“She tore up his speech, which means she challenged him to a duel because she broke the rule of truthful reciprocal trade between sovereigns, limiting us to testimony (facts).”Testimony: Jury > Thang > Senate > Multiple Houses > Public Speech. [T]he western tradition’s first premise is Sovereignty. Every man is his own country, king, legislature, army. We form alliances that insure one another’s sovereignty. In this way we are all equal at the top and seek material achievement – where religions (slaves) are equal at the bottom and seek to minimize material responsibilities. As sovereigns, we appeal to our allies (court) for enforcement of our sovereignty (violations of our interests). This premise does not take cooperation for granted, it takes sovereignty for granted. It requires only that we do not offend (impose costs upon) one another’s demonstrated interests. But that as sovereigns we are free to war whenever we want. And we need submit to no one. In the Western Tradition of Sovereignty, the only reason to tolerate free speech is if it is Testimony (Realism, Naturalism, Operationalism, Reciprocity) – else violence licensed. Truth is a Commons in the West. Limiting public speech to the Testimonial and Reciprocal licenses VOLUNTARY TRADE (argument) but prohibits INVOLUNTARY HARMS. The duel between sovereign men b/c insult prohibited untruths. We failed to clarify that free speech meant Free Testimony. Westerners intuit these customary laws, but because they are customs are thousands of years old, and we lacked (until now) an operational(scientific) explanation of the western tradition and its reason for our disproportionate success: P(Natural)-law articulates these intuitions. P-Law explains the West and lets us defend it from competing traditions that don’t practice truth-telling, and some of which (Semitic) consist entirely of lying. It may take a few decades for P-Law to take root as the logic of social science, but it will, b/c: Explanatory Power.
Source: Original Site Post
-
Tearing Up The Speech – vs The Western Tradition
“She tore up his speech, which means she challenged him to a duel because she broke the rule of truthful reciprocal trade between sovereigns, limiting us to testimony (facts).”Testimony: Jury > Thang > Senate > Multiple Houses > Public Speech. [T]he western tradition’s first premise is Sovereignty. Every man is his own country, king, legislature, army. We form alliances that insure one another’s sovereignty. In this way we are all equal at the top and seek material achievement – where religions (slaves) are equal at the bottom and seek to minimize material responsibilities. As sovereigns, we appeal to our allies (court) for enforcement of our sovereignty (violations of our interests). This premise does not take cooperation for granted, it takes sovereignty for granted. It requires only that we do not offend (impose costs upon) one another’s demonstrated interests. But that as sovereigns we are free to war whenever we want. And we need submit to no one. In the Western Tradition of Sovereignty, the only reason to tolerate free speech is if it is Testimony (Realism, Naturalism, Operationalism, Reciprocity) – else violence licensed. Truth is a Commons in the West. Limiting public speech to the Testimonial and Reciprocal licenses VOLUNTARY TRADE (argument) but prohibits INVOLUNTARY HARMS. The duel between sovereign men b/c insult prohibited untruths. We failed to clarify that free speech meant Free Testimony. Westerners intuit these customary laws, but because they are customs are thousands of years old, and we lacked (until now) an operational(scientific) explanation of the western tradition and its reason for our disproportionate success: P(Natural)-law articulates these intuitions. P-Law explains the West and lets us defend it from competing traditions that don’t practice truth-telling, and some of which (Semitic) consist entirely of lying. It may take a few decades for P-Law to take root as the logic of social science, but it will, b/c: Explanatory Power.
-
Tri-Partism and The Tri-Functional Hypothesis of Our Natural Gods, and Our Natural Religion
(mandatory understanding on IE origins of Market Gods) (compare with the Monopoly of semitic underclass gods)
[T]he Trifunctional Hypothesis of prehistoric Proto-Indo-European society postulates a tripartite ideology (“idéologie tripartite”) reflected in the existence of three classes or castes—priests, warriors, and commoners (farmers or tradesmen)—corresponding to the three functions of the sacral, the martial and the economic, respectively. The trifunctional thesis is primarily associated with the French mythographer Georges Dumézil, who proposed it in 1929 in the book Flamen-Brahman, and later in Mitra-Varuna. According to Dumézil (1898–1986), Proto-Indo-European society comprised three main groups corresponding to three distinct functions:
- Sovereignty, which fell into two distinct and complementary sub-parts:
… 1.1 one formal, juridical and priestly but worldly;
… 1.2 the other powerful, unpredictable, and also priestly but rooted in the supernatural world. - Military, connected with force, the military and war.
- Productivity, herding, farming, and crafts; ruled by the other two.
In the Proto-Indo-European mythology, each social group had its own god or family of gods to represent it and the function of the god or gods matched the function of the group. Many such divisions occur in the history of Indo-European societies: Southern Russia: Bernard Sergent associates the Indo-European language family with certain archaeological cultures in Southern Russia and reconstructs an Indo-European religion based upon the tripartite functions. Early Germanic society: The supposed division between the king, nobility and regular freemen in early Germanic society. Norse mythology: Odin (sovereignty), Týr (law and justice), the Vanir (fertility). Odin is assigned one of the core functions in the Indo-European pantheon as a representative of the first function (sovereignty) corresponding to the Hindu Varuṇa (fury and magic) as opposed to Týr, who corresponds to the Hindu Mitrá (law and justice); while the Vanir represent the third function (fertility). Odin has been also been interpreted as a death-god (“Psychopomp”: transporting us to the afterlife) and connected to cremations, and has also been associated with ecstatic practices. Classic Greece: The three divisions of the ideal society as described by Socrates in Plato’s The Republic. Bernard Sergent examined the trifunctional hypothesis in Greek epic, lyric and dramatic poetry. India: The three Hindu castes, the Brahmins or priests; the Kshatriya, the warriors and military; and the Vaishya, the agriculturalists, cattle rearers and traders. The Shudra, a fourth Indian caste, is a peasant or serf. A 2001 study found that the genetic affinity of Indians to Europeans is proportionate to caste rank, the upper castes being most similar to Europeans whereas lower castes are more like Asians. The researchers believe that the Indo-European speakers entered India from the Northwest, mixing with or displacing proto-Dravidian speakers, and may have established a caste system with themselves primarily in higher castes. TRIPLE (TRIPARTITE) DEITIES A triple deity (sometimes referred to as threefold, tripled, triplicate, tripartite, triune or triadic, or as a trinity) is three deities that are worshipped as one. Such deities are common throughout world mythology; the number three has a long history of mythical associations. Carl Jung considered the arrangement of deities into triplets an archetype in the history of religion. In classical religious iconography or mythological art, three separate beings may represent either a triad who always appear as a group (Greek Moirai, Charites, Erinyes; Norse Norns; or the Irish Morrígan) or a single deity known from literary sources as having three aspects (Greek Hecate, Roman Diana). THE INDO EUROPEAN ORIGINS OF TRIPARTISM, TRIFUNCTIONALISM, TRIPLE GODS, AND TERNARY LOGIC Georges Dumézil’s trifunctional hypothesis proposed that ancient Indo-European society conceived itself as structured around three activities: worship, war, and toil. In later times, when slave labor became common, the three functions came to be seen as separate “classes”, represented each by its own god. Dumézil understood this mythology as reflecting and validating social structures in its content: such a tripartite class system is found in ancient Indian, Iranian, Greek and Celtic texts. In 1970, Dumézil proposed that some goddesses represented these three qualities as different aspects or epithets and identified examples in his interpretation of various deities including the Iranian Anāhitā, the Vedic Sarasvatī and the Roman Juno. Vesna Petreska posits that myths including trinities of female mythical beings from Central and Eastern European cultures may be evidence for an Indo-European belief in trimutive female “spinners” of destiny. But according to the linguist M. L. West, various female deities and mythological figures in Europe show the influence of pre-Indo-European goddess-worship, and triple female fate divinities, typically “spinners” of destiny, are attested all over Europe and in Bronze Age Anatolia. POST BRONZE AGE COLLAPSE CULTURES Ancient Celtic cultures The Matres or Matronae are usually represented as a group of three but sometimes with as many as 27 (3 × 3 × 3) inscriptions. They were associated with motherhood and fertility. Inscriptions to these deities have been found in Gaul, Spain, Italy, the Rhineland and Britain, as their worship was carried by Roman soldiery dating from the mid 1st century to the 3rd century AD.[24] Miranda Green observes that “triplism” reflects a way of “expressing the divine rather than presentation of specific god-types. Triads or triple beings are ubiquitous in the Welsh and Irish mythic imagery” (she gives examples including the Irish battle-furies, Macha, and Brigit). “The religious iconographic repertoire of Gaul and Britain during the Roman period includes a wide range of triple forms: the most common triadic depiction is that of the triple mother goddess” (she lists numerous examples).[25] In the case of the Irish Brigid it can be ambiguous whether she is a single goddess or three sisters, all named Brigid.[26] The Morrígan also appears sometimes as one being, and at other times as three sisters,[27][28][29][30] as do the three Irish goddesses of sovereignty, Ériu, Fódla and Banba.[31] Hinduism In Hinduism, the supreme divinity Para Brahman can take the form of the Trimurti, in which the cosmic functions of creation, preservation, and destruction of the universe are performed by the three deities of Brahma (the creator), Vishnu (the preserver), and Shiva (the destroyer), who are at the same time three forms of the one Para Brahman.[32] The divine being Dattatreya is a representation of all three of these deities incarnated as a single being.[33] Christianity (the trinity) Christians profess “one God in three divine persons” (God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Ghost). This is not to be understood as a belief in (or worship of) three Gods, nor as a belief that there are three subjectively-perceived “aspects” in one God, both of which the Catholic Church condemns as heresy. The Catholic Church also rejects the notions that God is “composed” of its three persons and that “God” is a genus containing the three persons. The Gnostic text Trimorphic Protennoia presents a threefold discourse of the three forms of Divine Thought: the Father, the Son, and the Mother (Sophia). Many Christian saints, especially martyrs, are trios who share a feast day or other remembrance. (See Category:Saints trios.) Whether they are subject to actual veneration and prayed to for supernatural aid, or simply honored, varies by Christian denomination. ESTATES OF THE REALM A 13th-century French representation of the tripartite social order of the Middle Ages – Oratores (“those who pray”), Bellatores (“those who fight”), and Laboratores (“those who work”). The estates of the realm, or three estates, were the broad orders of social hierarchy used in Christendom (Christian Europe) from the medieval period to early modern Europe. Different systems for dividing society members into estates developed and evolved over time. The best-known system is the French Ancien Régime (Old Regime), a three-estate system used until the French Revolution (1789–1799). Monarchy was for the king and the queen and this system was made up of clergy (the First Estate), nobles (the Second Estate), and peasants and bourgeoisie (the Third Estate). In some regions, notably Scandinavia and Russia, burghers (the urban merchant class) and rural commoners were split into separate estates, creating a four-estate system with rural commoners ranking the lowest as the Fourth Estate. Furthermore, the non-landowning poor could be left outside the estates, leaving them without political rights. In England, a two-estate system evolved that combined nobility and clergy into one lordly estate with “commons” as the second estate. This system produced the two houses of parliament, the House of Commons and the House of Lords. In southern Germany, a three-estate system of nobility (princes and high clergy), knights, and burghers was used. In Scotland, the Three Estates were the Clergy (First Estate), Nobility (Second Estate), and Shire Commissioners, or “burghers” (Third Estate), representing the bourgeois, middle class, and lower class. The Estates made up a Scottish Parliament. TRIPARTISM (COOPERATIONISM, MARKETS) IN PROPERTARIANISM In P we begin with the three means of coercion: Force-Defense, Remuneration-Deprivation, and Inclusion-Undermining (ostracization) in a market preserved by the judiciary. We argue that the three classes developed three ‘market competitions’ for elites; martial-judicial, priestly-educational, and productive-labor and trade. These three sets of elites we recognize as Conservative-Capitalizing (force), Progressive-consuming(Undermining), and Libertarian-Productive (Trade). In P we restore the “cooperation between the compatible but unequal classes”: The Monarchy as judge of last resort, The Judiciary as preservation of sovereignty, the Senate (nobility) as territorial (tribal) interests, the Upper House as the Commercial Interests, and the Lower House as Family and Labor Interests. Under this interpretation, Christianity is migrating to its natural place as the feminine (forgiveness, love), while we are restoring our traditional gods as we try to restore our civilization after the Abrahamic dark ages of death and decline. LEARN MORE This info is collected from Wikipedia but read Dumezil or at least the spark notes version. 😉 If you understand Dumizel’s description of, Campbell’s Monomyth, and the nordic myths you can begin to reconstruct our natural religions in both northern second generation and southern European first-generation forms.
- Sovereignty, which fell into two distinct and complementary sub-parts:
-
Tri-Partism and The Tri-Functional Hypothesis of Our Natural Gods, and Our Natural Religion
(mandatory understanding on IE origins of Market Gods) (compare with the Monopoly of semitic underclass gods)
[T]he Trifunctional Hypothesis of prehistoric Proto-Indo-European society postulates a tripartite ideology (“idéologie tripartite”) reflected in the existence of three classes or castes—priests, warriors, and commoners (farmers or tradesmen)—corresponding to the three functions of the sacral, the martial and the economic, respectively. The trifunctional thesis is primarily associated with the French mythographer Georges Dumézil, who proposed it in 1929 in the book Flamen-Brahman, and later in Mitra-Varuna. According to Dumézil (1898–1986), Proto-Indo-European society comprised three main groups corresponding to three distinct functions:
- Sovereignty, which fell into two distinct and complementary sub-parts:
… 1.1 one formal, juridical and priestly but worldly;
… 1.2 the other powerful, unpredictable, and also priestly but rooted in the supernatural world. - Military, connected with force, the military and war.
- Productivity, herding, farming, and crafts; ruled by the other two.
In the Proto-Indo-European mythology, each social group had its own god or family of gods to represent it and the function of the god or gods matched the function of the group. Many such divisions occur in the history of Indo-European societies: Southern Russia: Bernard Sergent associates the Indo-European language family with certain archaeological cultures in Southern Russia and reconstructs an Indo-European religion based upon the tripartite functions. Early Germanic society: The supposed division between the king, nobility and regular freemen in early Germanic society. Norse mythology: Odin (sovereignty), Týr (law and justice), the Vanir (fertility). Odin is assigned one of the core functions in the Indo-European pantheon as a representative of the first function (sovereignty) corresponding to the Hindu Varuṇa (fury and magic) as opposed to Týr, who corresponds to the Hindu Mitrá (law and justice); while the Vanir represent the third function (fertility). Odin has been also been interpreted as a death-god (“Psychopomp”: transporting us to the afterlife) and connected to cremations, and has also been associated with ecstatic practices. Classic Greece: The three divisions of the ideal society as described by Socrates in Plato’s The Republic. Bernard Sergent examined the trifunctional hypothesis in Greek epic, lyric and dramatic poetry. India: The three Hindu castes, the Brahmins or priests; the Kshatriya, the warriors and military; and the Vaishya, the agriculturalists, cattle rearers and traders. The Shudra, a fourth Indian caste, is a peasant or serf. A 2001 study found that the genetic affinity of Indians to Europeans is proportionate to caste rank, the upper castes being most similar to Europeans whereas lower castes are more like Asians. The researchers believe that the Indo-European speakers entered India from the Northwest, mixing with or displacing proto-Dravidian speakers, and may have established a caste system with themselves primarily in higher castes. TRIPLE (TRIPARTITE) DEITIES A triple deity (sometimes referred to as threefold, tripled, triplicate, tripartite, triune or triadic, or as a trinity) is three deities that are worshipped as one. Such deities are common throughout world mythology; the number three has a long history of mythical associations. Carl Jung considered the arrangement of deities into triplets an archetype in the history of religion. In classical religious iconography or mythological art, three separate beings may represent either a triad who always appear as a group (Greek Moirai, Charites, Erinyes; Norse Norns; or the Irish Morrígan) or a single deity known from literary sources as having three aspects (Greek Hecate, Roman Diana). THE INDO EUROPEAN ORIGINS OF TRIPARTISM, TRIFUNCTIONALISM, TRIPLE GODS, AND TERNARY LOGIC Georges Dumézil’s trifunctional hypothesis proposed that ancient Indo-European society conceived itself as structured around three activities: worship, war, and toil. In later times, when slave labor became common, the three functions came to be seen as separate “classes”, represented each by its own god. Dumézil understood this mythology as reflecting and validating social structures in its content: such a tripartite class system is found in ancient Indian, Iranian, Greek and Celtic texts. In 1970, Dumézil proposed that some goddesses represented these three qualities as different aspects or epithets and identified examples in his interpretation of various deities including the Iranian Anāhitā, the Vedic Sarasvatī and the Roman Juno. Vesna Petreska posits that myths including trinities of female mythical beings from Central and Eastern European cultures may be evidence for an Indo-European belief in trimutive female “spinners” of destiny. But according to the linguist M. L. West, various female deities and mythological figures in Europe show the influence of pre-Indo-European goddess-worship, and triple female fate divinities, typically “spinners” of destiny, are attested all over Europe and in Bronze Age Anatolia. POST BRONZE AGE COLLAPSE CULTURES Ancient Celtic cultures The Matres or Matronae are usually represented as a group of three but sometimes with as many as 27 (3 × 3 × 3) inscriptions. They were associated with motherhood and fertility. Inscriptions to these deities have been found in Gaul, Spain, Italy, the Rhineland and Britain, as their worship was carried by Roman soldiery dating from the mid 1st century to the 3rd century AD.[24] Miranda Green observes that “triplism” reflects a way of “expressing the divine rather than presentation of specific god-types. Triads or triple beings are ubiquitous in the Welsh and Irish mythic imagery” (she gives examples including the Irish battle-furies, Macha, and Brigit). “The religious iconographic repertoire of Gaul and Britain during the Roman period includes a wide range of triple forms: the most common triadic depiction is that of the triple mother goddess” (she lists numerous examples).[25] In the case of the Irish Brigid it can be ambiguous whether she is a single goddess or three sisters, all named Brigid.[26] The Morrígan also appears sometimes as one being, and at other times as three sisters,[27][28][29][30] as do the three Irish goddesses of sovereignty, Ériu, Fódla and Banba.[31] Hinduism In Hinduism, the supreme divinity Para Brahman can take the form of the Trimurti, in which the cosmic functions of creation, preservation, and destruction of the universe are performed by the three deities of Brahma (the creator), Vishnu (the preserver), and Shiva (the destroyer), who are at the same time three forms of the one Para Brahman.[32] The divine being Dattatreya is a representation of all three of these deities incarnated as a single being.[33] Christianity (the trinity) Christians profess “one God in three divine persons” (God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Ghost). This is not to be understood as a belief in (or worship of) three Gods, nor as a belief that there are three subjectively-perceived “aspects” in one God, both of which the Catholic Church condemns as heresy. The Catholic Church also rejects the notions that God is “composed” of its three persons and that “God” is a genus containing the three persons. The Gnostic text Trimorphic Protennoia presents a threefold discourse of the three forms of Divine Thought: the Father, the Son, and the Mother (Sophia). Many Christian saints, especially martyrs, are trios who share a feast day or other remembrance. (See Category:Saints trios.) Whether they are subject to actual veneration and prayed to for supernatural aid, or simply honored, varies by Christian denomination. ESTATES OF THE REALM A 13th-century French representation of the tripartite social order of the Middle Ages – Oratores (“those who pray”), Bellatores (“those who fight”), and Laboratores (“those who work”). The estates of the realm, or three estates, were the broad orders of social hierarchy used in Christendom (Christian Europe) from the medieval period to early modern Europe. Different systems for dividing society members into estates developed and evolved over time. The best-known system is the French Ancien Régime (Old Regime), a three-estate system used until the French Revolution (1789–1799). Monarchy was for the king and the queen and this system was made up of clergy (the First Estate), nobles (the Second Estate), and peasants and bourgeoisie (the Third Estate). In some regions, notably Scandinavia and Russia, burghers (the urban merchant class) and rural commoners were split into separate estates, creating a four-estate system with rural commoners ranking the lowest as the Fourth Estate. Furthermore, the non-landowning poor could be left outside the estates, leaving them without political rights. In England, a two-estate system evolved that combined nobility and clergy into one lordly estate with “commons” as the second estate. This system produced the two houses of parliament, the House of Commons and the House of Lords. In southern Germany, a three-estate system of nobility (princes and high clergy), knights, and burghers was used. In Scotland, the Three Estates were the Clergy (First Estate), Nobility (Second Estate), and Shire Commissioners, or “burghers” (Third Estate), representing the bourgeois, middle class, and lower class. The Estates made up a Scottish Parliament. TRIPARTISM (COOPERATIONISM, MARKETS) IN PROPERTARIANISM In P we begin with the three means of coercion: Force-Defense, Remuneration-Deprivation, and Inclusion-Undermining (ostracization) in a market preserved by the judiciary. We argue that the three classes developed three ‘market competitions’ for elites; martial-judicial, priestly-educational, and productive-labor and trade. These three sets of elites we recognize as Conservative-Capitalizing (force), Progressive-consuming(Undermining), and Libertarian-Productive (Trade). In P we restore the “cooperation between the compatible but unequal classes”: The Monarchy as judge of last resort, The Judiciary as preservation of sovereignty, the Senate (nobility) as territorial (tribal) interests, the Upper House as the Commercial Interests, and the Lower House as Family and Labor Interests. Under this interpretation, Christianity is migrating to its natural place as the feminine (forgiveness, love), while we are restoring our traditional gods as we try to restore our civilization after the Abrahamic dark ages of death and decline. LEARN MORE This info is collected from Wikipedia but read Dumezil or at least the spark notes version. 😉 If you understand Dumizel’s description of, Campbell’s Monomyth, and the nordic myths you can begin to reconstruct our natural religions in both northern second generation and southern European first-generation forms.
- Sovereignty, which fell into two distinct and complementary sub-parts:
-
Civilizational Differences in Strategy and Conflict
CIVILIZATIONAL DIFFERENCES IN STRATEGY AND CONFLICT(very important) (summary)
(Warning: This is the most important subject of our age, but it might trigger (offend) you so please move on if having your sacred cows slaughtered by science is unacceptable.)
[P]re-marine-trade Europeans like all other peoples didn’t have writing – few people did. Writing requires the evolution of debt-trade and taxation. The population density of territorial regions, the rate of production of territorial areas, and the cost of political control, all inhibit it, which is why the river valleys and the coasts developed writing. The europeans like all people, had oral history. Although it is most interesting that the europeans seem to have invented history as we understand it. The Atlantics, the Mediterraneans, the indo europeans, the beaker people, the Germanics, and certainly the Celts had oral history and had an industry for training their priesthood. The jews had history, and didn’t write it down, because of the prestige of memorizing it (just like europeans), and only wrote it down under advice, question, or command of the greeks. Like the dictionary froze english spelling, writing froze jewish, then christian, then islamic dogma. This isn’t the same for european, Indian, or Chines thought which was advice (wisdom literature) not command (authoritarian literature). Besides the universal lying and face before truth of the semitic tribal peoples, and this authoritarian literature, the middle east developed jewish pilpul and critique (lying) and muslim recitation and stagnation (avoidance of adaptation). The Chinese pursued harmony of their wisdom literature which limited their adaptation, and they followed sun tzu in war by delay and deceit, and their culture followed. The Iranic branch in India (Hindus) could not (as is happening to Americans) rule such a vast population of lower classes, and so chose a corporeal organization of class roles – a military organization familiar to the iranics, replicating the class structure of warriors, priests, and workers, each with different responsibilities. The Chinese had chosen hierarchical family, and europeans had chosen a hierarchical military. The Jewish-Palestinian-Arab semites chose universal resistance to all forms of aristocracy including the Egyptian by the adoption of universal slave resistance as a strategy. This failure to produce a durable military still plagues the jewish- Palestinian and less so Arab (raiding) peoples today. The jews in particular because they have neither the ethical tradition of land holders (and cant hold land) nor the ethical tradition of a working class (who fight) or an ethical tradition of a market between the elites. Which is why we wanted to move all jews to Israel, making a Netherlands of the middle east that may drag the primitive peoples out of authoritarian monopoly slave-resistance into market modernity – AND insulate us from jewish and muslim undermining at the same time. The Chinese strategy of course is to eradicate islam by incremental domestication of the muslim people and prohibiting entry of the jewish people. There is no force in Asia that can compete with Chinese domestication of other peoples. They have been doing it for thousands of years. The Europeans, having conquered the continent by military and technological means, had the pressure of a small population using maneuver, adaptation, technology, and a universal voluntary and therefore entrepreneurial military to produce a hierarchy – and produced as a consequence an entrepreneurial wisdom literature of markets including technology(science), law, philosophy, theology that competed with one another under their only immutable strategy – the sovereignty of the entrepreneurial warrior. Europeans maneuver, adapt, and invent with small number , Chinese resist and defeat by delay and deceive using numbers, semites deceive seduce with false promise and undermine and weaken – and the muslims consume and destroy, and Indians ignore because they are unconquerable by other than a cancer like islam – and get temporarily conquered by every passing malcontent even if they have the most beautiful of cultures and religions for the average person (except for the filth and irresponsibility for the commons). So as usual, when comparing civilizations we don’t disambiguate the truth-telling-empirical races, from the delay and deceive races, from the lying races – which is the entire purpose of my work. Ending abrahamic method of lying by jewish, christian, muslim generation-one theology, and marxism, cultural marxism, postmodern, feminism, denialism, by abrahamic generation-two pseudoscience and sophism. Because lying – especially baiting into hazard and undermining, are (empirically) easier and more profitable, as we can see from financial, insurance, gambling, advertising, media, entertainment, pornography, ad education – all of which allow undermining host peoples by false promise, absent warranty, under claims of plausible deniability of innocence. Which is where the Ashkenazi Jews have specialized: in every single form of profiting by false promise, baiting into hazard, – because that is the group strategy, just like every other group strategy I’ve mentioned above. And this is why the Ashkenazi were the most literate people in Europe but contributed absolutely nothing to thought, politics, law, technology, medicine, science, or arts until baited into the franchise in exchange for adopting european Aristotelian if not christian ethics – and failed. And its why they were kicked out of Egypt and every other host civilization; why they lost their territory and were dispersed, and why they have been systematically removed from every host population once they become intolerable by achieving critical mass of influence on the people and can no longer deny their strategy. This is the scientific basis of the conflict of civilizations including the conflict between jewish and muslim civilizations and EVERY OTHER civlization on this earth. Yet no matter what opportunity every people give the jews and muslims the outcome is the same – neither jews nor muslims adapt. Because that is the nature of their authoritarian monopoly parasitic group strategy: slave resistance that preys on the social and economic orders of aristocratic meritocratic people until they are reduced to genetic, institutional, political, cultural, normative, economic and military ruin – it is the strategy of uncontrolled dysgenic growth used by cancers. And the only ‘cure’ for this method of deceit is the light of truth and the law to punish it in a via-negativa market for the continuous suppression of profit by plausible deniability of accountability. The worst you can say about europeans is that we dragged humanity out of tyranny, rent seeking, free riding, deceit, ignorance, superstition, hard labor, starvation, disease, suffering, child mortality, early death, and the vicissitudes of an uncaring nature – but could have done it better. That’s the worst you can say. That is not the worst we can say for the semitic dark ages and 1billion dead in the ancient world, and 100M dead in just this past century and a half, and we still are not ‘cured’ of this second attempt at another semitic dark age. We have domesticated and Germanicized Christianity – but we must make it impossible for the Jews and Muslims to create another dark age for mankind. My hope is that we cure both physical and informational cancers in this century. And I’m doing my part for the latter by extending the law to prohibit these forms of crime. People have very little agency. We are trial and error gene computers with firmware that imitates others, evolving software for no purpose other than negotiation with others – and what little agency we have is determined by the limits of whatever it is we learn by imitation and negotiation. Very, very, few of us transcend the animal from semi-consciousness to consciousness. The result of doing so – is love for man like we love our domesticated animals, pets, and children. “all we can do is help them. we are too few to do much else.”
-
Civilizational Differences in Strategy and Conflict
CIVILIZATIONAL DIFFERENCES IN STRATEGY AND CONFLICT(very important) (summary)
(Warning: This is the most important subject of our age, but it might trigger (offend) you so please move on if having your sacred cows slaughtered by science is unacceptable.)
[P]re-marine-trade Europeans like all other peoples didn’t have writing – few people did. Writing requires the evolution of debt-trade and taxation. The population density of territorial regions, the rate of production of territorial areas, and the cost of political control, all inhibit it, which is why the river valleys and the coasts developed writing. The europeans like all people, had oral history. Although it is most interesting that the europeans seem to have invented history as we understand it. The Atlantics, the Mediterraneans, the indo europeans, the beaker people, the Germanics, and certainly the Celts had oral history and had an industry for training their priesthood. The jews had history, and didn’t write it down, because of the prestige of memorizing it (just like europeans), and only wrote it down under advice, question, or command of the greeks. Like the dictionary froze english spelling, writing froze jewish, then christian, then islamic dogma. This isn’t the same for european, Indian, or Chines thought which was advice (wisdom literature) not command (authoritarian literature). Besides the universal lying and face before truth of the semitic tribal peoples, and this authoritarian literature, the middle east developed jewish pilpul and critique (lying) and muslim recitation and stagnation (avoidance of adaptation). The Chinese pursued harmony of their wisdom literature which limited their adaptation, and they followed sun tzu in war by delay and deceit, and their culture followed. The Iranic branch in India (Hindus) could not (as is happening to Americans) rule such a vast population of lower classes, and so chose a corporeal organization of class roles – a military organization familiar to the iranics, replicating the class structure of warriors, priests, and workers, each with different responsibilities. The Chinese had chosen hierarchical family, and europeans had chosen a hierarchical military. The Jewish-Palestinian-Arab semites chose universal resistance to all forms of aristocracy including the Egyptian by the adoption of universal slave resistance as a strategy. This failure to produce a durable military still plagues the jewish- Palestinian and less so Arab (raiding) peoples today. The jews in particular because they have neither the ethical tradition of land holders (and cant hold land) nor the ethical tradition of a working class (who fight) or an ethical tradition of a market between the elites. Which is why we wanted to move all jews to Israel, making a Netherlands of the middle east that may drag the primitive peoples out of authoritarian monopoly slave-resistance into market modernity – AND insulate us from jewish and muslim undermining at the same time. The Chinese strategy of course is to eradicate islam by incremental domestication of the muslim people and prohibiting entry of the jewish people. There is no force in Asia that can compete with Chinese domestication of other peoples. They have been doing it for thousands of years. The Europeans, having conquered the continent by military and technological means, had the pressure of a small population using maneuver, adaptation, technology, and a universal voluntary and therefore entrepreneurial military to produce a hierarchy – and produced as a consequence an entrepreneurial wisdom literature of markets including technology(science), law, philosophy, theology that competed with one another under their only immutable strategy – the sovereignty of the entrepreneurial warrior. Europeans maneuver, adapt, and invent with small number , Chinese resist and defeat by delay and deceive using numbers, semites deceive seduce with false promise and undermine and weaken – and the muslims consume and destroy, and Indians ignore because they are unconquerable by other than a cancer like islam – and get temporarily conquered by every passing malcontent even if they have the most beautiful of cultures and religions for the average person (except for the filth and irresponsibility for the commons). So as usual, when comparing civilizations we don’t disambiguate the truth-telling-empirical races, from the delay and deceive races, from the lying races – which is the entire purpose of my work. Ending abrahamic method of lying by jewish, christian, muslim generation-one theology, and marxism, cultural marxism, postmodern, feminism, denialism, by abrahamic generation-two pseudoscience and sophism. Because lying – especially baiting into hazard and undermining, are (empirically) easier and more profitable, as we can see from financial, insurance, gambling, advertising, media, entertainment, pornography, ad education – all of which allow undermining host peoples by false promise, absent warranty, under claims of plausible deniability of innocence. Which is where the Ashkenazi Jews have specialized: in every single form of profiting by false promise, baiting into hazard, – because that is the group strategy, just like every other group strategy I’ve mentioned above. And this is why the Ashkenazi were the most literate people in Europe but contributed absolutely nothing to thought, politics, law, technology, medicine, science, or arts until baited into the franchise in exchange for adopting european Aristotelian if not christian ethics – and failed. And its why they were kicked out of Egypt and every other host civilization; why they lost their territory and were dispersed, and why they have been systematically removed from every host population once they become intolerable by achieving critical mass of influence on the people and can no longer deny their strategy. This is the scientific basis of the conflict of civilizations including the conflict between jewish and muslim civilizations and EVERY OTHER civlization on this earth. Yet no matter what opportunity every people give the jews and muslims the outcome is the same – neither jews nor muslims adapt. Because that is the nature of their authoritarian monopoly parasitic group strategy: slave resistance that preys on the social and economic orders of aristocratic meritocratic people until they are reduced to genetic, institutional, political, cultural, normative, economic and military ruin – it is the strategy of uncontrolled dysgenic growth used by cancers. And the only ‘cure’ for this method of deceit is the light of truth and the law to punish it in a via-negativa market for the continuous suppression of profit by plausible deniability of accountability. The worst you can say about europeans is that we dragged humanity out of tyranny, rent seeking, free riding, deceit, ignorance, superstition, hard labor, starvation, disease, suffering, child mortality, early death, and the vicissitudes of an uncaring nature – but could have done it better. That’s the worst you can say. That is not the worst we can say for the semitic dark ages and 1billion dead in the ancient world, and 100M dead in just this past century and a half, and we still are not ‘cured’ of this second attempt at another semitic dark age. We have domesticated and Germanicized Christianity – but we must make it impossible for the Jews and Muslims to create another dark age for mankind. My hope is that we cure both physical and informational cancers in this century. And I’m doing my part for the latter by extending the law to prohibit these forms of crime. People have very little agency. We are trial and error gene computers with firmware that imitates others, evolving software for no purpose other than negotiation with others – and what little agency we have is determined by the limits of whatever it is we learn by imitation and negotiation. Very, very, few of us transcend the animal from semi-consciousness to consciousness. The result of doing so – is love for man like we love our domesticated animals, pets, and children. “all we can do is help them. we are too few to do much else.”
-
Why Is Richmond a Perfect Opportunity for Starting the Revolution?
[W]HY IS RICHMOND A PERFECT OPPORTUNITY FOR STARTING THE REVOLUTION? Every possible resource. Every possible vulnerability. Every strategic opportunity Proximity to DC but NOT DC. Only NYC and DC are capable of self defense. It’s one thing to conduct a rally, another a demonstration, another a physical conflict …. and quite another a civil war. Once this ball starts it’s not going to stop. Fourth generation warfare is over. Islamists ended the Westphalian Peace. Isis and Mao set stage for all war. Someone is going to get the right twelve people face to face and while antifa is instigating violence, the war will be conducted by a land navy in the red sea, against a few blue islands dependent upon transportation, in the only country evolved exclusively under road transport. The original european method of war, like the current islamic method of war, was raiding. Western man evolved as cattle raiders, marines(greece, rome), vikings, conquerors by sail, pirates, and now air. We are the best people in the world at initiative and maneuver. And while battlefield warfare may in fact ‘be hell’ after the invention of machine gun and artillery, the same is not true for raiding, piracy, and hit and run warfare of attrition. Why? Because it is war for profit. And unstated truth is there is no thrill like hunting man. There will never be a leftist united states. We will compromise by converting blue (left) cities into city states. Otherwise, we will simply let nature take its course once “The Fourth Meal Is Missed” and the liberals discover the true nature of the herds they corralled.
-
Why Is Richmond a Perfect Opportunity for Starting the Revolution?
[W]HY IS RICHMOND A PERFECT OPPORTUNITY FOR STARTING THE REVOLUTION? Every possible resource. Every possible vulnerability. Every strategic opportunity Proximity to DC but NOT DC. Only NYC and DC are capable of self defense. It’s one thing to conduct a rally, another a demonstration, another a physical conflict …. and quite another a civil war. Once this ball starts it’s not going to stop. Fourth generation warfare is over. Islamists ended the Westphalian Peace. Isis and Mao set stage for all war. Someone is going to get the right twelve people face to face and while antifa is instigating violence, the war will be conducted by a land navy in the red sea, against a few blue islands dependent upon transportation, in the only country evolved exclusively under road transport. The original european method of war, like the current islamic method of war, was raiding. Western man evolved as cattle raiders, marines(greece, rome), vikings, conquerors by sail, pirates, and now air. We are the best people in the world at initiative and maneuver. And while battlefield warfare may in fact ‘be hell’ after the invention of machine gun and artillery, the same is not true for raiding, piracy, and hit and run warfare of attrition. Why? Because it is war for profit. And unstated truth is there is no thrill like hunting man. There will never be a leftist united states. We will compromise by converting blue (left) cities into city states. Otherwise, we will simply let nature take its course once “The Fourth Meal Is Missed” and the liberals discover the true nature of the herds they corralled.
-
A Detailed Explanation of Rothbard’s Sophistry
–“I define anarchist society as one where there is no legal possibility for coercive aggression against the person or property of any individual.” — Murray N. Rothbard
—“There needs to be a detailed explanation as to how this statement is sophistry Curt Doolittle.”— Χρόνος @HliosX, Murray Rothbard @MurraySuggests [E]asily done. The Jewish method of deceit by sophism (pilpul), and Rothbard’s application of the Jewish method of deceit by suggestion: “I define a perfect object as one that has four dimensions” The fact that it’s possible to imagine but impossible to construct any object in four dimensions isn’t stated. Mathematical axioms are declarative (we make them up), literary consistencies (pseudo-axioms) are declarative (they are only analogies), and physical laws are existential (we merely discover them, and can’t make them up). It doesn’t matter what you define (axioms) it matters only what exists and can be constructed by actions (laws). Once we know the Jewish method of deceit by pilpul (sophism) the technique is obvious: false promise, baiting into hazard, advocated by pilpul (sophism, overloading, suggestion), defended by critique(undermining), via pretense of plausible deniability, and absent warranty. We then compare this to the Western test of Operational Construction: How can a thing be brought into being by a sequence of actions, and persist if it is? An example of idealism (sophism) vs realism (operationalism). The Greeks innovated in truth and the jews in lying. So, false promise of possibility or survival by suggestion (freedom from conformity, integration, paying costs of normative, institutional, territorial commons), false promise of ethics by non-coercion (psychological and personally controlled), rather than non-imposition (empirical, and controlled by those affected by your actions, and whether they retaliate). False promise (insinuation) of the nature of man, false promise of the function of state(assets), rule(conflict), government(cooperation in the production of commons). Real purpose? Undermining western civilization’s competition, cooperation, cohesion, by militarization, duty, and production of commons for high returns on those commons. Create the oppression myth in order to obscure free riding on the production of commons by others. Marx to undermine tripartism (cost of cooperation between the classes using markets under rule of law of tort), Rothbard to undermine the production of commons (cost). Friedan to undermine the family as an institution(cost) between men and women. Derrida undermine truth itself. Cultural Marxists (Frankfurt School) to undermine heroism, duty, honor, excellence, beauty, all of which are methods of paying costs of contribution to the commons. They work to create the myth (false promise) that physical law and natural law are oppressions by man. (In effect they’re calling our people ‘gods’.) And that western aristocracy oppresses man, rather than that western man has discovered optimums: work in concert with physical and natural law. Their strategy is to hide under myth of persecution and oppression rather than being prohibited from free riding, baiting into hazard, and undermining, while they profit from undermining societies by sowing discord. And while there is little shame in it, because this technique of deceit is very advanced, you my friend are just as much a useful idiot of the enemy of our people and our civilization as are the useful idiots of the marxists. So my unsolicited advice is that you learn their technique of lying, and my techniques of how to articulate, expose, and defeat their lies, and how to produce a constitution and body of law, that creates rule of law of tort preventing imposition on our demonstrated intersets. So that we can prevent not only the misuse of rule of law, state, court, and government to produced imposition of costs on us by well intentioned and unaccountable fools, and malicious groups whose sole group strategy for survival is the undermining more advanced peoples. And repeating a dark age in the modern world with Marxism, Libertarianism, Neoconservatism, Feminism, and Postmodernism by combining the Jewish method of deceit by sophism with pseudoscience as they did in the dark age of judaism, christianity and islam in the ancient with theology. We look at history and see the great achievements of western and eastern civilizations, vs the destruction of every other civlization that arose under agrarianism – without cognizance that technology of both Truth (western, eastern) and Deceit (middle eastern) evolved apace. And that the battle for the future is between another semitic dark age under another era of lies, poverty, and destruction, or another european renaissance and enlightenment under another era of truth, prosperity, and innovation. The enemy (purveyors of abrahamism), is just as sophisticated in deceit, undermining, ignorance, and dysgenia, as we are in truth, cooperation, innovation, and eugenia. So stop being a useful idiot, undermining the miracle of western civilization’s heroism, excellence, beauty, truth, duty, sovereignty, reciprocity, rule of law, jury, and markets in all aspects of life – that dragged mankind out of ignorance, poverty, hard labor, and disease. And instead, work to produce western, empirical, evidentiary, operational, logical, rational, and cooperative optimum and the commons that result, from the direction of dominance to the production of commons including truth, trust, property, and sovereignty. And be upfront and honest that eugenics has been our strategy, and that markets are softly and empirically eugenic, if we limit reproduction to those who can afford their reproduction by participation in those markets. But that we do not abandon those who by accident of birth or circumstance require extra-market organization – not possible to organize in the production of commons under the pricing systems incentives. We merely limit their reproduction to one child – and time cures all. Peoples who never developed agrarian norms, traditions, institutions and genetics,and remained migratory thieves(gypsies) or shepherds(arabs) on one end, or traders(jews) on the other, never developed the bias for commons and the returns on commons, and hence despotic empires. We did develop those traditions (Market Hierarchy), Hindustanis did(Caste hierarchy) less so, and the Chinese(Monopoly hierarchy) did. The persians were ruined by three waves of muslim raiders. The arabs, jews, gypsies never did. And the pacific and africans were behind. The world has only one enemy: the lies of the abrahamic peoples. The world has only one hero: the truth of natural law (aristotelian) peoples. Between is a spectrum.
-
A Detailed Explanation of Rothbard’s Sophistry
–“I define anarchist society as one where there is no legal possibility for coercive aggression against the person or property of any individual.” — Murray N. Rothbard
—“There needs to be a detailed explanation as to how this statement is sophistry Curt Doolittle.”— Χρόνος @HliosX, Murray Rothbard @MurraySuggests [E]asily done. The Jewish method of deceit by sophism (pilpul), and Rothbard’s application of the Jewish method of deceit by suggestion: “I define a perfect object as one that has four dimensions” The fact that it’s possible to imagine but impossible to construct any object in four dimensions isn’t stated. Mathematical axioms are declarative (we make them up), literary consistencies (pseudo-axioms) are declarative (they are only analogies), and physical laws are existential (we merely discover them, and can’t make them up). It doesn’t matter what you define (axioms) it matters only what exists and can be constructed by actions (laws). Once we know the Jewish method of deceit by pilpul (sophism) the technique is obvious: false promise, baiting into hazard, advocated by pilpul (sophism, overloading, suggestion), defended by critique(undermining), via pretense of plausible deniability, and absent warranty. We then compare this to the Western test of Operational Construction: How can a thing be brought into being by a sequence of actions, and persist if it is? An example of idealism (sophism) vs realism (operationalism). The Greeks innovated in truth and the jews in lying. So, false promise of possibility or survival by suggestion (freedom from conformity, integration, paying costs of normative, institutional, territorial commons), false promise of ethics by non-coercion (psychological and personally controlled), rather than non-imposition (empirical, and controlled by those affected by your actions, and whether they retaliate). False promise (insinuation) of the nature of man, false promise of the function of state(assets), rule(conflict), government(cooperation in the production of commons). Real purpose? Undermining western civilization’s competition, cooperation, cohesion, by militarization, duty, and production of commons for high returns on those commons. Create the oppression myth in order to obscure free riding on the production of commons by others. Marx to undermine tripartism (cost of cooperation between the classes using markets under rule of law of tort), Rothbard to undermine the production of commons (cost). Friedan to undermine the family as an institution(cost) between men and women. Derrida undermine truth itself. Cultural Marxists (Frankfurt School) to undermine heroism, duty, honor, excellence, beauty, all of which are methods of paying costs of contribution to the commons. They work to create the myth (false promise) that physical law and natural law are oppressions by man. (In effect they’re calling our people ‘gods’.) And that western aristocracy oppresses man, rather than that western man has discovered optimums: work in concert with physical and natural law. Their strategy is to hide under myth of persecution and oppression rather than being prohibited from free riding, baiting into hazard, and undermining, while they profit from undermining societies by sowing discord. And while there is little shame in it, because this technique of deceit is very advanced, you my friend are just as much a useful idiot of the enemy of our people and our civilization as are the useful idiots of the marxists. So my unsolicited advice is that you learn their technique of lying, and my techniques of how to articulate, expose, and defeat their lies, and how to produce a constitution and body of law, that creates rule of law of tort preventing imposition on our demonstrated intersets. So that we can prevent not only the misuse of rule of law, state, court, and government to produced imposition of costs on us by well intentioned and unaccountable fools, and malicious groups whose sole group strategy for survival is the undermining more advanced peoples. And repeating a dark age in the modern world with Marxism, Libertarianism, Neoconservatism, Feminism, and Postmodernism by combining the Jewish method of deceit by sophism with pseudoscience as they did in the dark age of judaism, christianity and islam in the ancient with theology. We look at history and see the great achievements of western and eastern civilizations, vs the destruction of every other civlization that arose under agrarianism – without cognizance that technology of both Truth (western, eastern) and Deceit (middle eastern) evolved apace. And that the battle for the future is between another semitic dark age under another era of lies, poverty, and destruction, or another european renaissance and enlightenment under another era of truth, prosperity, and innovation. The enemy (purveyors of abrahamism), is just as sophisticated in deceit, undermining, ignorance, and dysgenia, as we are in truth, cooperation, innovation, and eugenia. So stop being a useful idiot, undermining the miracle of western civilization’s heroism, excellence, beauty, truth, duty, sovereignty, reciprocity, rule of law, jury, and markets in all aspects of life – that dragged mankind out of ignorance, poverty, hard labor, and disease. And instead, work to produce western, empirical, evidentiary, operational, logical, rational, and cooperative optimum and the commons that result, from the direction of dominance to the production of commons including truth, trust, property, and sovereignty. And be upfront and honest that eugenics has been our strategy, and that markets are softly and empirically eugenic, if we limit reproduction to those who can afford their reproduction by participation in those markets. But that we do not abandon those who by accident of birth or circumstance require extra-market organization – not possible to organize in the production of commons under the pricing systems incentives. We merely limit their reproduction to one child – and time cures all. Peoples who never developed agrarian norms, traditions, institutions and genetics,and remained migratory thieves(gypsies) or shepherds(arabs) on one end, or traders(jews) on the other, never developed the bias for commons and the returns on commons, and hence despotic empires. We did develop those traditions (Market Hierarchy), Hindustanis did(Caste hierarchy) less so, and the Chinese(Monopoly hierarchy) did. The persians were ruined by three waves of muslim raiders. The arabs, jews, gypsies never did. And the pacific and africans were behind. The world has only one enemy: the lies of the abrahamic peoples. The world has only one hero: the truth of natural law (aristotelian) peoples. Between is a spectrum.
