photos_and_videos/UntitledAlbum_vAUiLKiVrQ/69080622_450197148910514_7154742218882809856_n_450197145577181.jpg
Source date (UTC): 2019-08-17 14:16:00 UTC
Source: Facebook
-
photos_and_videos/TimelinePhotos_dJ9jhts2Ng/68606698_450195932243969_10340666598
photos_and_videos/TimelinePhotos_dJ9jhts2Ng/68606698_450195932243969_1034066659876274176_o_450195928910636.jpg The Cat’s Name is FedThe Cat’s Name is Fed
Source date (UTC): 2019-08-17 14:13:00 UTC
-
THE AMERICAN POSTWAR FAILURE FINANCED BY AMERICAN DEBT |PROCESS|Traditional Law
THE AMERICAN POSTWAR FAILURE FINANCED BY AMERICAN DEBT
|PROCESS|Traditional Law (Constitutionalism) > Utility > Postwar Morality > Economics > Obama-chaos > Decline > Civil War.
We didn’t have a ‘bible’ of western civ beyond which no man may tread. That’s the beginning of the problem: tradition vs articulation of the science under our tradition.
We didn’t organize against neoliberalism. We had no scientific answer to neo-liberalism (neo-marxism). We won against marxism simply by its demonstrated failure.
We didn’t organize against immigration like we did against communism. That’s the problem first problem.
We didn’t organize to achieve against islamic fundamentalism as we organized against communism. That’s the problem.
Without immigration we would have won (a) Rule of law (b) economics, (c) social norms (d) religion and education.
The only reason we lost so far is women voting, that suppressed the ability of men to defend against women’s voting patterns.
Source date (UTC): 2019-08-17 14:10:00 UTC
-
INTERESTING OBSERVATION. Posting material from 10 years ago. Not sure it’s helpf
INTERESTING OBSERVATION.
Posting material from 10 years ago. Not sure it’s helpful. Still testing it. Reason? I’d rather keep it all FB and drive people to the Blog then the Institute.
But here is an interesting observation:
When I started writing a lot in 2009, I wrote almost entirely about economics – just as the influence economists had on policy came to an end (the failure of mainstream economics in political theory.) I thought I would build an audience doing little more than daily falsifying claims by left leaning economists.
Around that same time I was working on a draft of the constitution and hit the problem of epistemology because it wasn’t possible to write a constitution without saying what a falsehood consisted of.
I spent most of my time on that series of problems working from what we all call metaphysics today (what I call grammars) on up through the skeleton of aristotelian categories (philosophical) by merging them with scientific and legal categories.
Sorta got stuck on religion and really had the problem figured out by last summer, but has taken me the past year to test and define a solution to it, and put it into our institutions. Religion really was the hard problem of social science – and it still is the primary impediment to restoring western civilization.
After 2016 work is mostly about natural law and constitution. Stuff that burned me out was the constitution. And rewriting the first part of the book last fall. I dont’ know why I”m more productive in spring and fall. no idea.
John and I have been working the revolutionary angle since last fall (2018). My original intention (2012) was to de-christianize libertarianism (rule of law) by restoring the dirty word “force “(or violence) to the discourse on rule of law, thereby prohibiting men from claiming virtue without warranty of insuring it with risk and force. This was an attempt to overturn rothbard and hoppe’s ‘pussytarian’ libertarianism, and restore anglo saxon rule of law of sovereign men, not liberty(Permission for local jurisdiction), or freedom (Permission to enter the market for goods, services, and labor).
SUMMARY
I have seen our country go from debate over economic means of administration to the verge of another civil war in just ten years, and I know that the answer is the acceleration under the Obama administration, and the general left’s presumption it would win due to third world immigration legal and illegal, despite the failure of its ideas.
Source date (UTC): 2019-08-17 14:04:00 UTC
-
OMG do you know how cheap it is to use FB to advertise a post from the institute
OMG do you know how cheap it is to use FB to advertise a post from the institute to the english speaking countries? It’s like $60 every ten days? Hmmm…..
Source date (UTC): 2019-08-17 13:38:00 UTC
-
“The rhetorical mirror of argumentative playback. How do you know what someone b
—“The rhetorical mirror of argumentative playback. How do you know what someone believes if they fail to apply their espoused ideals to themselves once they hold the Power?”—by Skye StewartUpdated Aug 17, 2019, 1:10 PM
Source date (UTC): 2019-08-17 13:10:00 UTC
-
THE FEMINIST LEFT’S IR-RECIPROCITY (from Twitter)(via Noah) —-“This is why we
THE FEMINIST LEFT’S IR-RECIPROCITY
(from Twitter)(via Noah)
—-“This is why we need to stop worrying about how to appeal to white men in the US. The majority of them have lost their minds. The only way to help them is to move on and run the government without them. Those smart enough & not batshit crazy, are welcome to join.”— @riotwomennn
So the reciprocal argument from what men would be that “everyone other than white men lack mental agency and moral intuition. The only way to help everyone other than white men, and to protect white men, is to move on and run the government without them. Those smart enough and not batshit crazy are welcome to join.”
So how come if you say you want to exclude white men and their strategy of reciprocity, it’s ok – but when they want to exclude you and continue the achievements of western civilization, you call it ‘hate speech’, and ‘white supremacy’?
Why? Because you don’t ‘do’ reciprocity.
You do parasitism and kleptocracy.
The first step in cooperation is intellectual honesty.
Source date (UTC): 2019-08-17 10:28:00 UTC
-
YES WE NEED ORDER RATHER THAN CHAOS (from Gab) —“Jefferson? We don’t need free
YES WE NEED ORDER RATHER THAN CHAOS
(from Gab)
—“Jefferson? We don’t need freedom, we need order”–
@alternative_right
Yes, but what order?
1. Order of Truth, Science, Law and productive cooperation? (Rule of Law – Competition between men under the law of reciprocity.)
2. Or order of Lies, Supernaturalism, Scripture and Parasitism – Rule by men? (Rule by Church Men – Priests)
3. Or order of Fraud, Pseudoscience, Sophism and Parasitism – rule by men? (Rule by Dishonest Men – “You Know Who”)
4. Or order of Force, Command, Whim, and Parasitism – rule by man? (Rule by Forceful Men – Military )
Let me explain Jefferson’s context.
1. The Aristocratic order (taxation force),
2. The Priestly Order(lies, obedience and Tithes) and
3. The Commercial order (truth, tort, and trade).
His understanding was natural law
Natural law by rule of law.
Rule of law producing a commercial order.
A commercial order is a voluntary order.
An order of meritocracy.
Meritocracy meaning Natural Aristocracy.
We haven’t replaced it with socializing.
We’ve replaced it with DISORDER.
We can have our order but we cannot have it by the simple means you intuit. Rules must exist, and rules free of human ‘discretion’ because in the end all human discretion ‘swims left’.
Jefferson was (correctly) trying to create a THIRD WAY, free of the parasitism of the state and church – who were both tremendous parasites that kept our people in ignorance and poverty.
The Enemy can bed defeated by law and prosecution without planting the seeds of another enemy.
The natural law is the best civic religion ever invented by man.
The natural law, the stoic method, and the Epicurean goals are the optimum personal religion.
The Five Rules of Christianity, if limited to Kin, are the optimum method of producing harmony.
The only cost one bears under the natural law is christian forgiveness.
And Aryan Intolerance.
Every Man a Sheriff.
Source date (UTC): 2019-08-17 10:08:00 UTC
-
TRUMP AND CHINA by Mike Streit If he only knew how easily he could crash chinas
TRUMP AND CHINA
by Mike Streit
If he only knew how easily he could crash chinas economy. He could threaten to do exactly that and they’d concede to whatever he asked for.
China has a massive demographics issue. The one child policy is great for population control but terrible decades later when you need a labor force big enough to keep your production costs below every other nations. Mexico has the labor force we need and they are conveniently located to our south. Lower production costs and lower transportation costs. But mike, Mexico doesn’t have the infrastructure, we are currently fixing that and pumping millions of cubic feet of natural gas to them daily. We are fixing their power problem thanks to our shale boom.
Next up, China is the most over credited nation in the history of nations or credit. Every time they tighten the money supply to start fixing their problem, those they’ve employed thru false methods are liable to be left with the free time to remove those in power. Imagine if we just went out into Wyoming and built entire cities that could hold thousands of people and then left them empty. China has done just that. At one point, you could claim an idea for an invention, insure it and days later file an insurance claim against the invention saying it had failed. With no proof of anything ever existing. China has an Oprah problem with handing out jobs and cash for those jobs that it doesn’t have. How bad is it? An Obama stimulus package every 17-21 days bad.
China has capital flight to the USA in the trillions. So many suspect it’s to buy up power over us. They know their economy is going to fail, it’s not if, it’s when. Getting back 10-50% of their money is still better than zero.
Xi is playing hard ball to look tough. He’s also consolidating power as fast as he can.
Can China make it a little rough on us for a little while? Absolutely. Long term, we can put the screws to them as hard as we want and there’s nothing they can do. 23% of their GDP is trade. Around 10% of ours is, of that 10%, half is with Canada and Mexico.
We are also the only country with a navy capable of protecting or shutting down trade routes. We have 11 super carriers (the rest of the world has zero. The UK will have 2 by 2024 and they are being folded into our system). We have 11 of the 21 jump carriers, it takes 7 of those to equal 1 super carrier.
Trump could easily explain all of these facts to China, tell them they can either agree to whatever we lay forth from now on without further international grand standing or that we will simply pull out the rug. What does that entail? It could actually be any number of things or multiples in concert. We could walk away from protecting oil shipments in the Middle East (China cannot go get their own oil, only japan has a deep water navy), we could ratchet up tariffs to a level that they couldn’t withstand (even with retaliatory tariffs its minimal damage here for maximum effect there), we could also stop all trade coming into or out of China from any nation (including China) that uses our currency as the middle man of exchange (Obama started this, trump turned it up to 11 and has it at his disposal whenever for whatever), we could block all shipments going into or out of China (this would be the most direct action and likely be considered an act of war by the entire international community, but nobody could actually stop us), it would be political suicide on trumps part but he could push us into a civil war or crash our economy (this is going to happen no matter what within the next few years anyway). I’m sure there’s others I’m forgetting, if you know any I missed please chime in.
China’s economy is a house of cards, the slightest wind and it’ll all come crashing down.Updated Aug 16, 2019, 9:39 PM
Source date (UTC): 2019-08-16 21:39:00 UTC
-
AN HISTORIC GAMBLE BY DONALD TRUMP. By Pat Buchannan “Trump seeks to throw out a
AN HISTORIC GAMBLE BY DONALD TRUMP.
By Pat Buchannan
“Trump seeks to throw out a free trade policy that, rooted in 19th-century ideology rather than U.S. national interests, threw open U.S. markets to the world and produced, over three decades, $12 trillion in trade deficits and a loss of 70,000 factories and 5 million manufacturing jobs.
Like the Russian army carting off German factories after World War II, the Great Arsenal of Democracy was looted by its postwar allies and adversaries alike.
The weapon Trump is using to stop this looting is tariffs, a price of admission into the U.S. market to replace the free passes foreign nations and transnational companies have had to produce abroad and sell into the USA.
Trump is using tariffs to coerce China to stop cheating on the trade rules we have established and to grant us the same access to her markets as producers in China have to the American market.
And he is betting his presidency he can pull it off.”
Source date (UTC): 2019-08-16 14:43:00 UTC