HOW DO WE ELIMINATE POLITICS (CORRUPTION) FROM GOVERNMENT?
It’s not terribly difficult really.
You start with the question, in an age of communication at the speed of light, why do we need politicians?
Then you ask, why do we need majority rule?
Source date (UTC): 2015-06-26 07:53:00 UTC
GENETICS
HBDChick’s Thesis on Groupishness.
Jayman’s “Tribalism” and his attack on pseudoscience.
Todd’s Invention of Europe
GROUP STRATEGY
Kevin MacDonald’s CoC.
My competing versions of truth
CULTURE AND INSTITUTIONS
You can get more out of Ricardo Duchesne’s Uniqueness of Western civ.
But I think truth is the answer.
So I am sort of working myself into this narrative. And that’s both informative and bad (becuase it’s tainted).
Source date (UTC): 2015-06-26 07:18:00 UTC
PhD in PROPAGANDA?
(humor)(worth repeating) (from elsewhere)
—“Dude. Give up. I was writing political propaganda before you got out of diapers…..wait….. Are you out of diapers?”—
Source date (UTC): 2015-06-26 04:54:00 UTC
BLOOD FOR THE TREE OF LIBERTY
If you don’t feed the tree of liberty frequently, then you must infrequently feed it a lot.
Thus endeth the lesson.
(Aristocratic Egalitarianism.)
Source date (UTC): 2015-06-26 03:25:00 UTC
http://www.moreright.net/the-long-run-economic-performance-of-china-from-1000-bc-to-1800-ad/Pretty good analysis of Chinese economic history.
Our world history keeps improving.
Source date (UTC): 2015-06-25 18:12:00 UTC
http://www.xenosystems.net/crime-think/Dysgenic reduction of IQ increases criminality
Source date (UTC): 2015-06-25 17:57:00 UTC
https://jaymans.wordpress.com/2015/06/24/200-blog-posts/Jayman summarises HBD: we are just like dog breeds.
Source date (UTC): 2015-06-25 17:55:00 UTC
http://www.counter-currents.com/2015/06/interview-with-curt-doolittle/
Source date (UTC): 2015-06-25 15:59:00 UTC
ANARCHIC WELL INTENTIONED FOOLS
(worth repeating) (from elsewhere)
It is a typical tactic of the marxists, and the rothbardians adopted marxist methods of critique, to throw criticism of one’s opponents as a means of distraction from the failure or incompetence or lack of one’s ideas.
A great example of this technique is Lew Rockwell’s most recent book, which purports to offer solutions, but like most anarchic drivel, consists of nothing more than repeating rants against the state, leaving you waiting for the punch line (solution) that never comes.
That’s because there isn’t one.
The only way to eliminate the state (monopoly bureaucracy) is to eliminate demand for the state. And that is non-trivial. It is possible. But it’s non trivial/. And rothbardian low trust ghetto ethics (“aggression against intersubjectively verifiable property”) would increase demand for the state. How do we know? Because low trust ethics are practiced all over the world, and the lower the trust the higher the demand for authoritarian state. (See Russia and every single Arab country.)
Rothbard is like Marx, Freud, and Cantor and unfortunately Mises: well-intentioned fool using extraordinary verbal productivity and ability to create pseudoscience as means of justifying priors.
(giving them benefit of the doubt)
Source date (UTC): 2015-06-25 15:46:00 UTC
ART IS VERY CRITICIZABLE, AND LIKE MORALITY IT”S OBJECTIVELY BETTER OR WORSE
(worth repeating)
As for art theory it’s pretty simple stuff. You can read every significant tome on it in a month. I am honestly not sure that Rand’s book isn’t one of the best really, in retrospect.
– Craftsmanship (skill in use of materials)
– Design (aesthetics – skill in associative pre-cognitive patterns)
– Content (meaning – skill in associative cognitive patterns)
All art can be criticized on these three criteria. And in simplest terms, in all three dimensions:
– Novel is better (innovation)
– Parsimony is better (clarity)
– More information is better (richness or density)
– Monumental (level of public/social/political value)
– Durable (the persistence of the work as a reference is better)
– Uniqueness (the symbol that captures an excellence of a time and place)
We tend to see these criteria as as ‘excellence’.
Using these criteria, all:
– Craft
– Design
– Art
Can be compared and contrasted if not quantitatively(cardinally) at least qualitatively(ordinary).
You would think not, but opinion in art coalesces just as do theories in science. While one might have one taste or another, it is very hard to study the whole of art history and not come to about the same conclusion as have all the others: These are clearly better and these are clearly not as good. But I PREFER these over the objectively better ones as they suit my taste.
I hope this helps.
If you try it, sort of by stack ranking any set of art pieces by the criteria above it will rapidly become clear to you that art criticism and scientific criticism are extremely similar endeavors.
This fucks with the mind of sentimental people who desperately want an internal intuitionistic truth to appeal to – but it’s sad for them. I’m sorry.
Art is just as open to criticism as any other work of man. There is just a lot of marginal indifference withing each strata of work.
It’s very obvious after a while that the communists and socialists and feminists and postmodernists attacked art just as they attacked truth.
‘Cause they desperately wanna lie.
Source date (UTC): 2015-06-25 13:35:00 UTC