( Tip. Facebook easily can get into an infinite loop under certain conditions. Social Fixer for Facebook plugin seems to catch it. And displays an message that it’s stopping FB from doing it, and returning manual control of loading to you. Grammarly can get caught in this infinite loop, and take down your browser. (I’ve reported it). I’m testing it now, but it looks like Social Fixer for Facebook protects Grammarly from causing browser crashes. )
Source date (UTC): 2017-02-13 08:55:00 UTC
Programming teaches you a great deal about the hubris of human intuition.
Source date (UTC): 2017-02-13 08:47:00 UTC
ON CRITICISM BY THE LESS-THAN-HUMAN ANIMAL, MAN.
I love it when some f–king idiot criticizes me because (a) I”m not finished with a scope of work that has stumped thinkers for 2500 years, (b) I can’t reduce that scope of work to a powerpoint presentation that some idiot can make use of in restating all history with ten minutes of investment of his time, and (c) that the said idiots can’t understand it, or much of it, given the limits of their current knowledge, and limits of their cognitive abilities. (d) especially when there ARE people who grasp various components of it and understand the consequence of the work.
I mean, WTH? I’ve spent the majority of my life trying to solve a single problem – avoidance of human conflict – and hundreds if not thousands of other men before me have tried to solve this problem, and some of the greatest thinkers in modern history century couldn’t solve it – in particular – among them non-trivial thinkers like Durkheim, Hayek, and the great synthetic historians. And while I feel an intellectual kinship with Hayek, I am fully aware that the only reason I have solved a problem that they didn’t is that I lived a life made possible by Turing, and identified the pattern that they, and specifically Hayek, didn’t.
So if I spent my life on it, and am still working on simplifying it, and applying it to the infinite little eddies of human thought; and if great minds from Aristotle to Hayek, Livy to Spengler could make progress but not solve it, then what the H— makes John Doe Baseball-Cap think he’s going to grasp it with any less effort than say, learning to program operating systems, or learn the law sufficiently to write and argue contracts, or learn mathematics well enough to use calculus to solve problems of inter-dependent motion.
I mean, just ’cause you can live life while avoiding those problems, and you can’t live life avoiding cooperation, conflict, law, and war, doesn’t mean the means of understanding cooperation, resolution, and war, are any less complicated than those forms of logic that you CAN avoid. In fact, if you have to learn any one of those skills the most important to learn is that of cooperation, conflict, resolution, and war: natural law.
I mean, I suppose if you can’t grasp this rather obvious statement, and still expect some simpleton’s shortcut (like The N’A’P’) or your own moral intuition, as if your moral intuition is sufficient for learning history, law, programming, and mathematics, then that failure in and of itself probably disqualifies you from participation in rational debate on matters of cooperation, conflict, resolution and war: natural law.
And in fact, probably disqualifies you from discourse in general. So please be a good domesticated animal and go back to your amusements and enjoy them, and let humans and adults get back to the business of civilization.
(Exasperated).
Curt Doolittle
The Propertarian Institute
Kiev, Ukraine
Source date (UTC): 2017-02-13 08:47:00 UTC
THE PROPERTARIAN TAKE ON WESTERN HISTORY
(important concept)
Let’s note that in propertarianism we don’t have to resort to the terms ‘good’ or ‘bad’ just true (moral) and false (immoral). If you work from the via-positiva, you are stuck with the impossible presumption of knowing the ‘good’. If you work from via-negativa, we only need to know know the bad. If you work from sovereignty over property-in-toto we can empirically test the bad, leaving only the good to survive the ‘battle’. (The origins of trial by combat are rational in this context).
And if you grasp that the only method of cooperating under sovereignty over property-in-toto is productive, fully informed, warrantied, transfer limited to productive externalities, then no ‘commands’ in ‘legislation’ exist: only contracts for exchanges. In some exchanges we are seeking merely reciprocal burden of the costs of the production of commons. In others we are seeking behavior in exchange for financing. In others we are seeking behavior in exchange for subsidy.
What Roman empire and the church provided was an insurer that monarchies(rulers) adhered to natural law – at least in commerce. In a world where monarchs could be readily replaced by advantage-seeking-peers if they broke natural law, and were given license by the church – the militias (people) would not defend their kings. This limited monarchies to an incremental evolution of christian natural law monarchies, culminating in the late medieval period as enlightened monarchs.
We blew it. We took a very long time to develop government without a state (rule of law), in sufficient scale across our civilization, that sovereignty reserved for the aristocracy, was nearly achieved at scale. By ‘jumping the gun’ with the enlightenment, and seizing power from the aristocracy and church, the anglos and french let loose the undomesticated animal man in the lower classes to undo that sovereignty that the aristocracy had spent 3500 years developing through the incremental suppression of parasitism, producing the incremental domestication, and incremental rise of animal man through slave, serf, freeman, lesser nobility, nobility, and aristocracy. Because by achieving aristocracy one has transcended parasitic man to sovereign brotherhood of non-parasitic humans.
Curt Doolittle
The Propertarian Institute
Kiev, Ukraine
Source date (UTC): 2017-02-13 08:10:00 UTC
—“Talkin’ crap with nimrods is the best part of being superior”—Nick Heywood
Source date (UTC): 2017-02-13 07:26:00 UTC
THE THREE COMMON NARRATIVES OF WESTERN CIV
(important concept)
(Note: I view #3 more broadly, as a set of waves: the invasion of the pre 1200bc civilizations from the north, the rise of those invaders, the hollowing-out of the celtic civilization making room for the german, and the german invasion from the north, hollowing out the ancient, and the Mulsim invasion from the east killing off the ancient and hollowing out the northern, and the rise of the Hanseatic (german), and the discovery of the Americas, interrupting the hanseatic, and the profits colonialism of which were used to hollow out the Hanseatic (German), and the present decline of the west because of that hollowing out, the invasion of european lands. The question is will we survive this ‘dark age’ at this scale of globalism?)
Eric Field on Metaschools
(from elsewhere)
Broadly speaking there are three metaschools of historiography for defining “Western” civilization.
1. Classical, which takes the classical Mediterranean from the Greco-Roman civilization as being the origin and nucleus of what has become Anglo-American civilization.
2. Medievalist, which views the rise of Christianity, usually the rise of the Church after the fall of Rome as the foundation of our current civilization.
3. Or the sort of Nordic model that Oswald Spengler advocated that asserts that the northern Indo-Europeans (Germanic and Celtic tribes, but later Balts and Slavs as well) came south, smashed into Rome, destroying Classical civilization, but ultimately absorbing the remnants into their own culture.
Academic elites in the West tended to use a mixture of theories 1 and 2. The United States is semi-unique amongst westerners for relying on a much bastardized version of theory two, which places Christianity as the defining role. I’m partial to the third model, but I am an ethnic German, and I think it does a great job reconciling Anglo-American frontier experience with a larger Northern European pattern of migration that goes back to at least the Völkerwanderung.
The Point I’m trying to make with this really autistic unsolicited history lecture is of the three historiographical schools of western civ, Americans (especially the rightwing) tend to be shaped by a version that considers Christianity the central defining feature of this civilization.
Source date (UTC): 2017-02-13 07:22:00 UTC
—“Marxists: it’s not the distribution of production, it’s the DISTRIBUTION of IQ”—Kashif Vikaas
Source date (UTC): 2017-02-12 20:45:00 UTC
Dmitry Chernov has got my number. Damn. lol
Source date (UTC): 2017-02-12 18:39:00 UTC
DEFINITION: CIVIL SOCIETY
1 – Government Organizations (involuntary production of formal institutions) The ‘First Sector’ of society.
2 – Business Organizations (voluntary production of production) “The Second Sector of Society’
3 – Civil Organizations (voluntary production of commons) “The Third Sector of Society”
Civil society consists of the set of non-governmental, non commercial, organizations and institutions by which citizens bring their will into fruition. It includes the family, private relations, and volunteer organizations.
The ‘tiny privileged countries” of the north sea have effectively grown their governments from their civil society orders. This differs from the larger states that formed central governments across multiple areas, families, tribes, and often subcultures.
American civil society was rich until attacked by the government.
Source date (UTC): 2017-02-12 18:32:00 UTC
***Christianity can be taught as myth, while removing the falsehoods by stating that it is myth and parable not history and truth.***
—“All science relies on metaphor. The science of wisdom is no different. Metaphor and allegory contain truths in tangible terms that can be readily understood and applied. The problems are not so much with the group (church) but with the leaders (priests) who, given sufficient authority, seek greater means of control over the group. Lies are the means of control and control is necessary for ‘steering’ in a given direction. This is only necessary because the individuals of whom the group is comprised lack self-control…and, so, back to the message….a self-referencing feed-back loop.”— Lesley Keys
Source date (UTC): 2017-02-12 17:40:00 UTC