Source: Facebook

  • “THESE PEOPLE ARE OUR FOOD, NOT OUR ALLIES” I told you a few months ago I had co

    “THESE PEOPLE ARE OUR FOOD, NOT OUR ALLIES”

    I told you a few months ago I had come to a suspicion that I needed to think about a bit before bringing in to the public discourse. But that I think is simply ‘true’ and the truth of which will restore ‘honesty’ to western civilization, and provide clarity into eastern civilization. And that we might want to change our strategy one way or the other in response to this ‘uncomfortable’ conclusion. So over the next few weeks I’m going to take the controversial position of explaining this hypothesis, which should probably sound obvious to conservatives but which will require me to attack competing ideas for a bit. We fail when we overreach. The chinese stagnate because they do not. But they were not defeated by abrahamism and without the USA to assist abrahamism the chinese will defeat it there. And they will stand alone. Unless we restore the west to not over-reaching.

    —“For f–k’s sake these people are our food, not our allies.”—

    Well, they certainly produce our food, even if we don’t eat them directly.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-17 21:51:00 UTC

  • “And it’s really difficult to speed up the learning process because the brain re

    —“And it’s really difficult to speed up the learning process because the brain requires time to “heal”, especially after Curt massacres one of your sacred cows right in front of your eyes.”— Ross Lampers

    (i’m gonna chuckle in my dreams tonight over that visualization )


    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-17 21:42:00 UTC

  • I think the argument is won. There is nothing good in christianity that was not

    I think the argument is won. There is nothing good in christianity that was not there prior. Christianity was developed like marxism/postmodernism as a resistance movement by the underclasses and women against the aristocratic classes (men). And while the ancients relied on deflationary truth and deflationary institutions, christianity like judaism (and then islam) relied on conflationary truth and conflationary institutions. Where the ancients relied on truth, technology, law, the abrahamists relied on deception, superstition, and scriptural authority.

    The matter is done. Christianity is done. Our natural religion was mythical-historical, nature-venerating, and stoic ritual in competition with epicurean experience.

    And that is what we have seen since the dawn of the enligthenment: the continuous progress of science by a minority and the continuous resistance by the underclasses against it.

    True is true.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-17 21:41:00 UTC

  • I also tend to think that rather than class warfare of individuals we simply hav

    I also tend to think that rather than class warfare of individuals we simply have a war between very good families, good families, not so good families, and bad families.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-17 21:31:00 UTC

  • DEAR LIBERTARIANS: WELCOME TO THE REAL. You are currently in the heavy-resistanc

    DEAR LIBERTARIANS: WELCOME TO THE REAL.

    You are currently in the heavy-resistance phase, as the entire cosmopolitan program comes crashing down, including the marxist-postmodern, libertine-libertarian, and neo-conservative, as well as the social democratic and classical liberal. That is because all the enlightenment views of man and all the enlightenment counter-reactions against the progress of the scientific method (criticism) by various methods of justification(justificationism) have been demonstrated to be false.

    Man was not oppressed by aristocracy. He was a beast that a small minority of gifted martial aristocrats domesticated from animal, to slave, to serf, to freeman, to citizen resulting in the diminution of the lower and increase in the middle and upper middle classes through reproductive suppression, war, starvation, and aggressive hanging.

    Man is a rational actor for whom cooperation is possible and generally superior choice. But at all times he chooses moral or immoral action by little more than either habit or accounting of consequences.

    And as such we invented the natural common law of reciprocity since no matter how complex our social orders, all conflicts over demonstrated investments are decidable by tests of reciprocity.

    There is but one epistemological method and that is the the market for competition for consistency between the dimensions, and the market for competition for consistent application in reality.

    And because of that competition, both truth and lie can survive through continuous innovation. If only because it is cheaper to produce deception than truth. And the most powerful incentive to produce truth is to defeat ignorance, falsehood and deceit.

    Cheers.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-17 21:19:00 UTC

  • PART 3 – THE DEFEAT OF JARED HOWE, AND BY EXTENSION THE ENTIRETY OF ‘AUSTRIAN’ E

    PART 3 – THE DEFEAT OF JARED HOWE, AND BY EXTENSION THE ENTIRETY OF ‘AUSTRIAN’ ECONOMIC PSEUDOSCIENCE.

    Jared Howe,

    I think you’re just a disingenuous at this point, and using the very method of mandated ignorance I accuse mises and rothbard of, of kant of by claiming special pleading for general rules of behavior.

    You see, while you can identify possible truth propositions with justificationary reasoning, you cannot prevent false propositions with justificationary reasoning – that requires competition. Or what we call ’empiricism’: the competition between the ideal and the real.

    —“You’re still contradicting yourself by rejecting the validity of a priorism via a priori truth statements”—

    But what did I say actually?

    I said apriorism in economics is demonstrably insufficient for the identification of *all* economic phenomenon (including both general rules, variations from those general rules.)

    I said economics was indifferent from the others sciences in that it required survival from a competition between the analytic(thought), logical(words), existential(actions).

    And that all economic phenomenon have proven to be resistant to deduction even if they are not resistant to operational (praxeologica) explanation through sympathetic reconstruction of a series of actions taken in response to available incentives.

    I claimed that empirically, unavoidably, we have observed, that all truth claims about reality are contingent, including in economics. That even the a prior of ‘length’, ‘space’ and ‘time’ were false.

    For example, “all other things being equal, increasing the minimum wage will increase unemployment” is not true in general, and is not true in all cases. In other words, it is a synthetic, contingent, a priori proposition. Which is a pseudoscientific posturing – a way of saying ‘a general rule’.

    I am not claiming that spectrum of categories which kant referred to as a priori, are false so much as that they reflect dimensions of reality, that the scientific method is superior in describing and testing.

    A Priori: “independent of observation.”

    There are three dimensions to claims of a priori truth claim:

    i) Aprioricity vs A posteriori,

    ii) Analyticity vs Syntheticity, and

    iii) Necessity vs Contingency

    Therefore we can produce at least the following spectrum of a priori claims.

    (a) Analytic A Priori: tautological: 2+2=4 and all deductions thereof.

    (c) Necessary Synthetic A Priori: Childless women will have no grandchildren.

    (b) “General” Synthetic A Priori : Increasing money increases inflation.

    (d) Contingent Synthetic A Priori: “all other things being equal, as a general trend, increasing demand will increase supply, although we cannot know the composition of that supply in advance, we can identify it from recorded evidence.”

    This produces a an ordered spectrum of declining precision:

    (a) Identity(categorical consistency) – Analytic A Priori

    (b) Logical:(internal consistency) – Nec. Synthetic a priori

    (c) Empirical: (external consistency) – Gen. Synth. a priori

    (d) Existential: (operational consistency) – Cont. Synth. a priori

    Both Mises and Rothbard confess to this later in life. Sorry. It is what it is. They realized they had failed. Economics is like any other science “a mix of the empirical and operational”. And the praxeological movement and all that was related to it crumbled as nothing more than a pseudoscientific resistance movement against the continuing progress of science.

    Competition between the rational and the real. Markets in knowledge just like markets in everything else. There is no justificationary reasoning available to man for real world phenomenon.

    WELCOME TO THE REAL.

    You are currently in the heavy-resistance phase, as the entire cosmopolitan program comes crashing down, including the marxist-postmodern, libertine-libertarian, and neo-conservative, as well as the social democratic and classical liberal. That is because all the enlightenment views of man and all the enlightenment counter-reactions against the progress of the scientific method (criticism) by various methods of justification(justificationism) have been demonstrated to be false.

    Man was not oppressed by aristocracy. He was a beast that a small minority of gifted martial aristocrats domesticated from animal, to slave, to serf, to freeman, to citizen resulting in the diminution of the lower and increase in the middle and upper middle classes through reproductive suppression, war, starvation, and aggressive hanging.

    Man is a rational actor for whom cooperation is possible and generally superior choice. But at all times he chooses moral or immoral action by little more than either habit or accounting of consequences.

    And as such we invented the natural common law of reciprocity since no matter how complex our social orders, all conflicts over demonstrated investments are decidable by tests of reciprocity.

    There is but one epistemological method and that is the the market for competition for consistency between the dimensions, and the market for competition for consistent application in reality.

    And because of that competition, both truth and lie can survive. If only because it is cheaper to produce deception than truth.

    Cheers.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-17 21:18:00 UTC

  • THE GERMANIZATION OF CHRISTIANITY – AND THE FUTURE OF OUR CIVIL RELIGION (must r

    THE GERMANIZATION OF CHRISTIANITY – AND THE FUTURE OF OUR CIVIL RELIGION

    (must read!)

    by Daniel Gurpide

    Catholic Christianity, in both Northern and Southern Europe, turned during medieval times into a different syncretic religion as a result of encountering Greco -Roman and Celto -Germanic culture. The pagan component of this religion, though usually unacknowledged, remained strong for a long time and it is this syncretic religion that people think of when they speak of ‘traditional Christianity’.

    However, the secularisation of the Christian West prevents any return to a sort of sociological Christianity which could be the vehicle in which to transmit a message of protest against modernity.

    The ‘right’-understood in a counter-revolutionary sense- has ceased to exist and religious Christianity no longer plays the role of a social-religious pillar or an ideal projection of a mythical -communitarian residue which could keep the different fragments of the egalitarian ecumene together. That role is played today by the religion of human rights and political correctness.

    The Christian churches themselves become fully aware of the situation and no longer identify themselves -if they ever did -with the destiny and culture of Europe, but rather with their own projects and historical interests. They merely constitute a minority within the egalitarian matrix :a backward and folkloric variation on the same theme.

    Christendom -as a marker of the European continent and peoples -is, in many ways, a fleeting sideshow in the world-historical development of the Christian faith. Christianity’s future lies in the ‘global South’, where its message of ‘pauper as Pantocrator ‘ – and its veneration of the meek and downtrodden – will no doubt be well received. Pope Francis (Bergoglio) is not an anomaly.

    In Curt Doolittle’s Summer School several ‘solutions’ have been proved to be false, a waste of time and energy: Libertarianism, petty intra-European fratricidal Nationalism, National-Socialism/Hitlerism, and also (traditional) Christianity. What’s next?

    I believe the iconoclasm of this ‘via negativa’ is the proper way forward :first clear the terrain of rubble and then begin the construction on more solid foundations.

    Ave et Salve.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-17 20:28:00 UTC

  • by Daniel Gurpide Christianity was carried by a Jew, Saul of Tarsus, from the Le

    by Daniel Gurpide

    Christianity was carried by a Jew, Saul of Tarsus, from the Levant to the Greco -Roman world. Its doctrines found fertile soil among the populous slave class in Rome.

    Eventually, after playing a far from negligible role in the collapse of the Roman Empire, the revolutionary spirit which stood in opposition to all authority – and hierarchy – was firmly organised by the Church of Rome.

    Once in power, the Church readily compromised with pre-Christian values and social forms, and condemned as heretics those who demanded that it live by the values of the gospels.

    The seed of rebellion and protest is inherent to the Gospels. That is why the Catholic Church traditionally opposed the reading and interpretation of the Bible by the people.

    –“Of all books, from a historical point of view,the most perilous is,indisputably, the Bible, if the public peril is to be in any way considered.”–(Goethe)


    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-17 20:27:00 UTC

  • GRADUATE COURSE IN EPISTEMOLOGY – CLASS TWO – BOOM! (continuing with testimonial

    GRADUATE COURSE IN EPISTEMOLOGY – CLASS TWO – BOOM!

    (continuing with testimonialism’s synthesis of science, philosophy, morality and law)

    —“Denying apriorism whilst simultaneously making a priori truth claims = hopelessly confused.”—

    Actually, ah, but that’s not what I did, right? I deflated Kant to unite science, philosophy, morality and law and the techniques of deceptive argument by claims of distinctions without a difference that were used by the marxists-postmodernists, rothbardians and straussian neocons. (Which is what others will tell you.)

    (In other words, I ‘hardened’ philosophy by uniting it with science and law.)

    I said:

    – That analytic truth(thought), ideal truth(words), “testimonial truth”or existentially possible truth(actions) describe a spectrum of increasing differences in information between the statement and reality.

    – That all a priori statements are special cases of the single theoretical method that encompasses all of conceivable and actionable reality.

    – That Reality consists of a number of actionable dimensions, and that the various statements of a priori reasoning reflected the most simple of those dimensions.

    – That we can test each dimension of reality for consistency.

    – That any test of any dimension consistency requires appealing to the test of at least the next dimension, and that any test of reality requires appealing to the full set of dimensions of reality.

    – That survival of each dimensional test does not determine that the statement is true, but that it is non false within the scope of the limits defined.

    – That because of causal density, the application of economic theories can describe trends but not cases.

    – That we cannot know a subset of cases will follow the general rule without investigation.

    – That all not only can all cases not be determined, or not all trends be observable, but that all economic phenomenon cannot be and have not been discovered by deduction but by empirical observation (ie: sticky prices), because much economic phenomenon is beyond our perceptions without measurements.

    – That the predictability of economic phenomenon is (likely) determined by symmetries within intermediary states (in math “lie groups”) and that these are not deducible without empirical observation due to the limits of the human mind to model. But that once modeled will be understandable by the human mind.

    – That this epistemological method will apply even with the addition of new dimensions (which is the likely consequence of the current mathematical and physical investigation into symmetries. Symmetries we cannot conceive of. But once observed we can operationally explain.

    OR AS POPPER TOLD US:

    All knowledge of the world is temporal and contingent. All scientific investigation is social and moral.

    OR AS I’M STATING MORE COMPLETELY

    All knowledge of the world is temporal and contingent, and demand for completeness of truth claims is in fact nothing but demand for warranty of due diligence given the the externalities of the display, speech or action.

    THE LAW

    The ‘Law’ of the Analytic(thought), Ideal(word), Real(action), Reasonable(choice), Moral(reciprocal):

    – Analytic: i can or cannot think that.

    – Ideal:I think I can or cannot say that.

    – Real:I claim I can or cannot do that.

    – Reasonable: I can or cannot but would or would not do that.

    – Moral: I would or would not do that, but I should or should not do that.

    HOW CAN WE REDUCE THIS TO GENERAL RULES?

    (a) All non trivial statements about the reality require prior experience.

    (b) All non trivial propositions are contingent.

    (c) All non trivial tests of dimensional consistency are incomplete

    (d) These statements are all contingent.

    (e) All statements we know how to make are contingent, because all knowledge is contingent.

    (f) All display, speech, action, and externality

    CLOSING

    In other words, I eliminated the special pleading intended by, and made possible by kant by the mandation of ignorance, as a resistance against the tide of science. Which is why Rothbard used rationalism, just as abrahamic religious dogma was used: to place artificial constraints on our actions by placing artificial constraints on our reason.

    FWIW

    I use people like you as educational foils. Because while I understand that these advances are probably too difficult for you, they are not too difficult for everyone, and these conversations function as advertising and marketing by which I can locate those who CAN understand such things (likely because of a combination of education and intelligence). And what we have come to understand over the past few years, is that one generally must have an understanding of the methods of the sciences as well as economics, if not learned from computer science the difference between mathematics (arithmetic operations), logic (set operations), programming (algorithmic operations). The reason being, that algorithmic operations must be informationally complete, and training the human mind to think by decidability (informational sufficiency) rather than choice (informational possibility) is rather challenging.

    THUS ENDETH THE LESSON.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine


    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-17 20:07:00 UTC

  • Yeah. Well, if that post on epistemology doesn’t blow your mind I am going to ha

    Yeah. Well, if that post on epistemology doesn’t blow your mind I am going to have to work pretty hard to top it. lol


    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-17 14:23:00 UTC