—“Aristocracy creates sovereignty*: the prevention of monopoly by the enforcement of markets.”— James Augustus Berens
Source date (UTC): 2016-11-18 13:44:00 UTC
—“Aristocracy creates sovereignty*: the prevention of monopoly by the enforcement of markets.”— James Augustus Berens
Source date (UTC): 2016-11-18 13:44:00 UTC
Curt Doolittle shared a post.
Source date (UTC): 2016-11-18 12:52:00 UTC
THE BOURGEOISE SOCIETY HAS BEEN A CATASTROPHE.
There is a vast difference between the scientific enlightenment which was a tremendous success, and the classical liberal seizure of political power through the various revolutions against the aristocracy and the monarchies.
Yes we can blame the aristocracy from failing to evolve the organization of the state and incorporate the bourgeoisie. And yes we can blame the bourgeoisie for failing by incorporating the proletariat and women into the house of commons.
But in the present, of the Marxist proletariat(worldwide), the classical liberal bourgeoisie, the ‘liberal’ priesthood (20th century), and the martial aristocracy(antiquity to 1800), all have failed except the martial aristocracy. And more frighteningly, they have failed quickly, and in succession.
The aristocracy created markets in every aspect of life: freedom, marriage, commerce, commons, dispute resolution, and rule. But failed to abandon their rents and accommodate the finance and merchant class when commerce rather than agrarian territory evolved to the central source of production.
The classical liberal bourgeoisie tried to make the market everything, at the expense of the tribe. They tried to create a monopoly of the entrepreneurial classes. And they failed. They destroyed the family and community as a unit of production. They brought people to capital rather than capital to people. Even if the primary beneficiaries of their financial order were the common people’
The Marxists proletarians resisted the bourgeoise’s impact on home and family – and committed the greatest crimes in human history by trying to take over rule from the bourgeoisie. They tried to create a monopoly of the laboring classes. And they failed. They destroyed entire nations, tribes, families, economies and traditions. Worst of all they destroyed all trust.
The secular priesthood we call ‘liberals’ or ‘the cathedral’ tried to take over from the Marxists, in pursuit of a global secular religion consisting of utopian promises, pseudoscience, and faith in the persistent expansion of technology – and destroyed the entirety of western civilization in less than a century.
They tried to create a monopoly of the secular priestly caste. And they failed. They failed because they treated as equal in potential and demand people who are not. As the classical liberals destroyed the family as a unit of production, the liberals destroyed the nation as a unit of production.
But only the martial aristocracy forced the creation of markets in everything by the total prohibition of monopoly – even a monopoly of rule – by resisting all unification and federalization until Napoleon used fiat credit to create ‘total war’ and forced them to relent out of defense.
Only the monarchy created markets for the voluntary production, distribution, and exchange of goods, services, information, and commons, between the classes.
And only the aristocracy understood that each class’ attempt to create monopolies would lead to a breakdown of the cooperation between the ‘estates of the realm’ – what we call today ‘the social classes’.
Aristocracy creates a monopoly: the prevention of monopoly by the enforcement of markets.
Source date (UTC): 2016-11-18 12:52:00 UTC
If you go to a restaurant or club, or a shopping center in ukraine, or even a hotel lobby, their equivalent of ‘elevator music’ is a set of televisions, half of which are tuned to a series of fashion shows and the other half to soccer games. And that’s about all you see. this has a little bit to do with the difference in music: western music is theatrical (you’re sort of in church) and it’s supposed to entertain, whereas in that part of the world, it’s background for you and your friends to talk, drink, and kill an entire evening enjoying each other.
Now you can make a youtube channel equivalent by just searching for and playing a stream of fashon shows. I did it by accident today since auto-play just keeps a stream going. But it reminds me of yet another of the vast differences I notice:
Russians and Ukrainians live in a civil society. Americans live in school, academy, and consumer-church. We are over-told, over-sold, over-indoctrinated, over-fed, over-worked, over-isolated, and we’re fat, confused, and too many americans are lonely because of it.
If I could go back in time and Kill Keynes it would be almost as valuable as going back and killing zoroaster.
Source date (UTC): 2016-11-18 12:19:00 UTC
NEWBIES: GET IT YET? WE ARE CHANGING THE QUALITY OF POLITICAL DISCOURSE – FOREVER.
Every person, with every minor improvement in making his propertarian arguments, is helping to raise the bar of political argument, and to overthrow millennia of nonsense, falsehood, pseudoscience, and lies.
The purpose of the Propertarian project was to give us a ratio-scientific language for the discussion, comparison, and debate of ethical, moral, political, and group evolutionary strategies.
My goal was to collect 5-10 that could do it well, and 100 that could do it at all.
That, and a Book, a “canon”, is all it will take for us to change the world as much as empiricism changed the world.
And with that argumentative weaponry, and a set of demands, we will force a revolution on this world equal to the greek and the anglo – even if we must do so at the end of a gun, the tip of a spear, the heat of flame,
We are doing something very important.
We have the next best chance to complete the Germanic Project, and restore our civilization to its original path: transcendence into the gods we seek, through the continuous improvement of man.
Curt Doolittle
The Propertarian Institute
Kiev, Ukraine.
Source date (UTC): 2016-11-18 10:50:00 UTC
CAN WE COMPLETE THE GERMANIC PROJECT? FINALLY?
—“We will complete the system of German Idealism.”—Z.A. Corbett
i used to be against it, but now i see that we need both law, literature, and poetry. and that my work merely is the science underneath the literature and poetry. And that we require the entire corpus of science, law, literature, and aesthetics in order to provide each ‘method of sense’, from the intellectual to the political to the religio-spiritual a consistent message.
This is what I learned from the study of religion. Successful religions do all. The issue is conflation. We cannot break the western tradition of conflation. So instead of one narrative mythos, we must have layers, from the scientific to the purely aesthetic. This is how we preserve western uniqueness but obtain the virtue of religions.
So, the germans failed to resist christianity, they failed in the reformation to overthrow it, they failed in the enlightenment. they failed in the romantic period, they failed with national socialism.
So hopefull this time we all will reunite germanic (eruopean) civilization. not by ONE Method. But by the POLYTHEISTIC method, of LAYERS of different forms of argument, rather than attempting anglo analytic alone, german rational alone, italian poetic alone, and russian literary alone.
WE CAN FINALLY DO IT (I THINK).
Source date (UTC): 2016-11-18 10:38:00 UTC
WE ARE MEN. WE LIMIT. WE RULE. WE MUST ACT LIKE IT.
RULE OR BE RULED.
Source date (UTC): 2016-11-18 10:04:00 UTC
We are supposed to love women and care for them. We are not supposed to debate with them over true or false. Only whether a want is possible for the two of us, or impossible for the two of us. Our education, commerce, and politics places too much emphasis on true or false or good or bad, and too little upon possible and impossible. Women are precious creatures if they are honest. There is no reason we must worry about good and true. Only possible and harmful. It does not matter if what they want is good or true, only whether it is possible and not harmful. We are happy to ask women not to ask us to think as women. But we too infrequently fail to reciprocate by not asking women to think as men. Women nest at home, seek signal status with their peers, and try to overload their children, and none of these three impulses have any limit other than her exhaustion. An exhaustion which she will transfer to you. So do not ask woment to be men and think of limits and efficiency. Just love them, and do what is possible. The suffering occurs when we engage in transfers and not exchanges. and the enemy of exchanges is lethargy caused by lack of fitness, and lack of will.
Source date (UTC): 2016-11-18 09:46:00 UTC
impossibility is not a problem for libertarians. it’s all a fantasy of wishful thinking – a prayer that a margin will someday be a norm.
Source date (UTC): 2016-11-18 09:30:00 UTC
Contradiction is not a problem for women or liberals.
Because correspondence with reality is not necessary for women or liberals.
Because truth is not necessary for women or liberals.
Because the purpose of liberal verbalism is to lie, cheat, and steal.
Because they are seeking to avoid trades, and impose rents.
The Left is a Kleptocracy, and the Right a Meritocracy.
There is nothing more to be said.
Liberals and Women just ‘want’.
We’re the ones who limit their wants to what is not harmful.
Otherwise there is no end to their wants.
Source date (UTC): 2016-11-18 09:28:00 UTC