1 – Antibiotic Resistance. 2 – The next Pandemic: “Disease X” 3 – The expansion of third world population such that medical resources are overwhelmed. 4 – The restoration of decline into poverty because of that demographic expansion. Well shared vision bill. ‘Cept that I am absolutely positive nothing can be done about the last two, and absolutely determined to prevent our genocide because of it. There has to remain a reserve of human capital to survive that cataclysm. QUOTES: Joe Shute,The Telegraph•September 18, 2018 —“When I ask which challenges to global health security he fears the most, Gates outlines three: antibiotic resistance, cuts to government funding to improve health in the world’s poorest countries, and the next unknown disease, referred to by the World Health Organisation simply as ‘Disease X’. “We are not fully prepared for the next global pandemic,” he says. “The threat of the unknown pathogen – highly-contagious, lethal, fast-moving – is real. It could be a mutated flu strain or something else entirely. The Swine Flu and 2014 Ebola outbreaks underscored the threat.” There is another threat on his mind, one which has often been treated as the ‘elephant in the room’ in the world of international development. Namely, the population explosion in Africa’s poorest countries and its future impact – either fueling poverty, political instability, conflict and refugees, or sparking a new boom in world growth as happened in India and China. … above all is one simple fact that even the eternally optimistic Gates warns could mean “to put it bluntly decades of progress in the fight against poverty and disease may be on the verge of stalling”. In short, as birth rates falter in the developed world, in the poorest parts of Africa they are booming. By 2050, the ten poorest countries on the continent are projected to more than double in population. “The thing that is mind-blowing is if the demographers who have been very accurate on these things are right about Africa, then you are going from 1bn today to 2bn at middle of century, to 4bn at the end of the century,” he says.”—
Source: Original Site Post
-
We Can’t We Just Tell the Left the Truth?
1) Our civilization has succeeded because it’s been eugenic in every era – right up until the industrial revolution. 2) We find you disgusting. 3) and it’s because you’re unfit. 4) and you are unfit because you lack agency. 5) and you lack agency because you’re still undomesticated. 6) and as undomesticated still an animal. 7) and it isn’t any more complicated than that. 8) we cannot cooperate with you on equal terms any more than we can cooperate with any other animal – you lack the agency. 9) We don’t grant barn animals equality which is why we don’t grant you equality. And we don’t want barn animals in our homes, business, or our commons. 10) This is what we mean when we want to separate from you.
-
We Can’t We Just Tell the Left the Truth?
1) Our civilization has succeeded because it’s been eugenic in every era – right up until the industrial revolution. 2) We find you disgusting. 3) and it’s because you’re unfit. 4) and you are unfit because you lack agency. 5) and you lack agency because you’re still undomesticated. 6) and as undomesticated still an animal. 7) and it isn’t any more complicated than that. 8) we cannot cooperate with you on equal terms any more than we can cooperate with any other animal – you lack the agency. 9) We don’t grant barn animals equality which is why we don’t grant you equality. And we don’t want barn animals in our homes, business, or our commons. 10) This is what we mean when we want to separate from you.
-
Is There a Place for The Left?
—“Under your natural law, Is there a place for the left?”—
[T]here is a place for EXCHANGE between anyone, but predation and parasitism by no one. It’s not true that left wingers invent more than right. It’s true that leftists and rightists innovate in different areas: left consumption and release of normative constraint vs right order and release of existential constraints. I mean, I have absurd orderliness, and I still was voted most likely to succeed as a practicing artist by the faculty two years in a row. creativity occurs across the spectrum, but it’s creativity in WHAT? There is a place for everyone, there is just no place for parasitism and the left innovates means of parasitism and consumption to obtain its freedom from the right, and the right innovations suppression of parasitism and consumption in order to obtain its freedom from the left. The left and the feminine mind it evolved from cannot compete so it engages in rents, parasitism and predation to obtain what they see as proportionality independent of merit, and what we see as proportionality by merit. They have lower agency. They are not fully human. And this is why we must separate if possible, so that we can continue to speciate by proportionality: whether equalitarian and irreciprocal, or meritocratic and reciprocal. REVOLT, SEPARATE, PROSPER, SPECIATE. They will devolve and we will evolve and leave them behind.
-
Is There a Place for The Left?
—“Under your natural law, Is there a place for the left?”—
[T]here is a place for EXCHANGE between anyone, but predation and parasitism by no one. It’s not true that left wingers invent more than right. It’s true that leftists and rightists innovate in different areas: left consumption and release of normative constraint vs right order and release of existential constraints. I mean, I have absurd orderliness, and I still was voted most likely to succeed as a practicing artist by the faculty two years in a row. creativity occurs across the spectrum, but it’s creativity in WHAT? There is a place for everyone, there is just no place for parasitism and the left innovates means of parasitism and consumption to obtain its freedom from the right, and the right innovations suppression of parasitism and consumption in order to obtain its freedom from the left. The left and the feminine mind it evolved from cannot compete so it engages in rents, parasitism and predation to obtain what they see as proportionality independent of merit, and what we see as proportionality by merit. They have lower agency. They are not fully human. And this is why we must separate if possible, so that we can continue to speciate by proportionality: whether equalitarian and irreciprocal, or meritocratic and reciprocal. REVOLT, SEPARATE, PROSPER, SPECIATE. They will devolve and we will evolve and leave them behind.
-
The West Is Already and Always Has Been Polytheistic
[W]e have polytheism already: mythology, literature, history, biography, law, engineering, economics, medicine, science, mathematics, and logic. It is precisely the deconflation into markets of specialization and the different explanations of the universe and our relation to it, that provide that polytheism. Western man’s cult is the law, and always has been. His civic religion of heroic ancestor worship has been invaded by semitism, for the purpose of political conquest, and we are yet again, for the third time, trying to cast it off. But supernatural semitism has been evolved into pseudoscientific and pseudo-rational Semiticism (Abrahamism) in order to restore monopoly of the herd, and once again destroy the market for explanations between peoples of different abilities, that cooperate by trade using that market we call law, regardless of their differences. Semiticism is political warfare no different than the british selling of drugs to china – and even more evil, and always has been. It destroyed the ancient world and drove mankind into darkness. it destroyed egyptian civilization, mesopotamian, north african, european, and eventually greek (byzantine). What crime is greater than 1b dead and a thousand year dark age, then Semiticism (Abrahamism)? So choose Europeanism (Aristotelianism and Stoicism), Semiticism (Abrahamism), Hinduism or its reformation (Buddhism), Cinism (Confucianism). But of them which is demonstrably the least harmful, and most beneficial? Truth is enough. Literature is enough. Ancestors are enough. and all attempts at monopoly and submission are crimes against mankind. No more lies. Truth is enough.
-
The West Is Already and Always Has Been Polytheistic
[W]e have polytheism already: mythology, literature, history, biography, law, engineering, economics, medicine, science, mathematics, and logic. It is precisely the deconflation into markets of specialization and the different explanations of the universe and our relation to it, that provide that polytheism. Western man’s cult is the law, and always has been. His civic religion of heroic ancestor worship has been invaded by semitism, for the purpose of political conquest, and we are yet again, for the third time, trying to cast it off. But supernatural semitism has been evolved into pseudoscientific and pseudo-rational Semiticism (Abrahamism) in order to restore monopoly of the herd, and once again destroy the market for explanations between peoples of different abilities, that cooperate by trade using that market we call law, regardless of their differences. Semiticism is political warfare no different than the british selling of drugs to china – and even more evil, and always has been. It destroyed the ancient world and drove mankind into darkness. it destroyed egyptian civilization, mesopotamian, north african, european, and eventually greek (byzantine). What crime is greater than 1b dead and a thousand year dark age, then Semiticism (Abrahamism)? So choose Europeanism (Aristotelianism and Stoicism), Semiticism (Abrahamism), Hinduism or its reformation (Buddhism), Cinism (Confucianism). But of them which is demonstrably the least harmful, and most beneficial? Truth is enough. Literature is enough. Ancestors are enough. and all attempts at monopoly and submission are crimes against mankind. No more lies. Truth is enough.
-
Regarding Gans’ Generative Anthropology
[S]omeone just asked, so for those that are interested in such things, Eric Gans’ Generative Anthropology, is compatible and non-contradictory with Propertarianism. It is however a description of potential (cooperation on policy) not one of limits (resolution of differences by law), and it is narrative (literary and analogical) not operational (descriptive and scientific). Gans is also from the French and Marxist Critical theory schools, which explains his use of literary rather than scientific device. My work, particularly my work on grammars, and my work using neural economy, provide an operational explanation for the emphasis on the consequences of language. But I place dramatically more emphasis on truth as a competitive evolutionary advantage, and tolerance beyond the kin group as a competitive evolutionary disadvantage. This is the opposite of his position. However, when I read him I do not see falsehood, only another attempt to justify a norm rather than to create an excellence using similar understanding of the function of information that he calls language.
-
Regarding Gans’ Generative Anthropology
[S]omeone just asked, so for those that are interested in such things, Eric Gans’ Generative Anthropology, is compatible and non-contradictory with Propertarianism. It is however a description of potential (cooperation on policy) not one of limits (resolution of differences by law), and it is narrative (literary and analogical) not operational (descriptive and scientific). Gans is also from the French and Marxist Critical theory schools, which explains his use of literary rather than scientific device. My work, particularly my work on grammars, and my work using neural economy, provide an operational explanation for the emphasis on the consequences of language. But I place dramatically more emphasis on truth as a competitive evolutionary advantage, and tolerance beyond the kin group as a competitive evolutionary disadvantage. This is the opposite of his position. However, when I read him I do not see falsehood, only another attempt to justify a norm rather than to create an excellence using similar understanding of the function of information that he calls language.
-
Women Joyful and Men Noble
by Megan K. Usui [I] imagine for most men that they love their women most, not when they are making them a sammie, although that’s nice and all but they love them most when they see their beauty and this is usually when a woman is in a state of joy. So provided the man has taken the noble measures of providing a frame for his woman (see my post from yesterday) that ensures his (and therefore her) stability, she can feel secure in this frame to be joyful. If we weren’t so worried about our men connecting with their nobility, thereby requiring all of these (unconscious) shit tests, we would relish in our expression of joy. Chicken or egg? Let’s not go there. Let’s just do our part and the rest will follow.