October 27th, 2018 2:17 PM SCHOOLING THE GHOST VAGINA SYNDROME ON ARGUMENT (to: Damien Woodgate ) [I] don’t pre-prepare responses. I don’t have to. I work on the study of argument full time. And I use the same definitions (series) every time. Because they are constants (universals). And even if I did copy and paste, that would not undermine the argument – it would only illustrate (as it has) that you merely do as I said: engage in the extremely common tactic of feminine shaming as a substitute for argument and in doing so demonstrate you don’t know what you’re talking about. So again, just as I’ve stated, you’re just attempting to shame rather than argue the central point. —“”we civilised the world using violence”< You said that mate”—- Damien Woodgate I’ve not only stated it once, I have stated the premise twice : 1) >> “Violence is a precious resource. We civilised the whole world using violence. Thatâs the history of civilisation: the incremental suppression of parasitism through the organised application of violence.” 2) >> “If you attempt to deny that the organized application fo violence in the systematic use of law, to incrementally suppress free riding, parasitism and predation ISN”T how we civilized mankind by forcing people into markets, that’s going to be very difficult. Because politics(legislation and regulation) and law(Findings of law of Tort) are merely proxies for violence. ” And now a third time: 3) we have used the law to create law (findings of parasitism and predation), legislation/command (prevention of free riding, parasitism, and predation), and regulation (prior constraint that enforces legislation and law), to incrementally suppress each evolutionary migration of free riding, parasitism, and predation And you have not answered it, and that is because you can’t, because it can’t be falsified. The fact that you presume understanding when you lack the knowledge to even vaguely understand the argument. And I have defended against your “GSRMS” (gossip, shaming, ridicule, moralism, and straw manning” in an attempt for reputation destruction as an alternative to answering the central argument. Now here is your ‘simpleton’ understanding: (a) “geez, the financial sector screws us. they’re parasites” To which I answer “yes” because we have not yet used the organized application of violence via legislation, regulation, and law, to incrementally suppress the 19th-20th century innovation in rent seeking (free riding, predation, and parasitism) made possible by the failure to change from legislation, regulation and law under physical money distribution constraints under physical currency (note money substitutes), to legislation, regulation and law under fiat credit money, where money consists only of shares in the economy (Share Money Substitutes) needing no physical distribution. (Especially since all credit issuance is (a) determined my accumulated actuarial data, (b) insured by the state as the insurer of last resort, using the same assets (shares in the economy) – meaning we are insuring ourselves. As I said, we have incrementally suppressed free riding(externality), parasitism(indirect) and predation(direct), upon one another by the incremental application of organized violence, (law/courts and legislation/command/state)across the spectrum from: |HARM| Murder, VIolence, Theft, Fraud (in all its forms), free riding, socialization of losses, privatization of commons, conspiracy (in all its forms), Poisoning the Informational Well (propaganda and deceit), trade war, conversion, immigration, conquest, and genocide. Under the options of: |RELATIONS| Bocott < Avoidance < Risk <- RECIPROCITY -> Free Riding > Parasitism > Predation. You know, I have a reputation as extremely patient with overconfident (arrogant) ignorant young men, trying to maintain face (status) while navigating a world they rarely succeed in. And it’s because as a ‘teacher’ of young men I wish to turn that frustrated demand for dominance play into learning by playing king of the hill, where quite obviously, I play the king of the hill. If teaching were still done this way (competitively) boys would not have fallen behind girls, and young men would nether check out of society, or PRACTICE FEMININE ARGUMENT. Adolescent (undeveloped) males require a strong paternal competitor in order to learn. That’s my role. And that is why men follow me. To learn. And to learn to argue as men. Not ‘women’. Curt Doolittle The Philosophy of Aristocracy The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine.
Source: Original Site Post
-
Hoppe’s group
October 28th, 2018 5:01 PM [D]epressing to see Hoppe’s group decline. Of course, if he’d get over being mad at me for crucifying rothbard he’d fill the place to the gills with quality people. Not gonna happen tho. If he reads Propertarianism eventually, he’ll be in the same position as Marx having read the Marginalists. Hoppe is sorta my patron saint. But no way he’s going to tolerate me or mine around.
-
Hoppe’s group
October 28th, 2018 5:01 PM [D]epressing to see Hoppe’s group decline. Of course, if he’d get over being mad at me for crucifying rothbard he’d fill the place to the gills with quality people. Not gonna happen tho. If he reads Propertarianism eventually, he’ll be in the same position as Marx having read the Marginalists. Hoppe is sorta my patron saint. But no way he’s going to tolerate me or mine around.
-
Criticism
October 30th, 2018 8:58 AM
—“Did you use your natural instinct for science for that [criticism of climate science]?]”—
[N]ot sure what you’re getting at, but my particular ‘talent’ is purely mechanical – and a form of obsessive compulsion for order. I do not have autobiographical (perfect) memory but I have a very good memory, and a lot of general knowledge about many subjects. And so I ‘feel’ when ‘that doesn’t fit’- I just have to work at what I ‘feel/sense’ until the ‘urge to correct disorder’ goes away. (It never goes away otherwise and makes me crazy). Propertarianism is a universal language that helps everything ‘fit together’ into a single unified model. (That’s why I developed it.) And so I sort of specialize in identifying uses of argument that are various attempts at fraud. And I saw that in the climate data. Now, as for the climate science crew, I worked on the “Two Degrees” initiative (clinton foundation, microsoft, etc) until november 2009 when the evidence came out that they had be manipulating the data and suppressing competing research. At that point everyone walked away from it. And I lost the 200K invested in the program. So I have personal knowledge of these people, their organizations, their incentives, how they approach the data, and the political ambitions they had (and careerism) and tax revenue goals they had. So that’s where I come by my opinion. yes we are having some impact on the climate but it’s not clear it’s meaningful, or that it can’t be fairly easily corrected by (a) nuclear power, and (b) reducing underclass reproduction. SO: “Just ’cause most people with lots of life experience don’t engage in running a free classroom online doesn’t means some of us don’t. I don’t have a university classroom, access to a pool of grad students to do research, or a team to put grants together with. Instead, I use the equivalent: fb/websites as my classroom, the hard working people who wont or cant waste their time in universities, and my own an my followers resources to run my ‘class’ and ‘do my research’. Cheers.
-
Criticism
October 30th, 2018 8:58 AM
—“Did you use your natural instinct for science for that [criticism of climate science]?]”—
[N]ot sure what you’re getting at, but my particular ‘talent’ is purely mechanical – and a form of obsessive compulsion for order. I do not have autobiographical (perfect) memory but I have a very good memory, and a lot of general knowledge about many subjects. And so I ‘feel’ when ‘that doesn’t fit’- I just have to work at what I ‘feel/sense’ until the ‘urge to correct disorder’ goes away. (It never goes away otherwise and makes me crazy). Propertarianism is a universal language that helps everything ‘fit together’ into a single unified model. (That’s why I developed it.) And so I sort of specialize in identifying uses of argument that are various attempts at fraud. And I saw that in the climate data. Now, as for the climate science crew, I worked on the “Two Degrees” initiative (clinton foundation, microsoft, etc) until november 2009 when the evidence came out that they had be manipulating the data and suppressing competing research. At that point everyone walked away from it. And I lost the 200K invested in the program. So I have personal knowledge of these people, their organizations, their incentives, how they approach the data, and the political ambitions they had (and careerism) and tax revenue goals they had. So that’s where I come by my opinion. yes we are having some impact on the climate but it’s not clear it’s meaningful, or that it can’t be fairly easily corrected by (a) nuclear power, and (b) reducing underclass reproduction. SO: “Just ’cause most people with lots of life experience don’t engage in running a free classroom online doesn’t means some of us don’t. I don’t have a university classroom, access to a pool of grad students to do research, or a team to put grants together with. Instead, I use the equivalent: fb/websites as my classroom, the hard working people who wont or cant waste their time in universities, and my own an my followers resources to run my ‘class’ and ‘do my research’. Cheers.
-
The Myth of The Noble Savages vs The the Debts of Ignoble Savages
(unpleasant)(insensitivity warning) —“Violence is a precious resource. We civilised thewhole world using violence. That’s the history ofcivilisation: the incremental suppression of parasitismthrough the organised application of violence.”–Curt Doolittle —“Thoughts?”– Joel Harvey —“If by “parasitism” you mean “the extermination of indigenous people who had a reciprocal relationship with the world and then the forced conversion of there children, theft of there resources and obliteration of there memories so the could end up fat useless consumers” then yeah brother, We are lovely“— Damien Woodgate Yes, we dragged them out of ignorance, superstition, hard labor, poverty, starvation, disease, suffering, child mortality, early death, and endemic violence – and we did it for profit, and we did it against their will; and they fought us kicking and screaming, all the way; and they are unthankful for it. And other than profiting from it, and having a great european civil war over the profitability of it, and leaving the job unfinished, so rather than continue our work, that we had to fight the communists and now the islamists in their attempts at reversal of our work, while fighting the jews and puritans within our societies undermining our work, it seems to have done us no good – because they make up fantasy stories of the noble savage living peaceful lives in harmony with nature, instead of half domesticated animals at malthusian limits relentlessly preying upon one another in endemic competition, corruption, violence, and warfare. So yes, we failed to complete our program of profiting from the domestication of barely humane humans, and enforcing farming, industry, technology, science, medicine, plenty, literacy, relative peace, charity to women, and long lives upon them, and they are resentful, because they cannot bear the thought of thanking us when we succeeded, or thanking us for exterminating those who were the most primitive, the most work, and who were dedicated out failure. We are not equals as individuals as classes, as groups, polities, nations, civilizations, or “races” if that means anything more than ‘civilizations’. We dragged all of mankind out of barbarism. No man is a hero to his debtors. That said, none of us should expect respect or appreciation from our debtors. Our project was incomplete. However, in retrospect, we could have and perhaps should have treated white man’s burden as Pragmatic Heathen rather than Utopian Christian and instead of converting (educating) them, and improving their condition, simply engaged in organized replacement of them. Because history shows we always ‘lose’ when we are tolerant, ruling, or colonizing, and we have always ‘won’ and advanced ourselves and mankind rapidly whenever we conduct replacement. And that is the lesson that our ungrateful ‘Debtors’ have taught us (yet again). The evidence is rather glaringly obvious: Replacement of less domesticated (evolved) peoples is the dominant force in developmental history, and produces the optimum results for not only us, but for all mankind. Hence the necessity of separatism. That is the lesson of history.
-
The Myth of The Noble Savages vs The the Debts of Ignoble Savages
(unpleasant)(insensitivity warning) —“Violence is a precious resource. We civilised thewhole world using violence. That’s the history ofcivilisation: the incremental suppression of parasitismthrough the organised application of violence.”–Curt Doolittle —“Thoughts?”– Joel Harvey —“If by “parasitism” you mean “the extermination of indigenous people who had a reciprocal relationship with the world and then the forced conversion of there children, theft of there resources and obliteration of there memories so the could end up fat useless consumers” then yeah brother, We are lovely“— Damien Woodgate Yes, we dragged them out of ignorance, superstition, hard labor, poverty, starvation, disease, suffering, child mortality, early death, and endemic violence – and we did it for profit, and we did it against their will; and they fought us kicking and screaming, all the way; and they are unthankful for it. And other than profiting from it, and having a great european civil war over the profitability of it, and leaving the job unfinished, so rather than continue our work, that we had to fight the communists and now the islamists in their attempts at reversal of our work, while fighting the jews and puritans within our societies undermining our work, it seems to have done us no good – because they make up fantasy stories of the noble savage living peaceful lives in harmony with nature, instead of half domesticated animals at malthusian limits relentlessly preying upon one another in endemic competition, corruption, violence, and warfare. So yes, we failed to complete our program of profiting from the domestication of barely humane humans, and enforcing farming, industry, technology, science, medicine, plenty, literacy, relative peace, charity to women, and long lives upon them, and they are resentful, because they cannot bear the thought of thanking us when we succeeded, or thanking us for exterminating those who were the most primitive, the most work, and who were dedicated out failure. We are not equals as individuals as classes, as groups, polities, nations, civilizations, or “races” if that means anything more than ‘civilizations’. We dragged all of mankind out of barbarism. No man is a hero to his debtors. That said, none of us should expect respect or appreciation from our debtors. Our project was incomplete. However, in retrospect, we could have and perhaps should have treated white man’s burden as Pragmatic Heathen rather than Utopian Christian and instead of converting (educating) them, and improving their condition, simply engaged in organized replacement of them. Because history shows we always ‘lose’ when we are tolerant, ruling, or colonizing, and we have always ‘won’ and advanced ourselves and mankind rapidly whenever we conduct replacement. And that is the lesson that our ungrateful ‘Debtors’ have taught us (yet again). The evidence is rather glaringly obvious: Replacement of less domesticated (evolved) peoples is the dominant force in developmental history, and produces the optimum results for not only us, but for all mankind. Hence the necessity of separatism. That is the lesson of history.
-
“Good people” have been too glorified.
October 26th, 2018 12:34 PM by Jayant Bhandari
In conventional wisdom “good people” have been too glorified. It is assumed that 80% of the society is of decent people, who like to work with others, pay their taxes and just want to fit in. It is the evil, say, 5% of the people who make life hell for the society. My view is that these 85% are basically meat, without moral or rational anchors. They are adrift and can be made to believe in whatever those in power want them to. The direction of the society is decided by a minority of rational/moral people, the 2% as Curt Doolittle suggests. These peopleâwhether in power or outsideâgive direction to the society. It is under their leadership that intellectual and financial capital gets accumulated. Here is the real problem: This 2% leaders in Europe have slowly been castrated using political correctness or have become docile because of modern comforts they have grown up in. As the quality of this 2% falls (rather rapidly), Europe is losing its civilization. The counterpart of this 2% of Europe in the Third World is 0.000002%, maybe less–this is the reason why the Third World is always adrift, rudderless, always tending towards Malthusian equilibrium.
-
What ‘Traditional’ Do You Mean?
October 26th, 2018 8:22 AM WHAT ‘TRADITIONAL’ DO YOU MEAN? [T]raditional (Tory/Land power/Authority ), vs Whig (Liberal/Middle Class/Economic power), vs Burke (Reactionary: to the french revolution) When you say ‘tradition’ whose? The french and church (authoritarian submission) or the anglo saxon and Law (contractualism?) The vikings (and normans) were responsible for the preservation of rights of englishmen (contractualism). WHICH TRADITION? French, Catholic, Authoritarian that ended in the french revolution and the murder of the aristocracy, or the Anglo Saxon, Protestant, Contractualism that we succeeded with until invaded by socialists (jews and catholics) and women’s entry into the work and voting pools.
-
The language of forbearance being withdrawn
October 26th, 2018 12:30 PM
—“No one can say for sure when things will shift hard enough, but if you listen close you can hear the cracks forming. You will know the shift is occurring when people stop talking about what they are willing to die to protect and start talking about what they are willing to do to protect. For the herd that voice comes from a group who is panicked and feels backed into a corner. For the herd that is the language of fear when they are left with no choice but to recognize the capacity of tolerance to carry the load is exceeded. Evidence the herd is reaching that point is easy to find. For the pack that voice comes from a group who is poised to be done carrying costs not their own. For the pack that is the language of forbearance being withdrawn.”—Luke Weinhagen