as a universal, and cast the aristocracy as oppressors rather than domesticators and defenders – a tradition continued by the Frankfurt school. He created a class theory of oppression rather than domestication. He sought a revolution against the aristocracy, and an inversion of the aristocratic order. And he sought to do it by depriving the aristocracy of property as its means of domestication.
Rothbard only changed the strategy; deprive the aristocracy of commons and retain your private property, and you will destroy the principle asset of western man: his unique ability to construct commons.
Do I think marx and rothbard, as well as freud, mises, and boaz (jews), have any more of an idea what they’re doing than women do when they undermine our civilization? Do gypsies? Do Muslims? I don’t think these people operate by reason but by intuition, and they all intuit that the west is something to be preyed upon – and do so.
Source date (UTC): 2017-03-05 10:09:00 UTC
“Success expands acquisitions, which increases the phenomena to track, which allows for un-meritocratic creep into social and governmental institutions.”
“The aristocracy gradually gets infected by the petty bourgeoisie who desire the material comforts and status gained, but who reject the virtue trials that grant warrior-aristocrats their moral indisputability.”
“As the social and governmental institutions come to be stocked with mere bureaucrats, demands of virtue and competence decline. It becomes a downward spiral of the weak and incompetent struggling to cheaply profit how their petty vision and ability allow them.”
“The republican ideal necessitates selling two products: liberty and security, the former for the virtuous and hungry who want enfranchisement and are willing to accept the rigors and the latter for the plebs who will otherwise ally with a Caesarian-Machiavellian figure against the aristocracy if they aren’t granted their petty needs (and with their subsequent constraints of influence).”
Source date (UTC): 2017-03-04 11:04:00 UTC
—“..the flag can’t fight. I can. If you won’t kneel to a flag, I’ll make you kneel to me.”—
Source date (UTC): 2017-03-02 19:32:00 UTC
I didn’t think our accelerating civil war was all that quiet…. ๐ https://twitter.com/CaptHaddock83/status/833134078790615042
Source date (UTC): 2017-03-02 19:13:11 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/837380283003465728
https://t.co/MiXVpAFXEKI didn’t think our accelerating civil war was all that quiet…. ๐
Source date (UTC): 2017-03-02 14:13:00 UTC