I always though r/k selection hypotheses were a crock of rubbish and basing anything on the false scale is bound to be flawed, yet highly appealing to liars. As the geneticist of 20 years says 20 mins in, ‘r vs k …this is pseudoscience’ (watch 1 min to 14 mins):
Source date (UTC): 2016-01-21 10:46:00 UTC
Women mate with what they understand. What they think they can ‘get’, by grabbing the genes of the alphas, or what they think they can ‘control’ by holding a beta.
What they understand has little relevance to whether it’s good or bad.
Then they spend their lives raising a universal dependency that damages the gene pool….
Women need education. We men have been told forever about women. Women seem to have forgotten about men. Mothers don’t teach daughters. They teach them to follow their hearts. And taht just means doing what you know. What if you dn’t know what good is?
This is why I understand the problem of family and marriage. There is a tragic competition between the two unless we dramatically suppress reproduction at the bottom.
Source date (UTC): 2016-01-21 09:49:00 UTC
I dunno. Josh and the Nietzscheans kicked my around a bit and I’ve been working on it, and I can probably get there. Natural Law, the right to demand it, to enforce it, and to make beauty to celebrate one’s victory is enough. I begin to see a sort of way to get there….
Source date (UTC): 2016-01-21 09:46:00 UTC
ITS TIME TO DO SOMETHING NOBLE…
I think many of us were attracted to libertarianism under the assumption that we could do something noble with what we found there.
But we were wrong.
We can do something noble however.
But we must do it at the Point of a Knife, The End of a Spear, The Barrel of a Gun, and under the Gavel of the Natural Law.
We gave the world a chance to join the aristocracy. And they failed.
The experiment is over. Time to rule again.
Pick up your spear, knife, rifle and gavel.
It’s Time for us to make Law.
Source date (UTC): 2016-01-21 09:41:00 UTC
—” Ideology is easily digestible by those eager to be fed.”— Howard Roark
Source date (UTC): 2016-01-21 09:38:00 UTC
We could just get all crass and call left libertarians ‘Manginas’. But “Cucks” seems to be good enough for the beer and fries crowd. 🙂
Source date (UTC): 2016-01-21 07:33:00 UTC
So freaking obvious. I’m stupid. The cheapest thing a woman can do here is eat carefully and stay fit by walking. I mean, a woman in shape can wear a pair of jeans, a turtleneck, and cheap bangles, makeup and she looks amazing.
Same for men you know. It’s hard to look bad in jeans and a sport shirt when you have low body fat and extra upper body strength.
Source date (UTC): 2016-01-21 06:59:00 UTC
MARKET FAILURE? GOVERNMENT FAILURE? NOPE. OUR FAILURE.
We can fail to construct a market. But the market for goods and services can’t fail – that’s logically impossible.
If the market for goods and services cannot provide a desired commons, then that’s the providence of the market for commons (‘government’).
We can fail to construct a market for commons (‘government’). But the market for commons cannot fail – that’s logically impossible.
If the market for commons cannot provide a desired employment or consumption, then that’s the providence of the market for reproduction.
We can fail to construct a market for reproduction, but the market for reproduction cannot fail – that’s logically impossible.
Markets don’t fail. Families fail to produce offspring capable of providing goods, services, and commons, or producing too many offspring for the market for goods, services, and commons to serve.
The family is the source of all that follows: reproduction, production, and commons.
The family requires individuals who limit their reproduction to that which they can provide for. That is the source of our failure to produce markets for goods and services, and markets for commons (“governments”) to provide goods, services, and commons for all.
We have failed to maintain a market for commons by destroying the houses of the monarchy(military), aristocracy(land), Commons(industry), and Church(dependents) – which functioned as a market for commons between the classes.
We have failed to produce a market for reproduction, by reversing the demand for self provision of one’s offspring, and causing the failure of our markets both private and common.
We have failed moreso by reversing 1000 years of genetic pacification and, importing the offspring of those not genetically pacified.
Source date (UTC): 2016-01-21 06:41:00 UTC
LIBERTARIAN SPECTRUM
LEFT
Libertines: free riders on the normative commons. Whining about liberty because they don’t want to pay for it, or even respect the investments of others. They want evasion, not liberty. “NAP’ers That Don’t Care.”
CENTER
Bourgeois Libertarians: Free riders on the defensive commons. Whine about not having liberty because they don’t want to pay for it. They want permission, not liberty. “NAP’ers + Excuse Making”
RIGHT
Aristocratic Libertarians (conservative libertarians): Pay the cost of liberty and possess liberty, by suppressing parasitism. They want liberty and are willing to act to possess it. “NonAggression against demonstrated property: that which causes retaliation and inhibits cooperation”.
Source date (UTC): 2016-01-21 04:48:00 UTC
(from elsewhere)
1) The argument I have put forward is genetic pacification. Meaning that the purpose is not to change behavior but to forcibly remove people from the commons, the social order, and the gene pool, and continue the ongoing incremental suppression of aggression, and long term pacification of aggression in the world.
2) As far as I know the death penalty has little impact on certain demographics, possibly because it is statistically improbable that one will suffer it. However, through about 1900 we hung about .5-1% of people a year and the argument is that this was responsible for the genetic advantage of northern europeans everywhere they went in the world – the people who were otherwise were culled.
3) The evidence from the field, from sheriffs, from police, from prosecutors, is that the three strikes policy has been disproportionately effective. It has for example caused vast migrations between states of the organized petty crime conducted by the methamphetamine trade. And in the northwest its a common complaint that lower tolerance drives Idaho criminals into eastern Washington for example.
4) Conformity in this case is Non Aggression against Property En Toto. It is somewhat hard to argue that non-aggression is something we avoid conforming to. (If you have some other logic at hand I would love to understand it.)
One cannot create an intertemporal disincentive for the inter-temporally challenged and cognitively impaired. We can however, cull them if they engage in aggression, and if not we can pay them to behave.
Source date (UTC): 2016-01-21 04:48:00 UTC