Mar 11, 2020, 3:09 PM by Luke Weinhagen This is the approach to take moving forward. We are in open debate here, all the time, on every issue we can think of. All are welcome to join. We do not need to pursue “debate” with anyone. We are engaged very intentionally in perpetual “Public Disputation”. Our pamphlets are freely available and our polemic on any topic is available for all to see. At this point we are better served by extending invites than we are by starting fights.
Source: Original Site Post
-
China Crosses from Trade War to Act of War
Mar 11, 2020, 5:04 PM
—“This seems an epic miscalculation on the part of China. How do you read this? Simple desperation?”—Daniel Roland Anderson
I don’t really undrestand why they would say these things but yes, it’s desperate, yes it’s true, and yes it’s crossing the line into an act of war. And yes, if it crosses the line into an act of war any such products must be domestically produced so that they cannot be used as acts of wear. We will need to demand immediate repatriation of all medical supplies worldwide. Edit
-
China Crosses from Trade War to Act of War
Mar 11, 2020, 5:04 PM
—“This seems an epic miscalculation on the part of China. How do you read this? Simple desperation?”—Daniel Roland Anderson
I don’t really undrestand why they would say these things but yes, it’s desperate, yes it’s true, and yes it’s crossing the line into an act of war. And yes, if it crosses the line into an act of war any such products must be domestically produced so that they cannot be used as acts of wear. We will need to demand immediate repatriation of all medical supplies worldwide. Edit
-
The Need for Three Grammars: Empathic, Rational, Scientific, United by Truth and Reciprocity
Mar 12, 2020, 12:35 PM THE NEED FOR THREE GRAMMARS: EMPATHIC, RATIONAL, SCIENTIFIC, UNITED BY TRUTH AND RECIPROCITY ( Rik Storey Yes, I understand the Distributist. I understand you.) I understand the search for supernatural theology in theological terms (submission). I understand the search for secular theology in philosophical (cooperation, exchange). I just also understand the search for transcendence in fact by scientific, technological, institutional, and informational means (dominance). I understand the desire for the feminine, for the libertarian, and for the masculine. And I understand that the behaviors of these three emotional(feminine), rational(compromise), and scientific(masculine) methods are reflections of our degrees of agency over emotion, reason, and action, of ourselves, those near us, and the polity. And I have, I think, understood that these three paradigms, vocabulary, logics (Grammars) reflect our interest, willingness and ability to take on increasing scope of material responsibility, and conversely, the reflection of our preference for, willingness, and ability to go along with the herd in peaceful (non-conflict, non adversarial, agreable ) to unpeaceful(conflict, adversarial, disagreeable) means. And I understand how this spectrum of feminine to masculine strategies is merely a reflection of differences in sexual dimorphism, brain structure, body chemistry, class, indoctrination, training, and skill. And I understand that all three are necessary to prevent the horrors of ignorance and dysgenics and decline under abrahamic or any other monopoly. And I understand the externalities of the feminine(submission, empathic), compromise(exchange,rational), and masculine(dominance, scientific). And I understand the market for elites in all three of these, and the change in the power of elites given changes in demographic composition, economic composition, and strategic and military composition. And I understand that preserving the market for elites and their grammars (paradigms, vocabularies, logics), provides both the most aggressive (male), most adaptive(compromise), and the most regressive (female), and that these three markets keep one another in check. And I understand that via positiva feminine (organize on the positive by emotional myth), via practica in the ascendent male (organize on compromise, cooperation, production by contract), and the via negativa masculine (organize limits by law and war) are not in disharmony or conflict as long as they are relegated (LIMITED) to their domains of CAPABILITY, share the natural law. And that indoctrination (emotional children), training (rational young), and education (scientific adults), just like the ethics of rules, of values, and of outcomes, and the family, society, and polity, all consist of rules of scale. And that all of us are evolved to divide the labor of generating demand for some portion of the temporal and scale spectrums between mothers and children in consumption, brothers in trade, and headmen polity and limits. And that the reason we have developed different grammars is to provide each of us with the most precise tools of calculating thought word and deed, in our spectrum of the division of temporal labor and scale. How do I eliminate the abrahamic method of deceit, and make possible a constant set of grammars from theological(non-conflict and consumption ) to philosophical(competition and contract and production) to scientific(conflcit law and war)? This is the issue. Religion is necessary. A submissive religion may be necessary for the agreeable and feminine brain structure, strategy, and class. A secular religion may suffice – which is what the distributist and the continentals are searching for. My understanding is that there are true religions and false. And that there is no need for a false religion. And that is what I am searching for. No falsehood.
-
The Need for Three Grammars: Empathic, Rational, Scientific, United by Truth and Reciprocity
Mar 12, 2020, 12:35 PM THE NEED FOR THREE GRAMMARS: EMPATHIC, RATIONAL, SCIENTIFIC, UNITED BY TRUTH AND RECIPROCITY ( Rik Storey Yes, I understand the Distributist. I understand you.) I understand the search for supernatural theology in theological terms (submission). I understand the search for secular theology in philosophical (cooperation, exchange). I just also understand the search for transcendence in fact by scientific, technological, institutional, and informational means (dominance). I understand the desire for the feminine, for the libertarian, and for the masculine. And I understand that the behaviors of these three emotional(feminine), rational(compromise), and scientific(masculine) methods are reflections of our degrees of agency over emotion, reason, and action, of ourselves, those near us, and the polity. And I have, I think, understood that these three paradigms, vocabulary, logics (Grammars) reflect our interest, willingness and ability to take on increasing scope of material responsibility, and conversely, the reflection of our preference for, willingness, and ability to go along with the herd in peaceful (non-conflict, non adversarial, agreable ) to unpeaceful(conflict, adversarial, disagreeable) means. And I understand how this spectrum of feminine to masculine strategies is merely a reflection of differences in sexual dimorphism, brain structure, body chemistry, class, indoctrination, training, and skill. And I understand that all three are necessary to prevent the horrors of ignorance and dysgenics and decline under abrahamic or any other monopoly. And I understand the externalities of the feminine(submission, empathic), compromise(exchange,rational), and masculine(dominance, scientific). And I understand the market for elites in all three of these, and the change in the power of elites given changes in demographic composition, economic composition, and strategic and military composition. And I understand that preserving the market for elites and their grammars (paradigms, vocabularies, logics), provides both the most aggressive (male), most adaptive(compromise), and the most regressive (female), and that these three markets keep one another in check. And I understand that via positiva feminine (organize on the positive by emotional myth), via practica in the ascendent male (organize on compromise, cooperation, production by contract), and the via negativa masculine (organize limits by law and war) are not in disharmony or conflict as long as they are relegated (LIMITED) to their domains of CAPABILITY, share the natural law. And that indoctrination (emotional children), training (rational young), and education (scientific adults), just like the ethics of rules, of values, and of outcomes, and the family, society, and polity, all consist of rules of scale. And that all of us are evolved to divide the labor of generating demand for some portion of the temporal and scale spectrums between mothers and children in consumption, brothers in trade, and headmen polity and limits. And that the reason we have developed different grammars is to provide each of us with the most precise tools of calculating thought word and deed, in our spectrum of the division of temporal labor and scale. How do I eliminate the abrahamic method of deceit, and make possible a constant set of grammars from theological(non-conflict and consumption ) to philosophical(competition and contract and production) to scientific(conflcit law and war)? This is the issue. Religion is necessary. A submissive religion may be necessary for the agreeable and feminine brain structure, strategy, and class. A secular religion may suffice – which is what the distributist and the continentals are searching for. My understanding is that there are true religions and false. And that there is no need for a false religion. And that is what I am searching for. No falsehood.
-
Maria’s Colorful Explanation of Current Condition
Mar 12, 2020, 5:56 PM by Maria Al Masani Makienko
—“Most civilizations, cultures, states, tolerate polygamy. The problem is, women are freaking expensive. And unless you’re desperately poor and need women to share the farm labor, are short of men because of war, men can’t afford them, and educated women won’t tolerate it.)”—Eric Danelaw
I think you are right that before the sexual revolution + modern dating apps, women were expensive. Now they are cheap to [CD: some] men they perceive higher value (looks +game) and unavailable to the rest. Women sense executive traits like disagreeableness in a male executive that Pickup artists mimic. This is before anyone becomes a Thot. Thots go for outright aggressive men. Thots are a female tiger woods – a set of maladaptive behaviour in the PreTinder era only seen in sex workers and male professional athletes. With current technology x no prohibitions on sexual promiscuity there is no cost for the most virile disagreeable men maintaining big harems while contributing little to society, while men who would actually make a good father who are reasonably in shape but no 6 pack, loyal, faithful, great income, not a doormat but not a jerk like me … they get none. And I am not anti social and do not denigrate people without cause. At this point thots look at fitness x how anti social a male is, and the top 10% of that gets laid at the cost of a drink or a slice of pizza and a gym membership and the rest get nothing. And it has a real impact on policies. In short, we are experiencing a historically unprecedented dysgenic distortion of the sexual marketplace whereby contraception, modern technologies like tinder, a hook up culture promoted by (((Hollywood))), radical feminism all lower women’s sexual marketplace value to a couple drinks+ gym membership at 20, a couple slices of Pizza + gym membership at 25. At at 30, she would be lucky for a slice of pizza. At 40 her value is 0. I do not think women had such low cost in any society in any time in history because condoms, the pill and Tinder were not invented yet. Finally Haidt brings a valid point about decay, that any dysgenic or degenerate individualist behaviours might not harm the commons in the first generation, a mild negative impact on some in the second, but have a brutal devastating impact on the commons in the third. I think in images so translating it into text is difficult and wordy, but through P I hope to be able to be more articulate and concise in my wording to better express the image and pattern I see without wasting time. So thank you for bearing with me as I learn the language and grammar. In my generation, the sexual marketplace is a distorted hellscape that only benefits Weinsteins and Epstein’s
-
Maria’s Colorful Explanation of Current Condition
Mar 12, 2020, 5:56 PM by Maria Al Masani Makienko
—“Most civilizations, cultures, states, tolerate polygamy. The problem is, women are freaking expensive. And unless you’re desperately poor and need women to share the farm labor, are short of men because of war, men can’t afford them, and educated women won’t tolerate it.)”—Eric Danelaw
I think you are right that before the sexual revolution + modern dating apps, women were expensive. Now they are cheap to [CD: some] men they perceive higher value (looks +game) and unavailable to the rest. Women sense executive traits like disagreeableness in a male executive that Pickup artists mimic. This is before anyone becomes a Thot. Thots go for outright aggressive men. Thots are a female tiger woods – a set of maladaptive behaviour in the PreTinder era only seen in sex workers and male professional athletes. With current technology x no prohibitions on sexual promiscuity there is no cost for the most virile disagreeable men maintaining big harems while contributing little to society, while men who would actually make a good father who are reasonably in shape but no 6 pack, loyal, faithful, great income, not a doormat but not a jerk like me … they get none. And I am not anti social and do not denigrate people without cause. At this point thots look at fitness x how anti social a male is, and the top 10% of that gets laid at the cost of a drink or a slice of pizza and a gym membership and the rest get nothing. And it has a real impact on policies. In short, we are experiencing a historically unprecedented dysgenic distortion of the sexual marketplace whereby contraception, modern technologies like tinder, a hook up culture promoted by (((Hollywood))), radical feminism all lower women’s sexual marketplace value to a couple drinks+ gym membership at 20, a couple slices of Pizza + gym membership at 25. At at 30, she would be lucky for a slice of pizza. At 40 her value is 0. I do not think women had such low cost in any society in any time in history because condoms, the pill and Tinder were not invented yet. Finally Haidt brings a valid point about decay, that any dysgenic or degenerate individualist behaviours might not harm the commons in the first generation, a mild negative impact on some in the second, but have a brutal devastating impact on the commons in the third. I think in images so translating it into text is difficult and wordy, but through P I hope to be able to be more articulate and concise in my wording to better express the image and pattern I see without wasting time. So thank you for bearing with me as I learn the language and grammar. In my generation, the sexual marketplace is a distorted hellscape that only benefits Weinsteins and Epstein’s
-
Dialogic Over Dialectic
Mar 12, 2020, 6:28 PM
—“Philosophically the successful paradigm was/is realism, naturalism, dualism, empiricism, virtue ethics. Truth being the thing IS itself and rejecting the thing IN itself. Dialogic over dialectic.”—Andrew M Gilmour
-
Dialogic Over Dialectic
Mar 12, 2020, 6:28 PM
—“Philosophically the successful paradigm was/is realism, naturalism, dualism, empiricism, virtue ethics. Truth being the thing IS itself and rejecting the thing IN itself. Dialogic over dialectic.”—Andrew M Gilmour
-
Rights don’t exist without numbers.
Mar 13, 2020, 12:58 PM Rights don’t exist without numbers. Therefore maintain the numbers necessary to create and maintain rights. All rights must be reciprocal or cannot be rights, and are but claims on others to tolerate your irreciprocity and prevent their retaliation against your irreciprocity.
—“My rights exist completely apart from any “numbers” or your opinion or agreement. Inherent human right to life, privacy and property. No amount of numbers has the right to violate that for me. I don’t have the right to violate those for you.”— A Noob
You’re demanding behavior from others. To construct a right you must create either a normative or institutional condition under which you have others to appeal to, to enforce it. Natural rights are a desire. They must be brought into existence through production by men. So your desire for rights, or demand for rights, does not mean they exist, any more than a communist’s desire for rights of equidistribution exist. Rights are made by force of men, in normative or institutional form. Moral rights are limited to natural rights: reciprocity. Period. The technique employed in libertarianism presumes that the willingness of the female is transferrable to the male. But it doesn’t. females have intrinsic sexual and reproductive value. Men do not. Men must create reciprocal defense to have value. This is as always the foundational error of all jewish libertarian (Rothbardian) thought: the pretense of the female.