(NOTE: Banned on Facebook for this post) Women are wonderful, and superior at the same things men are not. The problem was extending the franchise without producing a market for differences between the genders in the production of commons. We created houses for the aristocracy(monarchy), nobility(lords), middle class (commons). But when we added labor (labor), and then added women(women), we did not add houses for them, and thereby failed to grasp what we had done: created a market for the production of commons between the classes that prohibited the abuse by any in gaining majority. The problem was, that people become increasingly incompetent in matters of the day as their responsibilities decline. So without requirements for children and property it is almost impossible to create a civil discourse and market between the classes – since the people in the market for commons must demonstrate prior ability to succeed in markets of voluntary cooperation.
Source: Original Site Post
-
Constitution: The Commons
Constitution: The Commons
Article X
The Commons
The Purpose of Commons
Regarding Zoning (cities for families) ( parks and green space ) ( aesthetic construction ) ( spec built homes) (design build prohibition) (design for use) (design by room), ( insurance on restoration to natural state ),Public Behavior
( … ) prohibition on aggressive, stalking,. hunting for opportunty for crimeActs
Regarding the Commons1 – Public transportation creates opportunity for disease transmission and exposure to crime. Restore “classes” given the dress and condition of passengers. All efforts shall be made to provide clean Isolated spaces For each individual, maximum air filtration, and zero tolerance for anything other than flawless civic behavior: clean, dressed for the commons, quiet, and still. Ill citizens shall avoid public transport, wear masks, and gloves. The citizenry shall police this behavior, and if necessary civil enforcement shall be allocated to do so.
2 – All carriers whether solid (such as wire or fiber) or container( such as pipe) shall be placed Underground To limit the visual noise and territorial hazard of poles and other structures, except where distance prohibits due to capacitance effects. Except for long-distance and high voltage lines, all suburban, urban lines shall be underground.
3 – All “outdoor” commercial advertising, including billboards, mobile billboards, transit advertising, banners, posters, ( …. ) -
Constitution: The Commons
Constitution: The Commons
Article X
The Commons
The Purpose of Commons
Regarding Zoning (cities for families) ( parks and green space ) ( aesthetic construction ) ( spec built homes) (design build prohibition) (design for use) (design by room), ( insurance on restoration to natural state ),Public Behavior
( … ) prohibition on aggressive, stalking,. hunting for opportunty for crimeActs
Regarding the Commons1 – Public transportation creates opportunity for disease transmission and exposure to crime. Restore “classes” given the dress and condition of passengers. All efforts shall be made to provide clean Isolated spaces For each individual, maximum air filtration, and zero tolerance for anything other than flawless civic behavior: clean, dressed for the commons, quiet, and still. Ill citizens shall avoid public transport, wear masks, and gloves. The citizenry shall police this behavior, and if necessary civil enforcement shall be allocated to do so.
2 – All carriers whether solid (such as wire or fiber) or container( such as pipe) shall be placed Underground To limit the visual noise and territorial hazard of poles and other structures, except where distance prohibits due to capacitance effects. Except for long-distance and high voltage lines, all suburban, urban lines shall be underground.
3 – All “outdoor” commercial advertising, including billboards, mobile billboards, transit advertising, banners, posters, ( …. ) -
All Stereotypes Are True
Men do not cheat to ‘trade up’ so much as satisfy the need, which is not much different (any really) from drug addiction. Women cheat to see if they can trade up, and are willing to trade up (for financial reasons). Women are likely to forgive for financial reasons whether they love or not. Men are more likely to forgive because they love their wives (and loyalty) women are less likely to forgive because they are less likely to love their husbands (devotion), since their devotion almost entirely to their kids. (Really).
-
All Stereotypes Are True
Men do not cheat to ‘trade up’ so much as satisfy the need, which is not much different (any really) from drug addiction. Women cheat to see if they can trade up, and are willing to trade up (for financial reasons). Women are likely to forgive for financial reasons whether they love or not. Men are more likely to forgive because they love their wives (and loyalty) women are less likely to forgive because they are less likely to love their husbands (devotion), since their devotion almost entirely to their kids. (Really).
-
German Immigrants to the USA
—The Germans who came to America mostly came from the northern parts. And various studies indicate that just as Germany is a genetically diverse nation by European standards so there are significant IQ differentials by regions. Generally speaking, the south is cleverer than the north.”—Anatoly Karlin In response to the question of why German Americans have a slightly lower IQ than other groups. (And why they don’t fight in the military.)
-
German Immigrants to the USA
—The Germans who came to America mostly came from the northern parts. And various studies indicate that just as Germany is a genetically diverse nation by European standards so there are significant IQ differentials by regions. Generally speaking, the south is cleverer than the north.”—Anatoly Karlin In response to the question of why German Americans have a slightly lower IQ than other groups. (And why they don’t fight in the military.)
-
British vs American Legal Systems
I think the open question is between the british model of professional litigators of the court, and professional advocates for the individual, and the american model without the intermediary position. It is much harder to ‘pull bullshit’ in court in the british model. It is much easier to ‘pull bullshit’ in legislation in the british model. I am not yet sure if the house of lords is superior to the supreme court or not, but there is good reason to think it might be. Or, that the lords AND a supreme court would be superior to either condition. American constitution is better given the fact that our founding documents (declaration, constitution, bill of rights) are written, and consistent, if not as consistent as we could make them today – and aside from the fact that one requires all three documents to make sense of the constitution or the bill of rights because the natural law of reciprocity is not stated, and instead states men are equal rather than must be equal for the law of reciprocity (natural law) to fulfill its purpose of harmony. Conversely, the american model is far more common law (meaning permissive – less regulation) than the british model (meaning impermissive – more regulation). So this means that while americans have a superior juridical presumption (optimistic leading to more innovation, but more court disputes to resolve) while the british have less litigation to resolve because of higher regulation. I think the impact on the cultures is vast and the regulation culture in the uk has led to the feminization of the british male in less than eighty years. The optimum is probably the mixture of the two systems, with near zero regulation in america, and adding the intermediary between the lawyer and the court so that less nonsense occurs in court. It can be embarrassing to listen to young lawyers speak for their clients in court, rather than tell them “there is no fking way this is gonna fly so I won’t take your money”.
-
British vs American Legal Systems
I think the open question is between the british model of professional litigators of the court, and professional advocates for the individual, and the american model without the intermediary position. It is much harder to ‘pull bullshit’ in court in the british model. It is much easier to ‘pull bullshit’ in legislation in the british model. I am not yet sure if the house of lords is superior to the supreme court or not, but there is good reason to think it might be. Or, that the lords AND a supreme court would be superior to either condition. American constitution is better given the fact that our founding documents (declaration, constitution, bill of rights) are written, and consistent, if not as consistent as we could make them today – and aside from the fact that one requires all three documents to make sense of the constitution or the bill of rights because the natural law of reciprocity is not stated, and instead states men are equal rather than must be equal for the law of reciprocity (natural law) to fulfill its purpose of harmony. Conversely, the american model is far more common law (meaning permissive – less regulation) than the british model (meaning impermissive – more regulation). So this means that while americans have a superior juridical presumption (optimistic leading to more innovation, but more court disputes to resolve) while the british have less litigation to resolve because of higher regulation. I think the impact on the cultures is vast and the regulation culture in the uk has led to the feminization of the british male in less than eighty years. The optimum is probably the mixture of the two systems, with near zero regulation in america, and adding the intermediary between the lawyer and the court so that less nonsense occurs in court. It can be embarrassing to listen to young lawyers speak for their clients in court, rather than tell them “there is no fking way this is gonna fly so I won’t take your money”.
-
Words Do Hurt.
—“Women know that words hurt. Notice how they are always quarrelling among themselves. Sometimes these feuds last decades. Sometimes they try to torment those they hate by seemingly ignoring them.Woke men know that words hurt. This is why it is necessary for men to punish all forms of gossiping, rallying, shaming, passive aggression and spite.Saying that words don’t break bones is simply lies. The correct way to put it is that words are a cheaper and readily available means of aggression.”— Den Tsatsu (Teacher Ayelam Agaliba)