ARISTOCRACY: WESTERN TRIPARTISM MADE QUADRIPARTISM “THOSE WHO FIGHT” (Military, Judiciary, Sheriffs) Those Who Enforce The Natural Law “THOSE WHO PRAY” (Academy) Those Who Teach The Natural and Physical Laws “THOSE WHO ORGANIZE” (Middle Class) Those Who Organize Those Who Labor Under the Natural and Physical laws “THOSE WHO LABOR” (Lower middle, Working, Laboring) Those Who Labor Under The Natural and Physical Laws
Source: Original Site Post
-
Western Tripartism Made Quadripartism
ARISTOCRACY: WESTERN TRIPARTISM MADE QUADRIPARTISM “THOSE WHO FIGHT” (Military, Judiciary, Sheriffs) Those Who Enforce The Natural Law “THOSE WHO PRAY” (Academy) Those Who Teach The Natural and Physical Laws “THOSE WHO ORGANIZE” (Middle Class) Those Who Organize Those Who Labor Under the Natural and Physical laws “THOSE WHO LABOR” (Lower middle, Working, Laboring) Those Who Labor Under The Natural and Physical Laws
-
Religions: Addiction to Emotional Self Indulgence
[T]he purpose of most religions is not mindfulness but supplanting it with addiction to emotional self indulgence. The purpose of buddha’s teaching was, originally, submissive mindfulness. The purpose of stoicism’s teaching was dominant mindfulness – action. The purpose of Epicureanism was evidentiary mindfulness: supplying the human with real demands instead of status competition. And while the stoic METHOD – today’s cognitive behavioral therapy (training) – is superior to all others, the Epicurean objective is superior to all others. And this is in part why the anatolian, syrian, middle eastern fought so hard to destroy western heroism and it’s status competition by demonstrated action, sacrifice to earn the franchise, truth and duty to preserve the franchise: because all of these demands force us to obtain status through contribution to the commons (farmers and men ), rather than hyperconsumption of any available commons (shepherds and women), and emotional self indulgence. Why? Because while the division of labor provides discounts on production, status provides a discount on opportunity. So if can construct high status (sexual, social, economic, political, or military market value) we obtain more and better opportunities with more and better people. The innovation in abrahamic religion was to provide competition against aristocratic stoicism, truth, duty, and contribution to the commons, with self indulgence, justification of cowardice, and elimination of contribution to the commons – which is what we see in communism, neo-liberalism, and libertarianism: how to consume the commons rather than contribute to them. The structure of this religion is dependent upon your learning to lie in the face of reality in exchange for denial of that reality, denial of truth, duty, commons. It is a narrative structure that recreates the nepotism and insularity of the wandering shepherds who have no land, but live off common lands, and preserve insularity and non-defection in a condition of permanent competition against others of the same ilk, rather than the forces of nature. Our gradual domestication of this religion the purpose of which was to undermine the aristocracy, by converting it’s women and underclasses, who could not obtain status in the meritocratic order in that era where industrialization and gunpowder had not yet produced multiples of force, and all was still dependent upon military participation and fighting. The demand for mindfulness is largely a demand for means of training our demand for status. As the division of labor increases, the classes diverge in ability, productivity, and interest, and as power distance between bottom and top increases, we find those with the least agency seeking status by alternative means, and a caste of ‘talkers’ providing status (success) by alternative means – where are alternative does not refer to production contribution to the commons, or defense of the private and common. Gods provide a means of obtaining approval without competing in the sexual, social, political, economic, and military markets for status and therefore opportunity. Mythical Archetypes, heroes (masculine pagan markets), gods and saints (feminine abrahamic monopoly), provide a diversity of heroies and interests as suits those with agency in a division of knowledge and labor. The monotheistic archetype creates an anti-hero, in which the victim who suffers for his lack of ability and agency is somehow heroic. But the purpose of this anti-hero is the undermining of those who demonstrate innovation, excellence, competitiveness, production, and contribution to the commons, that increases the division of knowledge and labor, increases competitiveness, increases power distance, and decreases opportunity for status in those lacking ability, training, and agency. The jesus hero is a contribution to the heathen (ancestors, nature) pagan (heroes, archetypes) when one of many. But a disaster, like mohammed, and the jews when a monopoly – for we are only equal in ignorance, lack of agency and poverty. We are always unequal in knowledge agency, and wealth. It is not that we didn’t need the jesus hero, since there is no equivalent of the feminine archetype in the european pantheon. and the teaching of forgiveness and love in christianity is commercially optimum for all peoples. Unless it is applied (as do christians) beyond our kith and kin. There is no better method of training our emotions and intuitions other than the stoic method. There is nothing better to seek in life than the epicurean. And just as we domesticated christianity into a germanic folk religion, and just as we manufactured chivalry to direct aryan men to christian ends. These are the needs of the many ordinary men, while nietzsche, aristotle, alexander, jefferson, and frederick are examples for those of us who are not ordinary men. And it is only aristotelianism, heathenism, paganism , and christianity together that produce a religion for all the classes. We have always been an aristotelian (natural law), heathen (nature and ancestor) and pagan (heroes and tribes) people. With competition between the martial, magical,literary, and rational in competition. (Note: I have made a mistake by not putting time, opportunity, and status, at the top of the demonstrated property hierarchy. life is just time. time opportunity. opportunity experience.)
-
Religions: Addiction to Emotional Self Indulgence
[T]he purpose of most religions is not mindfulness but supplanting it with addiction to emotional self indulgence. The purpose of buddha’s teaching was, originally, submissive mindfulness. The purpose of stoicism’s teaching was dominant mindfulness – action. The purpose of Epicureanism was evidentiary mindfulness: supplying the human with real demands instead of status competition. And while the stoic METHOD – today’s cognitive behavioral therapy (training) – is superior to all others, the Epicurean objective is superior to all others. And this is in part why the anatolian, syrian, middle eastern fought so hard to destroy western heroism and it’s status competition by demonstrated action, sacrifice to earn the franchise, truth and duty to preserve the franchise: because all of these demands force us to obtain status through contribution to the commons (farmers and men ), rather than hyperconsumption of any available commons (shepherds and women), and emotional self indulgence. Why? Because while the division of labor provides discounts on production, status provides a discount on opportunity. So if can construct high status (sexual, social, economic, political, or military market value) we obtain more and better opportunities with more and better people. The innovation in abrahamic religion was to provide competition against aristocratic stoicism, truth, duty, and contribution to the commons, with self indulgence, justification of cowardice, and elimination of contribution to the commons – which is what we see in communism, neo-liberalism, and libertarianism: how to consume the commons rather than contribute to them. The structure of this religion is dependent upon your learning to lie in the face of reality in exchange for denial of that reality, denial of truth, duty, commons. It is a narrative structure that recreates the nepotism and insularity of the wandering shepherds who have no land, but live off common lands, and preserve insularity and non-defection in a condition of permanent competition against others of the same ilk, rather than the forces of nature. Our gradual domestication of this religion the purpose of which was to undermine the aristocracy, by converting it’s women and underclasses, who could not obtain status in the meritocratic order in that era where industrialization and gunpowder had not yet produced multiples of force, and all was still dependent upon military participation and fighting. The demand for mindfulness is largely a demand for means of training our demand for status. As the division of labor increases, the classes diverge in ability, productivity, and interest, and as power distance between bottom and top increases, we find those with the least agency seeking status by alternative means, and a caste of ‘talkers’ providing status (success) by alternative means – where are alternative does not refer to production contribution to the commons, or defense of the private and common. Gods provide a means of obtaining approval without competing in the sexual, social, political, economic, and military markets for status and therefore opportunity. Mythical Archetypes, heroes (masculine pagan markets), gods and saints (feminine abrahamic monopoly), provide a diversity of heroies and interests as suits those with agency in a division of knowledge and labor. The monotheistic archetype creates an anti-hero, in which the victim who suffers for his lack of ability and agency is somehow heroic. But the purpose of this anti-hero is the undermining of those who demonstrate innovation, excellence, competitiveness, production, and contribution to the commons, that increases the division of knowledge and labor, increases competitiveness, increases power distance, and decreases opportunity for status in those lacking ability, training, and agency. The jesus hero is a contribution to the heathen (ancestors, nature) pagan (heroes, archetypes) when one of many. But a disaster, like mohammed, and the jews when a monopoly – for we are only equal in ignorance, lack of agency and poverty. We are always unequal in knowledge agency, and wealth. It is not that we didn’t need the jesus hero, since there is no equivalent of the feminine archetype in the european pantheon. and the teaching of forgiveness and love in christianity is commercially optimum for all peoples. Unless it is applied (as do christians) beyond our kith and kin. There is no better method of training our emotions and intuitions other than the stoic method. There is nothing better to seek in life than the epicurean. And just as we domesticated christianity into a germanic folk religion, and just as we manufactured chivalry to direct aryan men to christian ends. These are the needs of the many ordinary men, while nietzsche, aristotle, alexander, jefferson, and frederick are examples for those of us who are not ordinary men. And it is only aristotelianism, heathenism, paganism , and christianity together that produce a religion for all the classes. We have always been an aristotelian (natural law), heathen (nature and ancestor) and pagan (heroes and tribes) people. With competition between the martial, magical,literary, and rational in competition. (Note: I have made a mistake by not putting time, opportunity, and status, at the top of the demonstrated property hierarchy. life is just time. time opportunity. opportunity experience.)
-
Can We Create A New Federalist Papers?
TO: John Mark 1) I have the ‘last 30 day’ plan ready. It’s going to blow people away. But we can’t do it until next spring at the earliest. Just letting you know that it’s going to surprise people, it will bring in the people to act, and that combined with ‘hitting the road’ is going to work. I’m not going to talk about it until the last minute. 2) Is there a chance you would be willing to do a video per article of the constitution over the winter so that we get into a discussion like the federalist papers? i mean, interview style we walk through the constitution and we cover law and policy. This is what people will be interested in. I think this is waaaay too much to ask of you. So I’ll try to find someone else if you can’t, but I think a series of shorter videos on each article of teh constitution, including the declaration, preamble, man, and law is worth doing. it’ll end up being federalist papers set two and it might be the means by which we hit even more mainstream people.
FROM John Mark [Y]es. I think it’s a fantastic idea. It would really help people understand it and drive home to them how advanced a stage it’s in (“this is real”). Doing short (or even, say 1-hr) videos with you interview/conversation style is actually way easier and much less time consuming than my normal style videos because there’s so much less video/image editing required (that’s the time-consuming part). If I can get my sound setup sorted out so that I don’t even have to adjust sound levels afterward, it’s easy.
-
Can We Create A New Federalist Papers?
TO: John Mark 1) I have the ‘last 30 day’ plan ready. It’s going to blow people away. But we can’t do it until next spring at the earliest. Just letting you know that it’s going to surprise people, it will bring in the people to act, and that combined with ‘hitting the road’ is going to work. I’m not going to talk about it until the last minute. 2) Is there a chance you would be willing to do a video per article of the constitution over the winter so that we get into a discussion like the federalist papers? i mean, interview style we walk through the constitution and we cover law and policy. This is what people will be interested in. I think this is waaaay too much to ask of you. So I’ll try to find someone else if you can’t, but I think a series of shorter videos on each article of teh constitution, including the declaration, preamble, man, and law is worth doing. it’ll end up being federalist papers set two and it might be the means by which we hit even more mainstream people.
FROM John Mark [Y]es. I think it’s a fantastic idea. It would really help people understand it and drive home to them how advanced a stage it’s in (“this is real”). Doing short (or even, say 1-hr) videos with you interview/conversation style is actually way easier and much less time consuming than my normal style videos because there’s so much less video/image editing required (that’s the time-consuming part). If I can get my sound setup sorted out so that I don’t even have to adjust sound levels afterward, it’s easy.
-
The Constitution of Political Conspiracies
THE CONSTITUTION OF POLITICAL CONSPIRACIES
—“The purpose of policy is to destroy the family?”— A Twitter Critic
[I] think you, like most victims of 20th C pseudoscience attribute greater agency to our intentions, and stated intent over external consequence. Conspiracies of common cognitive bias, common interest are endemic even if common intent isn’t – outside of those with such agency. Learn the technique of false promise, baiting into moral hazard, pilpul (via positiva), critique (via negativa), and its common thread in the three monotheistic religions, marxism, pomo, feminism, and political correctness – but insightfully, the female strategy of undermining. To say its a conspiracy of intent would require intentionality of female anti-social expression (psychosis, promiscuity, undermining, reputation destruction). Instead, social super-predation (undermining) is instinctual for most; a political strategy some & deliberate for others. Useful idiots constitute the vast majority of the population (I know, I have iffy followers too.) For whom the portfolio of sentiments need be satisfied, not the central object of stated policy. Humans account for calories(consumption), and status(opportunity) almost exclusively. Just as economic policy consists of pulling a small number of levers to produce externalities by design, social and political policy consists of many more levers which produce direct objective and external objectives. Rarely if ever is the stated policy the central objective. This is why the declaration, constitution, and bill of rights are an adequate attempt to restate norman,anglo-saxon, germanic traditional law as natural law, expressed in specific rights. But lacking strict construction from the foundations of that law, the constitution was weak. The anglo constitutions from which our prosperity originates were written for people of shared moral and ethical intuition, with a shared history of means of dispute resolution,with limited power distance,and limited difference in means of production of family, goods, & services. The industrialization of lying by sophism and pseudoscience, denialism, and deceit using new media in the 19th 20th, and the capture of ‘preaching’ in school, academy, and media by profiting from use of this technique has left the 20th a repeat of the first-second century. Hayek and Poincare were right: the 20th will be remembered as a repeat of christianization and islamization of the ancient world – this time with sophism, pseudoscience and denial,instead of sophism, supernaturalism and denial:false promise of reversing the consequences of genes. I don’t err. It’s my job not to. -Cheers.
-
The Constitution of Political Conspiracies
THE CONSTITUTION OF POLITICAL CONSPIRACIES
—“The purpose of policy is to destroy the family?”— A Twitter Critic
[I] think you, like most victims of 20th C pseudoscience attribute greater agency to our intentions, and stated intent over external consequence. Conspiracies of common cognitive bias, common interest are endemic even if common intent isn’t – outside of those with such agency. Learn the technique of false promise, baiting into moral hazard, pilpul (via positiva), critique (via negativa), and its common thread in the three monotheistic religions, marxism, pomo, feminism, and political correctness – but insightfully, the female strategy of undermining. To say its a conspiracy of intent would require intentionality of female anti-social expression (psychosis, promiscuity, undermining, reputation destruction). Instead, social super-predation (undermining) is instinctual for most; a political strategy some & deliberate for others. Useful idiots constitute the vast majority of the population (I know, I have iffy followers too.) For whom the portfolio of sentiments need be satisfied, not the central object of stated policy. Humans account for calories(consumption), and status(opportunity) almost exclusively. Just as economic policy consists of pulling a small number of levers to produce externalities by design, social and political policy consists of many more levers which produce direct objective and external objectives. Rarely if ever is the stated policy the central objective. This is why the declaration, constitution, and bill of rights are an adequate attempt to restate norman,anglo-saxon, germanic traditional law as natural law, expressed in specific rights. But lacking strict construction from the foundations of that law, the constitution was weak. The anglo constitutions from which our prosperity originates were written for people of shared moral and ethical intuition, with a shared history of means of dispute resolution,with limited power distance,and limited difference in means of production of family, goods, & services. The industrialization of lying by sophism and pseudoscience, denialism, and deceit using new media in the 19th 20th, and the capture of ‘preaching’ in school, academy, and media by profiting from use of this technique has left the 20th a repeat of the first-second century. Hayek and Poincare were right: the 20th will be remembered as a repeat of christianization and islamization of the ancient world – this time with sophism, pseudoscience and denial,instead of sophism, supernaturalism and denial:false promise of reversing the consequences of genes. I don’t err. It’s my job not to. -Cheers.
-
Demand for the Pleasing Delusion
by Daniel Gurpide [I ]previously posted that
–“Plato’s philosophy was for ‘the intellectuals’; the ethics of Plato are tied to his whole system of knowledge, including politics. The doctrines of Epicurus appealed chiefly to the middle classes, the bourgeoisie; the ethics of Epicurus are separated from politics and joined only with physics (and Aristotle). The teachings of Jesus were for the very poor, the lost sheep. The ethics of Jesus are isolated from both physics and politics and fitted into a development scheme of salvation.”—
[C]urt and I were trying to figure out why Epicurean philosophy was wiped out so easily after the fall of the Roman Empire. There were never strong Epicurean communities. Epicureans prioritized their small groups and chose not to engage in politics (a consequence of the civil wars that used to plague the ancient world). I was recently reading “Liberalism: Ancient & Modern” by Leo Strauss. The central chapter and the longest chapter is his “Notes on Lucretius”. He identifies one of the main tenets of Epicurean teaching–that the world that we love is not eternal, because every world is mortal within the eternal universe of atoms in motion–as “the most terrible truth”. Philosophers can live with this truth with a tranquil mind. But most human beings cannot. And consequently most human beings can find peace of mind only through the “pleasing delusion” of a religious belief that the world of human concern is supported by a loving intelligent designer. I guess that the temptation for the Platonist “intellectuals” to lead the “lost sheep” and at the same time sandwich the middle classes has always been there.
-
Demand for the Pleasing Delusion
by Daniel Gurpide [I ]previously posted that
–“Plato’s philosophy was for ‘the intellectuals’; the ethics of Plato are tied to his whole system of knowledge, including politics. The doctrines of Epicurus appealed chiefly to the middle classes, the bourgeoisie; the ethics of Epicurus are separated from politics and joined only with physics (and Aristotle). The teachings of Jesus were for the very poor, the lost sheep. The ethics of Jesus are isolated from both physics and politics and fitted into a development scheme of salvation.”—
[C]urt and I were trying to figure out why Epicurean philosophy was wiped out so easily after the fall of the Roman Empire. There were never strong Epicurean communities. Epicureans prioritized their small groups and chose not to engage in politics (a consequence of the civil wars that used to plague the ancient world). I was recently reading “Liberalism: Ancient & Modern” by Leo Strauss. The central chapter and the longest chapter is his “Notes on Lucretius”. He identifies one of the main tenets of Epicurean teaching–that the world that we love is not eternal, because every world is mortal within the eternal universe of atoms in motion–as “the most terrible truth”. Philosophers can live with this truth with a tranquil mind. But most human beings cannot. And consequently most human beings can find peace of mind only through the “pleasing delusion” of a religious belief that the world of human concern is supported by a loving intelligent designer. I guess that the temptation for the Platonist “intellectuals” to lead the “lost sheep” and at the same time sandwich the middle classes has always been there.