—“Leninism’s development of the totally expropriating state was profoundly atavistic. So atavistic that, the Soviet Union managed to pass through ibn Khaldun’s state cycle in a single life time. “— Michael Phillip
–“Lenin famously claimed that communism was socialism + electricity. Actually, it was an attempted return to the origins of the state + electricity. But bargaining states had let loose technological dynamism on the world, and mere expropriation was no longer the cutting edge in organising societies. The gap between Leninist pretension and economic reality became de-stabilisingly obvious. So, we have collapsed Leninist regimes or societies with notionally Leninist ruling regimes ruling very not-totalitarian societies or, in the case of North Korea, a regime that has embraced its atavism. History is how the present was created, but only provides understanding if we accurately grasp that history.”— Michael Phillip
Ibn Khaldun’s State Cycle
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ibn_Khaldun
(I might recommend Carroll Quigley instead)
Atavistism : “The tendency to revert to Ancestral type”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atavism
Form: Quote Commentary
-
Leninism’s Atavism
-
Leninism’s Atavism
—“Leninism’s development of the totally expropriating state was profoundly atavistic. So atavistic that, the Soviet Union managed to pass through ibn Khaldun’s state cycle in a single life time. “— Michael Phillip –“Lenin famously claimed that communism was socialism + electricity. Actually, it was an attempted return to the origins of the state + electricity. But bargaining states had let loose technological dynamism on the world, and mere expropriation was no longer the cutting edge in organising societies. The gap between Leninist pretension and economic reality became de-stabilisingly obvious. So, we have collapsed Leninist regimes or societies with notionally Leninist ruling regimes ruling very not-totalitarian societies or, in the case of North Korea, a regime that has embraced its atavism. History is how the present was created, but only provides understanding if we accurately grasp that history.”— Michael Phillip
Ibn Khaldun’s State Cycle
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ibn_Khaldun
(I might recommend Carroll Quigley instead)
Atavistism : “The tendency to revert to Ancestral type”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atavism -
“CHILDHOOD’S END: I think it’s Skye Stewart who pointed us all to Daniel Dennett
“CHILDHOOD’S END:
I think it’s Skye Stewart who pointed us all to Daniel Dennett’s talk. It’s classicl Dennett: entertainment. But what we fail to see is that he’s working in the ancient paradigm of states and language rather than changes in state – the problem with philosophy writ large.
It’s helpful that we can easily be tricked – that undermines our confidence. But it tells us little other how to play skeptical parlor games.
By comparison Jeff Hawkins’ talks are algorithmic explanations of experience as on going changes in state for the purpose of forecasting the future so that we may act upon it.
If I stated that understanding Hawkins, my work, and Haidt is pretty much the current state of knowledge I think that would be correct.
Paradigms and the languages that reference them MATTER.
I think I need to record a talk tying the three bodies of work together.
And I think I will call it “childhood’s end”.
Source date (UTC): 2014-11-28 17:01:00 UTC
-
ART OF PLAYFULNESS yep. It works. Although I also use it to create distance
https://heartiste.wordpress.com/2014/11/26/the-art-of-playfulness/THE ART OF PLAYFULNESS
yep. It works.
Although I also use it to create distance.
Source date (UTC): 2014-11-27 22:14:00 UTC
-
NEW (EXCELLENT) ESSAY Aside from David Gordon’s use of Critique (heaping hyperbo
http://mises.org/library/aristocracy-monarchy-democracyHOPPE’S NEW (EXCELLENT) ESSAY
Aside from David Gordon’s use of Critique (heaping hyperbolic praise), the 8900 words restate the central proposition of Hoppe’s work. And not only has he composed it in nearly poetic prose, but this is Hoppe at his intellectual best – without his early tendency to descend into kantian or cosmopolitan rationalism – and arguing entirely in history, economy, and incentives. Clearly written – flawlessly actually. This is the Hoppe that taught all of us the technique of theorizing and explaining man, using the constructivist method that we call praxeological analysis of incentives.
VIOLENCE -> PROPERTY -> LAW -> CONTRACT -> PROSPERITY
Favorite quote:
—“no wonder Rawls reached so perverse a premise”—
(I have converted it to machine-read audio using mac if anyone wants to PM me. I listen to a lot of books this way so I am very comfortable with the mac voice.)
Source date (UTC): 2014-11-26 02:27:00 UTC
-
The Only Poor Honest White People Left On Earth
[I]n Ukraine, we have the only poor, honest, white people left on the planet. The only thing we lack is a justice system. The only difference between Ukraine and Canada is that Canada has America instead of Russia as the most influential political neighbor. We just need anglo-american jurisprudence and Ukraine will not only the biggest but one of the wealthiest countries in Europe.
-
Politicians are Entrepreneurs of Externality
Guest post by Michael Philip
[D]emocracy is supposed to make things better, by making all voters part of the political bargaining process. The problem with that is much of the art of representative politics is using the coercive power of the state to provide benefits to folk who do notice (and care and effectively politically express that noticing and caring) while shifting the costs onto those who do not. In other words, generating visible positive externalities paid for via not-usefully-noticed negative externalities. Politicians are entrepreneurs of externality. Appealing to politicians to deal with problems of externalities in general is rather like putting arsonists in charge of the fire brigade. -
Politicians are Entrepreneurs of Externality
Guest post by Michael Philip
[D]emocracy is supposed to make things better, by making all voters part of the political bargaining process. The problem with that is much of the art of representative politics is using the coercive power of the state to provide benefits to folk who do notice (and care and effectively politically express that noticing and caring) while shifting the costs onto those who do not. In other words, generating visible positive externalities paid for via not-usefully-noticed negative externalities. Politicians are entrepreneurs of externality. Appealing to politicians to deal with problems of externalities in general is rather like putting arsonists in charge of the fire brigade. -
My Position on Race
[I] don’t care about your race. I care about your IQ, impulsivity, aggression, time preference, degree of suppression of free riding, and total integration into every possible aspect of the culture.
You are not going to find anyone, me included, caring about the immigration of smart, un-impulsive, non-aggressive, low time preference (long term thinking), individuals. Not only because they’re rare. But because they’re nice to have around.
But everything else is costly invasion for a high trust polity.
So I don’t care about race. I care that there are differences in the distribution of these properties in the races, and that people from races act as blocs in politics, economics, society, and reproduction.
Integrate entirely or leave. Absolute nuclear family. High trust ethics. Religion and myths, institutions and norms.
Period.NO SEPARATISM. PERIOD. IF YOU CHOOSE TO BE SEPARATE I AM HAPPY TO SEPARATE YOU FROM THE REST OF US WHO AGREE WITH YOUR CHOICE.
(I think this is very close to my position on racism. I just don’t like it. if it’s present, that’s because something else is wrong: invasion, non-integration, material difference in distribution, and an impact on norms.)
-
My Position on Race
[I] don’t care about your race. I care about your IQ, impulsivity, aggression, time preference, degree of suppression of free riding, and total integration into every possible aspect of the culture.
You are not going to find anyone, me included, caring about the immigration of smart, un-impulsive, non-aggressive, low time preference (long term thinking), individuals. Not only because they’re rare. But because they’re nice to have around.
But everything else is costly invasion for a high trust polity.
So I don’t care about race. I care that there are differences in the distribution of these properties in the races, and that people from races act as blocs in politics, economics, society, and reproduction.
Integrate entirely or leave. Absolute nuclear family. High trust ethics. Religion and myths, institutions and norms.
Period.NO SEPARATISM. PERIOD. IF YOU CHOOSE TO BE SEPARATE I AM HAPPY TO SEPARATE YOU FROM THE REST OF US WHO AGREE WITH YOUR CHOICE.
(I think this is very close to my position on racism. I just don’t like it. if it’s present, that’s because something else is wrong: invasion, non-integration, material difference in distribution, and an impact on norms.)