Form: Reply

  • ok. give me a bit

    ok. give me a bit.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-07-30 21:03:11 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1024037715644502019

    Reply addressees: @Aremazu19

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1024025534467121153


    IN REPLY TO:

    Original post on X

    Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1024025534467121153

  • Yes when I quote you I edit your stuff – for posterity’s sake. 😉

    Yes when I quote you I edit your stuff – for posterity’s sake. 😉


    Source date (UTC): 2018-07-30 20:41:55 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1024032362370420736

  • Thoughts on The German Postwar Theory: Ordoliberalism?

    —“Is ordoliberalism an effective economic theory in your opinion? Why/why not?”— https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ordoliberalism THE CORRECT ANSWER Ordoliberalism refers to the state-private alliance used by Germans after world war two. The premise is for the state to extend the market such that it provides desired goods and services rather than to take over the market for the production of goods and services. Ordoliberalism (geramn) differs from classical liberalism (anglo) just as continental law (german/french) differs from common law (anglo), in that the anglo seeks to suppress the state’s interference in the market (optimistic), and the german seeks to guard and manage the market (pragmatic to pessimistic). The anglo model is Imperial and expansionist (seizing all growth opportunities), and the german is domestic (maximizing known wants). The principle issue here is (a) demographic and (b) cultural. You can only conduct the german model with a martial (professional) bureaucracy and very honest people (farming). You can only conduct the anglo model when innovation is accessible (sail, piracy, conquest). So again, there is no ‘best’ model of government, there are only organizations that satisfy wants, needs, and exploit opportunities. The german postwar model was somewhat like the Chinese postwar model, and that is when you are ‘behind’ and want to ‘catch up’ it is a problem of organization. When you are ‘ahead’ and want to ‘stay ahead’ it’s a problem of innovation. The german model would be ‘bad’ for imperial purposes, and ‘good’ for postwar purposes. Germans are unique because of superior and homogeneous genetics, superior political culture due to lack of a central state, superior culture due to mastering craftsmanship for production of quality products, and the professionalization of the bureaucracy in imitation of Frederick the Great – and the subsequent investment in technical education that allowed Germany to produce the scientific (rather than British empirical) revolution – from which the postwar era has so soundly benefitted. In other words, the Germans and the Japanese both pursued superior export goods as a postwar strategy – and they COULD because of genetic(demographic) and cultural superiority. This is not a strategy all peoples can pursue – they lack the genetics, culture, and institutions to do so. As I’ve said repeatedly, and will continue to, the primary economic advantage any culture can seek is demographic. This will exacerbate over the next century such that smaller states with superior demographics will constantly outperform larger states with worse demographics. The people you live with have greater influence on your potential than do your abilities.

  • Thoughts on The German Postwar Theory: Ordoliberalism?

    —“Is ordoliberalism an effective economic theory in your opinion? Why/why not?”— https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ordoliberalism THE CORRECT ANSWER Ordoliberalism refers to the state-private alliance used by Germans after world war two. The premise is for the state to extend the market such that it provides desired goods and services rather than to take over the market for the production of goods and services. Ordoliberalism (geramn) differs from classical liberalism (anglo) just as continental law (german/french) differs from common law (anglo), in that the anglo seeks to suppress the state’s interference in the market (optimistic), and the german seeks to guard and manage the market (pragmatic to pessimistic). The anglo model is Imperial and expansionist (seizing all growth opportunities), and the german is domestic (maximizing known wants). The principle issue here is (a) demographic and (b) cultural. You can only conduct the german model with a martial (professional) bureaucracy and very honest people (farming). You can only conduct the anglo model when innovation is accessible (sail, piracy, conquest). So again, there is no ‘best’ model of government, there are only organizations that satisfy wants, needs, and exploit opportunities. The german postwar model was somewhat like the Chinese postwar model, and that is when you are ‘behind’ and want to ‘catch up’ it is a problem of organization. When you are ‘ahead’ and want to ‘stay ahead’ it’s a problem of innovation. The german model would be ‘bad’ for imperial purposes, and ‘good’ for postwar purposes. Germans are unique because of superior and homogeneous genetics, superior political culture due to lack of a central state, superior culture due to mastering craftsmanship for production of quality products, and the professionalization of the bureaucracy in imitation of Frederick the Great – and the subsequent investment in technical education that allowed Germany to produce the scientific (rather than British empirical) revolution – from which the postwar era has so soundly benefitted. In other words, the Germans and the Japanese both pursued superior export goods as a postwar strategy – and they COULD because of genetic(demographic) and cultural superiority. This is not a strategy all peoples can pursue – they lack the genetics, culture, and institutions to do so. As I’ve said repeatedly, and will continue to, the primary economic advantage any culture can seek is demographic. This will exacerbate over the next century such that smaller states with superior demographics will constantly outperform larger states with worse demographics. The people you live with have greater influence on your potential than do your abilities.

  • JOHN MARK ON MARKETING MARKET FASCISM AS THE NEXT STEP IN DEMOCRACY —“As we ma

    JOHN MARK ON MARKETING MARKET FASCISM AS THE NEXT STEP IN DEMOCRACY

    —“As we market/promote a new and improved governmental system with propertarian/natural law tenets etc, is it wiser to speak of it (market/promote/educate) as “a new form of democracy” (and explain the part about houses/markets etc), or to call it something else (because obviously full franchise democracy doesn’t work, and we don’t want people thinking it will be full franchise direct democracy).”— John Mark

    Well I think of it as market democracy rather than monopoly democracy and if we explain that it solves the problem of either side winning only the moral will agree and only the immoral disagree.

    And then we know who to exit from the polity: the immoral.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-07-30 16:15:00 UTC

  • correct

    correct


    Source date (UTC): 2018-07-30 13:53:50 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1023929666762100739

    Reply addressees: @anewdarkage

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1023929172614246401


    IN REPLY TO:

    Original post on X

    Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1023929172614246401

  • It’s a book length treatment. But you know, hayek, popper, turing all came out a

    It’s a book length treatment.

    But you know, hayek, popper, turing all came out at about the same time. Mises, brouwer, and bridgman about the same time. With chomsky then mandelbrot and minsky following. I am not sure who understood the work of whom. But in retrospect I can see the convergence.

    Operationalism was sitting there and they had all the pieces, but no one put it together. In retrospect the isolation of the disciplines and their different languages was clearly a cause. The war was clearly a cause because of the academic shift in focus from truth (rule of law) to pragmatism (aggregates and keynesianism, marxism and postmodernism).

    My current position is that pragmatism/utilitarianism and the end of truth and reciprocity (law) as a means of decidability in favor of disciplinary utilitarianism (pseudoscience) prevented the synthesis. I know that when I listened to hoppe is saw the underlying issue, and when I read the calculation debate I understood mises versus hayek. I remember it very clearly. I remember where I was standing at the Mises Institute. It just took me a long time to unravel the puzzle.

    I think the only other person that came close to it was Rafe Champion. I remember reading a half finished paper of Rafe’s back in maybe the 90’s or early 00’s and thinking “you know this is about right”.

    But combining the work of all these thinkers (standing on their shoulders) should have (in my opinion) occurred in the 60’s if not for the civil unrest caused by the left’s takeover of the academy and discourse.

    The things that have helped me are the genetics/hbd movement, as well as the cog-sci movement, and the change post 2000 due to the conversion of psychology from a pseudoscience to physical science due to imaging.

    That said once you learn the two primary programming language paradigms, and the two or thee primary software paradigms, and the three primary database paradigms, and practice reducing reality to combination, and then apply these ideas to cognition and cooperation and law you see hayek was very close.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-07-30 09:36:00 UTC

  • Mr President. We win either way. Either they end the witch hunt as the scam it i

    Mr President. We win either way. Either they end the witch hunt as the scam it is, or we show up in Washington with a few million of us, and the consequences will be the subject of history books for the next five thousand years. REVOLUTION COMES!


    Source date (UTC): 2018-07-29 22:07:56 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1023691622473760769

    Reply addressees: @realDonaldTrump @RedNationRising

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1023653191974625280


    IN REPLY TO:

    @realDonaldTrump

    There is No Collusion! The Robert Mueller Rigged Witch Hunt, headed now by 17 (increased from 13, including an Obama White House lawyer) Angry Democrats, was started by a fraudulent Dossier, paid for by Crooked Hillary and the DNC. Therefore, the Witch Hunt is an illegal Scam!

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1023653191974625280

  • Curt Doolittle wrote on Kerry Robinson’s timeline. (ok, Wait, is that Putin as D

    Curt Doolittle wrote on Kerry Robinson’s timeline.

    (ok, Wait, is that Putin as Depp/Thomson? … Omg that’s awesome. lol )


    Source date (UTC): 2018-07-29 18:21:42 UTC

  • WTH is wrong with you? An axiom is a declaration – an ideal. A theory is a conti

    WTH is wrong with you? An axiom is a declaration – an ideal. A theory is a contingent explanation – a real. Logical and ideal axioms. Descriptive and real theories. They are not synonyms.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-07-29 12:10:00 UTC