Source: Facebook

  • PROFOUND. ANGLO=GERMAN < 1840. ANGLO != GERMAN > 1880 1) Jefferson was the first

    PROFOUND.

    ANGLO=GERMAN < 1840. ANGLO != GERMAN > 1880

    1) Jefferson was the first CONSTITUTIONALIST (USING: LAW/FORCE) An Aristocrat. (Protestant)

    2) Burke was the first CONSERVATIVE (USING: MORALITY/GOSSIP) The Upper Middle Class (Tilting Catholic)

    3) Disraeli was the first NEOCON (USING: COMMERCE/REMUNERATION) The Middle Class (Tilting Jew)

    This in itself is a profound statement about the devolution of western civilization.


    Source date (UTC): 2016-05-12 06:45:00 UTC

  • (I wonder how many people actually have the faintest idea what I’m talking about

    (I wonder how many people actually have the faintest idea what I’m talking about. lol )


    Source date (UTC): 2016-05-12 06:34:00 UTC

  • “The notion that Menger wrote as Middle-Class German Jew is easily dispelled if

    —“The notion that Menger wrote as Middle-Class German Jew is easily dispelled if you realize that Middle-Class German Jews do not usually tutor Austrian Crown princes, as Menger did with Rudolf.”— Johannes

    Well, I wasn’t making that statement.

    The point that I was making was that it’s ‘borderland’ thinking. And that the jews were central in the development of eastern ‘borderland thinking’ and that libertarianism and Jewish “Austrianism” arises out of eastern ‘borderland thinking’ for the same reason that “americanism” rises out of western ‘borderland thinking’.

    Borderlands have the privilege of a protectorate without the obligations and institutions of a state.

    We cannot confuse circumstantial privilege with intentional result.


    Source date (UTC): 2016-05-12 05:27:00 UTC

  • There is a group of seven taxi drivers that all but control the parking hotspot

    There is a group of seven taxi drivers that all but control the parking hotspot here in Lviv. They all have good cars. All are over 50, and are always a joy. I call them the taxi mafia. Which they absolutely love.


    Source date (UTC): 2016-05-12 05:14:00 UTC

  • Recipes are true. (operations). But is meaning ever true? Is meaning but a name

    Recipes are true. (operations). But is meaning ever true? Is meaning but a name for a recipe?


    Source date (UTC): 2016-05-12 04:56:00 UTC

  • THE UNDERSTANDABLE ORIGINS OF JUSTIFICATIONISM We evolved justificationary argum

    THE UNDERSTANDABLE ORIGINS OF JUSTIFICATIONISM

    We evolved justificationary argument for a set of understandable reasons:

    0) Our memories evolved to repeat what succeeded in the past.

    1) We learned to observe one another, then teach one another by imitation.

    2) It’s far less expensive to describe a route from problem to solution, rather than compare all alternative routes.

    3) Moral and legal rules are contractual, and as such at least lightly axiomatic, and therefore justificationary: “i did this because I though it ok to do this in our group”.

    4) Mathematics evolved prior to science, and as the most simple form of logic, it is the logical discipline in which the method of exploration and the method of proof (justification) are operationally nearly identical. Mathematics appeared to be justificationary because of this limited difference between exploration and proof.

    So between the evolutionary results of memory, learning through imitation, the economic demands of thought, moral justification, and mathematica justification, we continued the trend attempting to make truth justificationary.

    But truth is not constrained by our costs of finding it, the limits of our memories, the difficulty in transmitting it, and our moral appreciation for it.

    Truth is what it is precisely because it is not bounded by human limits.

    Truth is that description which both provides us with a recipe that consistently produces an existential result within a set of limits, and survives all attempts at falsification within those limits.

    Limits are significant, since professing the existential possibility of a perfect, complete, most parsimonious truth is in itself a logical impossibility. Parsimony depends upon the limits of the mind.

    So more parsimonious truths may be possible on any subject, but there are not more parsimonious truths within the limit of the claims we make.

    Limits are how we remove platonism – mysticism – from the art of truth telling. This remains a fallacy within critical rationalism that operationalism – the test of existential possibility – assists us in correcting.

    This process Re-Aryanizes “Truth” into testimony. And all the rest that we do not know is merely unknown information yet to be discovered or invented.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine


    Source date (UTC): 2016-05-12 04:47:00 UTC

  • Keeping others out and down (Jewish/Persian elitism) -vs- bringing others up and

    Keeping others out and down (Jewish/Persian elitism) -vs- bringing others up and in (Aryan Elitism) #NewRight ie: Western Aristocratic Egaliarianism


    Source date (UTC): 2016-05-12 04:03:00 UTC

  • Restoring #Libertarian -ism to aristocracy did teach me how the colorful comfort

    Restoring #Libertarian -ism to aristocracy did teach me how the colorful comforting cosmopolitan lies were constructed: suggestion.#NewRight


    Source date (UTC): 2016-05-11 10:28:00 UTC

  • That’s why I had to restore #libertarian -ism to aristocracy by demonstrating Ro

    That’s why I had to restore #libertarian -ism to aristocracy by demonstrating Rothbardian libertinism is colorful comforting lies.#NewRirght


    Source date (UTC): 2016-05-11 10:25:00 UTC

  • MENGER, AUSTRIANS, AND GHETTO ETHICS —“Hey Curt, would you say that Carl Menge

    MENGER, AUSTRIANS, AND GHETTO ETHICS

    —“Hey Curt, would you say that Carl Menger displayed a certain amount of “ghetto” ethics/philosophy in his writings? The young German historical school (Schmoller etc.) criticized him for being over-individualistic and having no sense for concepts like “Volk” or nation. And he did come from the fringes of the empire (Galicia, just like Mises). Some researchers even speculate about Menger’s family background being Jewish. I would love to hear your opinion about this.”—

    Comparative analysis puts this in perspective.

    What do Iceland, Colonial America, the Wild West Expansion, Poland, and Ukraine have in common?

    What they have in common is being borderlands that are defended by great powers, yet little administrative and cultural dominance over them.

    What did the Ancient Greeks/Romans, North Africans (before they were destroyed by islam) have in common?

    Greek individualism was a means of resisting the great power of the day – the Persians. Without the Persians there would have been no greek reaction to them. This is the same struggle we face today. We have Jews here at home and in the west, and Persians in the middle east. Both of whom are more aggressive than we are today.

    What was occurring at the point in time that Marx, Freud, Menger and Mises were writing? Effectively the eastern ‘borderlands’ were going through the cosmopolitan enlightenment.

    Hayek writes as an aristocratic Austrian – from the point of just rule. Menger and mises write as middle class eastern european polish/german jews. Marx, Freud, and Boaz write as separatist subculture jews.

    WHY? Because the parasite cannot imagine that he is dependent upon the host, the subculture upon the majority culture, the lower class upon the upper class, the ghetto upon the host people, the borderland upon the nation, the non-core state upon the core state of the civilization, any more than mankind can imagine he is dependent upon gravity for his survival.

    These peoples have no sense of folk because their myths, religion, traditions, history, manners, ethics, morals – in fact their entire metaphysical foundation, has never ‘held land’. And that is what ‘folk’ means: “the people with whom we hold this land, and without which we cannot hold it.” This is the aristocratic ethic: we parent a people such that together we may hold land, create production, create generations, and in doing so produce monuments to our success.

    The Jews have no monuments, no land, and no landholder ethics. And just as we cannot think as do asians, jews cannot think as do westerners. in no small part because we have evolved very differently and our ‘software’ (cultures) program us to persist that evolutionary strategy.

    While indo europeans share the same root language and much of the same genetic record, we evolved over the past 5000 years (at least) very differently. The Persian/Jewish, the caucasian indian, the ‘border tribes to the north of india’, the european(atlantic, southern, northern, german, slavic) peoples evolved very differently and demonstrate different distributions of talents.

    The ashkenazim have been both the most aggressive in capturing european genes and thereby increasing their intelligence, and at the same time outcasting non-performers, increasing rates of reproduction of high performers. But this is ALSO a product of time and place. Different traits are more valuable in different competitive conditions. And we are entering a new era.

    And I want to create a new era in which truth makes impossible the means by which financial predation and cultural parasitism are impossible without severe retribution.


    Source date (UTC): 2016-05-11 10:01:00 UTC