—“The main problem of western civilization is humanism (automatic attribution of human traits to inhuman people).”— Günther Shroomacher —“Eugenics, in the vernacular, often equates to needless discretionary euthanasia. Eugenics via negativa would consist of eliminating and preventing dysgenic policies and practices i.e. the welfare state etc. Eugenics via negativa is eugenic by not practicing dysgenics. — Bill Joslin —“No society is rich enough to artificially prop up a nation indefinitely via education or instruction. A high IQ just makes it cheaper.”— Lisa Outhwaite —“Hierarchy (A Pack) requires only that you seek your position. There is no fear of exclusion, only change in position. Equality (A Herd) has no position so one is either in and conforming our out for not. This is the origin of male(conservative) female (liberal) minds, and their cognitive, moral, and political biases.”— CD —“Packs survive by fighting together and protecting each other, regardless of position in the hierarchy. Herds survive by fleeing and leaving the weak behind.”— Andy Lunn —“The rothbardian argument originated in a bias to favor the concentration of savings for the purpose of redeployment as usury over the utility of credit. (yes, really, that’s the reason)”— CD —“Politics boils down to generation of demand in response to intuitions of genetic self-interest. Why? IDEOLOGICAL explanatory power is less explanatory than BIOLOGICAL explanatory power.”—Butch Leghorn —“The internet is revealing TRUTH in a way that humanity has never before seen, and the effects will change us as a species.”—Noah J Revoy —“Find the sacred, and you’ll likely find ignorance. For the sacred is that which we hold above criticism, thus removing our best means of education.”—Skye Stewart —“10,000 hours and all that. Novelty is exploration. Repetition is refinement.”—Ely Harman —“Novelty seeking is the preoccupation of those who lack the ability to master.”—Noah J Revoy
Source: Original Site Post
-
Is Libertarianism A Failed Property Management Business Model?
by Dax Rayner —“Libertarianism is simply marxism for the commons instead of marxism for private property.” —Curt Doolittle https://propertarianinstitute.com/…/libertarian-pretense-of-payi…/ I’ve been thinking a lot about this statement the past few months and I see it more and more every day now that I’m paying attention to it, every time I’m in a libertarian thread or discussion. Coming from a libertarian-ish/Ayn Randian worldview myself for much of my life, I began to really heavily question libertarianism the past few years. Anyone who’s known me for awhile can probably tell my positions have shifted quite a bit on many things. It just became glaringly obvious to me that there were a lot of holes and discrepancies between libertarian theories and what we see happening in the real world. I know many others have felt the same way. I’ve just started scratching the surface of propertarianism as defined by the Propertarian Institute but so far it has given me incredible clarity on the problems I was seeing before with libertarianism that I lacked the operational language to describe. Simply put: It seems the core problem of libertarianism can be boiled down to mismanagement of the commons, and that is why marxism has run rampant through the education system, pop culture and liberal establishments. The irony here is that when libertarians talk about the tragedy of the commons it seems they have actually misinterpreted what that means and the REAL tragedy of the commons, at least in the modern West, is an inversion of their analysis. The solutions they propose are not only incorrect but simply not possible. Many libertarians seem to misunderstand or miscategorize what the commons is or in some cases, deny that it even exists at all. There’s a lot of things that made me begin challenging libertarianism from borders to foreign policy to trade but ultimately what really pushed me over the edge was libertarianism’s complete ineptness and total impotence at countering the societal cancer of social justice warriorism and marxist feminism. Not only has libertarianism been an abysmal failure at using individualism to effectively thwart leftist authoritarians and SJWs, but in many ways it’s directly contributed to the problem and is even actively working to suppress real solutions to the problem. I believe this comes down to, again, mismanagement of the commons, as well as gaping holes in the NAP which I’ve seen for a long time, but furthermore an incomplete understanding of what property actually is and inadequate property norms, which I didn’t begin to understand until coming across propertarianism. If you owned a 30 unit apartment complex and you hired a property management company to take care of it and they allowed the place to turn into a complete dump, with people crapping all over sidewalks, throwing trash on the lawn, etc would you continue to work with that property management company? That’s basically what libertarianism has given us. Luke Weinhagen also said it well: “The way it hit me was that libertarianism survives/exists by miscategorizing relations. Specifically libertarians interpret commons(cooperation) as commons(conflict) and use property rights(IVP) to attempt to resolve that conflict. In doing so they justify libertarianism’s parasitism of the commons(that can only be generated via cooperation) as defense and that justification requires it not suppress any parasitism of the commons(cooperation) as this would self destruct the ideology.” I’m writing a 4 Part series on this that I’m putting on minds.com to elaborate my thoughts on it. I’m still an amateur when it comes to political science and legal theory but having started, run and sold numerous companies in the digital publishing world over the last decade and a half I’ve dealt with my share of intellectual property issues, so I’m writing from that perspective in addition to my other research. I know this has been a particular sore spot for many other internet marketers as well. Just based on my own personal experience and observations, I would say a loose form of libertarianism is kind of the default political philosophy for a good amount of people in the sales and marketing world I come from. It just naturally appeals to our independent entreprenur/anti-corporate personality. But I think if a lot of people looked into it more they may find the propertarian definitions of property to be much more all encompassing, useful and applicable to the real world, as I have. Propertarianism has added a whole new dimension of understanding for me when it comes to asset classes, brand protection, diversification & portfolio management. If you’re a business owner or individual who’s using the ideology and school of libertarianism/AnCapism as your property management company, I might encourage you to consider reevaluating your relationship with them. They may not be caretaking your family’s future, your community, your assets and your retirement as well as you’ve been led to think.
-
Is Libertarianism A Failed Property Management Business Model?
by Dax Rayner —“Libertarianism is simply marxism for the commons instead of marxism for private property.” —Curt Doolittle https://propertarianinstitute.com/…/libertarian-pretense-of-payi…/ I’ve been thinking a lot about this statement the past few months and I see it more and more every day now that I’m paying attention to it, every time I’m in a libertarian thread or discussion. Coming from a libertarian-ish/Ayn Randian worldview myself for much of my life, I began to really heavily question libertarianism the past few years. Anyone who’s known me for awhile can probably tell my positions have shifted quite a bit on many things. It just became glaringly obvious to me that there were a lot of holes and discrepancies between libertarian theories and what we see happening in the real world. I know many others have felt the same way. I’ve just started scratching the surface of propertarianism as defined by the Propertarian Institute but so far it has given me incredible clarity on the problems I was seeing before with libertarianism that I lacked the operational language to describe. Simply put: It seems the core problem of libertarianism can be boiled down to mismanagement of the commons, and that is why marxism has run rampant through the education system, pop culture and liberal establishments. The irony here is that when libertarians talk about the tragedy of the commons it seems they have actually misinterpreted what that means and the REAL tragedy of the commons, at least in the modern West, is an inversion of their analysis. The solutions they propose are not only incorrect but simply not possible. Many libertarians seem to misunderstand or miscategorize what the commons is or in some cases, deny that it even exists at all. There’s a lot of things that made me begin challenging libertarianism from borders to foreign policy to trade but ultimately what really pushed me over the edge was libertarianism’s complete ineptness and total impotence at countering the societal cancer of social justice warriorism and marxist feminism. Not only has libertarianism been an abysmal failure at using individualism to effectively thwart leftist authoritarians and SJWs, but in many ways it’s directly contributed to the problem and is even actively working to suppress real solutions to the problem. I believe this comes down to, again, mismanagement of the commons, as well as gaping holes in the NAP which I’ve seen for a long time, but furthermore an incomplete understanding of what property actually is and inadequate property norms, which I didn’t begin to understand until coming across propertarianism. If you owned a 30 unit apartment complex and you hired a property management company to take care of it and they allowed the place to turn into a complete dump, with people crapping all over sidewalks, throwing trash on the lawn, etc would you continue to work with that property management company? That’s basically what libertarianism has given us. Luke Weinhagen also said it well: “The way it hit me was that libertarianism survives/exists by miscategorizing relations. Specifically libertarians interpret commons(cooperation) as commons(conflict) and use property rights(IVP) to attempt to resolve that conflict. In doing so they justify libertarianism’s parasitism of the commons(that can only be generated via cooperation) as defense and that justification requires it not suppress any parasitism of the commons(cooperation) as this would self destruct the ideology.” I’m writing a 4 Part series on this that I’m putting on minds.com to elaborate my thoughts on it. I’m still an amateur when it comes to political science and legal theory but having started, run and sold numerous companies in the digital publishing world over the last decade and a half I’ve dealt with my share of intellectual property issues, so I’m writing from that perspective in addition to my other research. I know this has been a particular sore spot for many other internet marketers as well. Just based on my own personal experience and observations, I would say a loose form of libertarianism is kind of the default political philosophy for a good amount of people in the sales and marketing world I come from. It just naturally appeals to our independent entreprenur/anti-corporate personality. But I think if a lot of people looked into it more they may find the propertarian definitions of property to be much more all encompassing, useful and applicable to the real world, as I have. Propertarianism has added a whole new dimension of understanding for me when it comes to asset classes, brand protection, diversification & portfolio management. If you’re a business owner or individual who’s using the ideology and school of libertarianism/AnCapism as your property management company, I might encourage you to consider reevaluating your relationship with them. They may not be caretaking your family’s future, your community, your assets and your retirement as well as you’ve been led to think.
-
The Problem with Egalitarian Universal Franchise and Some Other Political Ideals
Ely Harman September 30 at 5:41 PM In any actually existing system there is going to be some unequal but non unitary distribution of *actual* power (strength, weapons, numbers, resources, wealth, charisma, influence, etc…) So I just think it’s best if the *procedural* distribution of power (voting protocols or whatever) matches that as closely as possible. If your civic religion says we’re all equal and our votes count the same, or we’re all subordinate to an absolute and unquestionable führer, neither of those things is that close to being true, and so there will be huge incentives for someone with the ability, to disrupt, upset, ignore or overthrow the established procedures and institute ones more beneficial to them. It’s fundamentally unstable to structure institutions around false articles of faith or sacred cows. In exact proportion to their falsehood; It’s merely an invitation for chaos…
-
The Problem with Egalitarian Universal Franchise and Some Other Political Ideals
Ely Harman September 30 at 5:41 PM In any actually existing system there is going to be some unequal but non unitary distribution of *actual* power (strength, weapons, numbers, resources, wealth, charisma, influence, etc…) So I just think it’s best if the *procedural* distribution of power (voting protocols or whatever) matches that as closely as possible. If your civic religion says we’re all equal and our votes count the same, or we’re all subordinate to an absolute and unquestionable führer, neither of those things is that close to being true, and so there will be huge incentives for someone with the ability, to disrupt, upset, ignore or overthrow the established procedures and institute ones more beneficial to them. It’s fundamentally unstable to structure institutions around false articles of faith or sacred cows. In exact proportion to their falsehood; It’s merely an invitation for chaos…
-
Joslin on Parasitism, Immorality, Predation
by Bill Joslin Repost from October 1, 2017 · Re: parasitism, immorality, predation etc… First thing to get is that predation, parasitism and cooperation are all natural consequences of the same natural phenomena – life must seek asymmetrical benefit to survive. From there – cooperation because it multiplies agency through aligning agents, opposed to predation and parasitism which reduces net agency, provides the only strategy (application of natural phenomena) which has an unlimited time horizon. Predation ends when the prey have been consumed – the more successful the predator the more likely the prey supply is reduced to zero; the more successful the parasite the more degradation of the hosts health. Predation and parasitism cap their success – their success increases their limits to success. Cooperation, however, when success increases, limits decrease. When we extend the interpersonal strategy (cooperation) to our pool of resources (environment- including social=material, intellectual) our extraction of asymmetrical benefits increases the health of the pool of resources (stewardship) woof.
-
Joslin on Parasitism, Immorality, Predation
by Bill Joslin Repost from October 1, 2017 · Re: parasitism, immorality, predation etc… First thing to get is that predation, parasitism and cooperation are all natural consequences of the same natural phenomena – life must seek asymmetrical benefit to survive. From there – cooperation because it multiplies agency through aligning agents, opposed to predation and parasitism which reduces net agency, provides the only strategy (application of natural phenomena) which has an unlimited time horizon. Predation ends when the prey have been consumed – the more successful the predator the more likely the prey supply is reduced to zero; the more successful the parasite the more degradation of the hosts health. Predation and parasitism cap their success – their success increases their limits to success. Cooperation, however, when success increases, limits decrease. When we extend the interpersonal strategy (cooperation) to our pool of resources (environment- including social=material, intellectual) our extraction of asymmetrical benefits increases the health of the pool of resources (stewardship) woof.
-
Like I Said, Its Genetic.
via Carl Onni “Finally, a relation between pride, testosterone, and the willingness to engage in “cheap” behavior also fits the observation that the five inmates with the lowest testosterone levels in a sample of 87 female prison inmates were characterized as “sneaky” and “treacherous” by prison staff members” Dabbs J, Hargrove M (1997) Age, testosterone, and behavior among female prison inmates. Psychosom Med 59: 477–480. View Article Google Scholar
-
Like I Said, Its Genetic.
via Carl Onni “Finally, a relation between pride, testosterone, and the willingness to engage in “cheap” behavior also fits the observation that the five inmates with the lowest testosterone levels in a sample of 87 female prison inmates were characterized as “sneaky” and “treacherous” by prison staff members” Dabbs J, Hargrove M (1997) Age, testosterone, and behavior among female prison inmates. Psychosom Med 59: 477–480. View Article Google Scholar
-
—“Q: Revolution: What about the effect on the global hegemony?”—
—“If your goals are realized in the US, what (do you believe) would be the effect on global hegemony? Is this speculation worthwhile?”— Yest the speculation is worthwhile because external effect is part of the desired outcome. Lets assume one of four initial reactions: 1 – External actors will become more confident in world affairs and more critical of US activity in the world. 2 – external actors will support the activity of activists 3 – external actors will seize opportunities for political expansion of influence. 4 – external actors will seize opportunities for military expansion of influence. The degree of change in the world will be dependent upon those actions and the outcome of a revolutionary change: 1 – acquiescence by the state and restoration of the powers of the states. 2 – continuing declining low level civil warfare and related economic decline 3 – a significant uprising that forces the military to enact martial law . 4 – a significant uprising that forces the military to call troops from abroad to american soil. By and large the balance of powers will be restored,and either way america will return to a domestic rather than imperial power. Since everyone KNOWS this, particularly the upper levels of the military, the objective (my objective) is to make revolutionary outcome so certain that the government merely meets our demands for devolution to the states. It is pretty hard to object to my proposal other than out of job defense or collusion with the world’s (((globalist))) movement. We will own the blue water navy for a long time to come. We will lose and want to lose our responsibility for defending europe. That will force germany and russia to work together and end our conflict. China much like russia operates entirely for its domestic market. The usa operates for its globalist market. we just need to restore the balance of powers and then we can all focus on the only remaining enemy to the world: judaism-islam.