Source: Facebook

  • REVIEW FOR NEWBS 1 – ACQUISITIONISM replaces psychology, 2 – REPRODUCTIVE DIVISI

    REVIEW FOR NEWBS

    1 – ACQUISITIONISM replaces psychology,

    2 – REPRODUCTIVE DIVISIONS of perception and methods of coercion replace Sociology

    3 – TESTIMONIALISM replaces Epistemology

    4 – PROPERTARIANISM replaces ethics

    5 – ALGORITHMIC NATURAL LAW replaces Law

    6 – MARKETS in Everything replaces internal politics

    7 – Group EVOLUTIONARY STRATEGY replaces political relations.

    Propertarianism completes science and reforms philosophy, psychology, sociology, law, politics and international relations.

    Its bigger than Marxism in scope.

    So that’s why it takes me so long.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-08-09 08:10:00 UTC

  • I give a sh-t about the working and middle classes. That’s why. ‘Cause the chanc

    I give a sh-t about the working and middle classes. That’s why. ‘Cause the chances you’re dealing with a moral person decline rapidly above and below those classes.

    I am totally done with this top and bottom against the middle.

    We need guillotines, hanging trees, pikes, crucifixions and pyres. Lots of them.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-08-09 07:59:00 UTC

  • “My opinion on most topics where I have an opinion, is very nuanced and sophisti

    —“My opinion on most topics where I have an opinion, is very nuanced and sophisticated. But basically I usually agree with the dumb people.”— Eli Harman

    It’s cuz dum peepul arunt cunning enuf to lie good.

    (really. that’s why uneducated people often produce superior polling results.)


    Source date (UTC): 2017-08-09 07:55:00 UTC

  • My opinion is, and has been, that Ayelam is the only person who fully understand

    My opinion is, and has been, that Ayelam is the only person who fully understands my work *as i do*. He is very smart and was a PhD student in the philosophy of science that i rely upon. He has been a profound influence on me and my work and is the person I turn to in private when frustrated.

    My understanding of the work is that Testimonialism is rock solid, and that I have defined the science of producing fully decidable algorithmic law, and a value neutral language of ethics, politics, and law, and completed the enlightenment by solving the question of social science.

    Where we differ is that I have the experience of writing artificial intelligence and I am more confident in the statement that all thought is justificationary, and testimony is as difficult to learn as mathematics and literacy, and that this is the scientific means of historical analysis.

    I think my use of the terms aristocracy priesthood and burgher refer to specializations in three modes of coercion, and thus the upper classes in these groups are equally superior in their specializations, producing three competing hierarchies organized by different means. So my use of aristocracy is a narrow definition that i understand people misinterpret.

    But his criticism of my position that the method of decidability in any civilization or culture that each calls truth equally explains all civilizations and their rates of development, and that the uniqueness of the west is reducible to martial truth (deflationary reporting) rather than storytelling ( justificationary ) and the combination of heroism, truth, sovereignty, common natural law, and markets in everything – due largely to territory and technology at in the age of transformation, is a *theory*.

    It is a very, very powerful theory. I have a great deal of confidence in this theory. I believe it will be extremely difficult to defeat that theory. But at present it is only a theory. So in those senses, I agree with his criticisms.

    But understand that we both operate from motivated reasoning because of our differences in background and circumstance, which I believe are reducible to ownership and value of prior investment in domestication and its rewards. A difference which merely proves my points.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-08-09 06:58:00 UTC

  • Untitled

    https://hackernoon.com/the-ai-hierarchy-of-needs-18f111fcc007

    Source date (UTC): 2017-08-09 06:46:00 UTC

  • The Priestly Question: On the Restoration of Aristocracy by Special Pleading by

    The Priestly Question: On the Restoration of Aristocracy by Special Pleading

    by James Augustus

    An important insight made by the Reactionaries (literary ‘priestly’ right) that is often over-looked by the martial (upper) and soldiering (mid-to-low) right is the dynamic between power & propaganda, or more accurately, the (totality of existential) dynamics concerning the distribution of rents, discretion (influence) & information.

    And we are often misguided by the fallacy of seeking agreement (through force of reasoned argument & genuine good will) amongst the lower-and-middle priestly classes under the false presumption that power follows propaganda, as opposed to propaganda as the industrial production of weaponized misinformation by priest against the aristocratic, commercial & the suggestible consumer classes.

    And we can blame the priest & Abrahamist, but really it was the mere perusal of rational self-interest given the (incentives) opportunities produced by advent of mass communications & the failure of the aristocracy to adapt to consumer capitalism (a shift of in revenues from rents on feudal holdings to rents on human holdings in exchange for cost of domestication & the product of civilizational order (commons)).

    Europe was just recovering from Abrahamic-monotheism via the Renaissance (rediscovery of Aristotelianism) & the introduction of Empiricism through the Anglo Enlightenment, when we fell to the next wave of deceits & conflations pseudo-science (Abrahamic), pseudo-rationalism (German), literary-moral-fictionalism (French), so we were never able to compete the scientific enlightenment (expand empiricism into the social sciences (law) through the falsification of ‘Man as inherently Moral’ instead of ‘Man as Rational’ (selfishly incentive-driven).

    The purpose of pseudo-science was to resist/destroy empiricism, so that a misguided West could not rule its colonial holdings (84% of the globe) empirically—& we lost the world because of it.

    And when the failures of the pseudo-scientific enlightenment began to accumulate, the response by the Priest was to attack the very notion of objectivity, and therefor measurement, accounting in political economy & scientific narrative.

    So post-modernism is merely the latest iteration of the priestly assault against Aristocracy (markets in everything).

    So to close that thought, we cannot restore the Aristocracy (markets), and by extension the West, by special pleading to the Priestly Class & its subordinates. We cannot restore the west by re-appropriation of the Church.

    The Restoration can only be achieved by our ancient practice of sovereignty by militia, which is to say reintroducing violence into the political process.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-08-08 22:53:00 UTC

  • is how things work there. It is how things work better

    http://vidmax.com/video/160845-Brother-Slaps-Friend-And-Carries-Home-His-Drunk-Sister-After-A-Long-Night-Of-Drinking#.WYpn7yF7DDU.facebookThis is how things work there. It is how things work better.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-08-08 21:40:00 UTC

  • THE FALL DE-ABRAHAMIZED The Fall The King built a great garden with high walls a

    THE FALL DE-ABRAHAMIZED

    The Fall

    The King built a great garden with high walls and named it Eden. Angry that it was not perfect without innocence, he purchased from slavers, two most beautiful children, and raised them with the birds, animals, fish, fruits in his garden named Eden. The boy he named Adam, and the girl he named Eve.

    The King raised to the boy and the girl in the Garden of Eden to work it and take care of it. And the King commanded them, “You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat from it you will certainly die.”

    Adam and Eve tended the garden, ate all they wanted from it, and knew nothing of the world beyond its walls save the sounds of birds, the rain and the wind.

    The king brought to the garden all the wild animals and all the birds in the sky. He brought them to Adam to see what he would name them; and whatever the man called each living creature, that was its name. So Adam gave names to all the livestock, the birds in the sky and all the wild animals.

    Now among the animals of the garden was an evil serpent, who was jealous of the love of the king for Adam and Eve. The serpent was more crafty than any of the other animals. He said to the woman, “Did the King really say, ‘You must not eat from any tree in the garden’?”

    The woman said to the serpent, “We may eat fruit from the trees in the garden, but the King did say, ‘You must not eat fruit from the tree that is in the middle of the garden, and you must not touch it, or you will die.’”

    “You will not certainly die,” the serpent said to the woman. “For The King knows that when you eat from it your eyes will be opened, and you will be as free men, knowing good and evil.”

    When the woman saw that the fruit of the tree was good for food and pleasing to the eye, and also desirable for gaining wisdom, she took some and ate it.

    She also gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he ate it. Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they realized they were naked; so they sewed fig leaves together and made coverings for themselves.

    Then the man and his wife heard the sound of the King as he was walking in the garden in the cool of the day, and they hid from the King among the trees of the garden. But the King called to the man, “Where are you?”

    He answered, “I heard you in the garden, and I was afraid because I was naked; so I hid.”

    And he said, “Who told you that you were naked? Have you eaten from the tree that I commanded you not to eat from?”

    The man said, “The woman you put here with me—she gave me some fruit from the tree, and I ate it.”

    Then the King said to the woman, “What is this you have done?”

    The woman said, “The serpent deceived me, and I ate.”

    So the King said to the serpent, “Because you have done this,

    “Cursed are you above all livestock and all wild animals!

    I send you to the desert where you will crawl on your belly and you will eat dust all the days of your life.”

    To the woman Eve he said, “From my garden I cast you. Know that your desire will be for your husband,and he will rule over you. And with painful labor you will give birth to children.”

    To the man Adam he said, “From my garden I cast you. Through painful toil you will eat food from the land all the days of your life. By the sweat of your brow you will eat your food until you return to the ground, from it you were taken; for dust you are, and to dust you will return.”

    The King gave garments of skin for Adam and his wife and to cloth them. And the King said, “The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil.”

    So the the king banished Adam and Eve from the Garden of Eden to work the ground from which they had been taken.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-08-08 19:06:00 UTC

  • CAIN AND ABEL DE-ABRAHAMIZED Adam made love to his wife Eve, and she became preg

    CAIN AND ABEL DE-ABRAHAMIZED

    Adam made love to his wife Eve, and she became pregnant and gave birth to Cain. Later she gave birth to his brother Abel. And in their manhood gave Abel flocks, and Cain Soil, that his sons be fruitful and prosper.

    Now Abel kept his flocks, and Cain worked the soil. In the course of time Cain brought some of the fruits of the soil as a gift to Adam. And Abel also brought an offering—fat portions from some of the firstborn of his flock. Adam looked with favor on Abel and his gift, but on Cain and his gift he did not look with favor. So Cain was very angry, and his face was downcast.

    Then Adam said to Cain, “Why are you angry? Why is your face downcast? If you do what is right, will you not be accepted? But if you do not do what is right, you will not be accepted; greed and envy desire to have you, but you must rule over it.”

    Now Cain said to his brother Abel, “Let’s go out to the field.” While they were in the field, Cain attacked his brother Abel and killed him.

    Then Adam said to Cain, “Where is your brother Abel?”

    “I don’t know,” he replied. “Am I my brother’s keeper?”

    Adam said, “What have you done? Listen! Your brother’s blood cries out to me from the ground. Now I curse you drive you from the ground, which opened its mouth to receive your brother’s blood from your hand. You will not work the ground, and it will no longer yield its crops for you. You will be a restless wanderer on the earth.”

    Cain said to Adam, “My punishment is more than I can bear. Today you are driving me from the land, and I will be hidden from your presence; I will be a restless wanderer on the earth, and whoever finds me will kill me.”

    But Adam said to him, “Not so”; and Adam took Cain and cut his mark on Cain as he would a beast or slave. And adam said “Anyone who kills Cain will suffer my vengeance seven times over.” So Cain went out from Adam’s presence and lived in the land of Nod, east of Eden. Where he married, built a city, and prospered.

    Adam made love to his wife again, and she gave birth to a son and named him Seth, saying, “Adam has given me another child in place of Abel, because Cain has killed him.”

    Adam gave Seth his land and his flocks, and Adam, Eve, Seth and his children prospered.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-08-08 18:47:00 UTC

  • “Ya know? Most of the conflation, lies and misinformation is just man makin’ sh-

    –“Ya know? Most of the conflation, lies and misinformation is just man makin’ sh-t up to supplement his inability to climb hierarchy.”—Nick Heywood


    Source date (UTC): 2017-08-08 18:21:00 UTC