Source: Original Site Post

  • Sovereignty: The Distillation of Western Civilization

    Text: THE DISTILLATION OF WESTERN CIVILIZATION If you would be sovereign, you must fight. If you would be sovereign and win, you must equally confederate. If you would be sovereign and confederate, you must equally compromise. If you would be sovereign and equally compromise, you must equally forgo opportunities for gain at another’s loss. If you would be sovereign and equally forgo equal opportunities to gain at another’s loss, your actions are limited to those that are productive, fully informed, warrantied, and voluntary, and limited to productive externalities. If you limit your actions to those, then the ONLY possible rule is rule by Common, judge-discovered, Natural Law of Non Imposition of Costs, and therefore, voluntary markets in everything: association, cooperation, reproduction, production, production of commons, production of dispute resolution, production of institutions, productions of monuments, production of war, productions of generations, This is Western Civilization: the choice of Sovereignty once made produces all that we have done. Small things in large numbers have vast consequences. If you would be Sovereign, and reap the benefits of Sovereignty, you must fight – fight to deny others all possible alternatives. If you will not fight you cannot be sovereign. You may beg the Sovereigns for commercial liberty, or physical freedom, or charity, in exchange for compensation. But you may never be in fact sovereign. by William Butchman, Eli Harman, and Curt Doolittle

  • Sovereignty: The Distillation of Western Civilization

    Text: THE DISTILLATION OF WESTERN CIVILIZATION If you would be sovereign, you must fight. If you would be sovereign and win, you must equally confederate. If you would be sovereign and confederate, you must equally compromise. If you would be sovereign and equally compromise, you must equally forgo opportunities for gain at another’s loss. If you would be sovereign and equally forgo equal opportunities to gain at another’s loss, your actions are limited to those that are productive, fully informed, warrantied, and voluntary, and limited to productive externalities. If you limit your actions to those, then the ONLY possible rule is rule by Common, judge-discovered, Natural Law of Non Imposition of Costs, and therefore, voluntary markets in everything: association, cooperation, reproduction, production, production of commons, production of dispute resolution, production of institutions, productions of monuments, production of war, productions of generations, This is Western Civilization: the choice of Sovereignty once made produces all that we have done. Small things in large numbers have vast consequences. If you would be Sovereign, and reap the benefits of Sovereignty, you must fight – fight to deny others all possible alternatives. If you will not fight you cannot be sovereign. You may beg the Sovereigns for commercial liberty, or physical freedom, or charity, in exchange for compensation. But you may never be in fact sovereign. by William Butchman, Eli Harman, and Curt Doolittle

  • The Truth Is for Ourselves – Not You.

    We don’t use the Truth to convince you. You are immoral, dishonest, dysgenic and lack the agency to use the Truth. We use the Truth to convince ourselves, who are moral, honest, eugenic, and possess of agency, that it is right, just and moral, to separate from you – and if not, then conquer, kill, enslave, en-serf, and subjugate you in self defense – not only of ourselves, but of all we have made, and the future of mankind yet unmade.

  • The Truth Is for Ourselves – Not You.

    We don’t use the Truth to convince you. You are immoral, dishonest, dysgenic and lack the agency to use the Truth. We use the Truth to convince ourselves, who are moral, honest, eugenic, and possess of agency, that it is right, just and moral, to separate from you – and if not, then conquer, kill, enslave, en-serf, and subjugate you in self defense – not only of ourselves, but of all we have made, and the future of mankind yet unmade.

  • Yes Conspiracies Exist.

    –“The recent wave of censorship of conservative voices on the internet by tech giants Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and Apple mirrors a plan concocted by a coalition of George Soros-funded, progressive groups to take back power in Washington from President Trump’s administration. A confidential, 49-page memo for defeating Trump by working with the major social-media platforms to eliminate “right wing propaganda and fake news” was presented in January 2017 by Media Matters founder David Brock at a retreat in Florida with about 100 donors, the Washington Free Beacon reported at the time. On Monday, the Gateway Pundit blog noted the memo’s relationship with recent moves by Silicon Valley tech giants to “shadow ban” conservative political candidates and pundits and remove content. The Free Beacon obtained a copy of the memo, “Democracy Matters: Strategic Plan for Action,” by attending the retreat. The memo spells out a four-year agenda that deployed Media Matters along with American Bridge, Shareblue and Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) to attack Trump and Republicans. The strategies are impeachment, expanding Media Matters’ mission to combat “government misinformation,” ensuring Democratic control of the Senate in the 2018 midterm elections, filing lawsuits against the Trump administration, monetizing political advocacy, using a “digital attacker” to delegitimize Trump’s presidency and damage Republicans, and partnering with Facebook to combat “fake news.” Quashing ‘fake news’ with ‘mathematical precision’ The Free Beacon in its January 2017 story said Brock sought to raise $40 million in 2017 for his organizations. The document claims Media Matters and far-left groups have “access to raw data from Facebook, Twitter, and other social media sites” so they can “systemically monitor and analyze this unfiltered data.” “The earlier we can identify a fake news story, the more effectively we can quash it,” the memo states. “With this new technology at our fingertips, researchers monitoring news in real time will be able to identify the origins of a lie with mathematical precision, creating an early warning system for fake news and disinformation.” Media Matters met with Facebook, which boasts some 2 billion members worldwide, to discuss how to crack down on fake news, according to the memo. The social media giant was provided with “a detailed map of the constellation of right-wing Facebook pages that had been the biggest purveyors of fake news.” Brock’s memo also says Media Matters gave Google “the information necessary to identify 40 of the worst fake new sites” so they could be banned from Google’s advertising network. The Gateway Pundit pointed out that in 2016, Google carried out that plan on the Gateway Pundit blog and other conservative sites, including Breitbart, the Drudge Report, Infowars, Zero Hedge and Conservative Treehouse. Facebook, meanwhile has changed its newsfeed algorithm, ostensibly to combat “fake news,” causing a precipitous decline in traffic for many conservative sites. President Donald Trump himself was affected, with his engagement on Facebook dropping by 45 percent. A study in June by Gateway Pundit found Facebook had eliminated 93 percent of the traffic of top conservative news outlets. Western Journal, in its own study, found that while left-wing publishers saw a roughly 2 percent increase in web traffic from Facebook following the algorithm changes, conservative sites saw a loss of traffic averaging around 14 percent. ‘Totalitarian impulse’ of the left President Trump’s 2020 campaign manager charged last week the giants of Silicon Valley are stifling free speech, particularly conservative speech, manifesting the “inherent totalitarian impulse” of the left. On Friday, Facebook appeared to be “shadow banning” the non-profit education site PragerU, founded by talk-host Dennis Prager, causing a drop in engagement of 99.9999 percent while removing two videos regarded as “hate speech.” After Facebook rejected a highly inspirational ad for a Republican congressional candidate that included images depicting her parents’ persecution under the Khmer Rouge communist regime in Cambodia, Twitter followed up with its own ban. WND reported earlier this month Facebook banned a pro-life video ad by a judicial candidate, giving the same explanation. On Aug. 6, WND reported, Facebook, YouTube and Apple banned commentator Alex Jones and his Infowars website within hours of each other. Last month, WND reported moderate Muslims and counter-terrorist activists were increasingly being restricted by Silicon Valley, while terrorist content remains on social-media platforms, according to researchers. Trump campaign chief Parscale said last week the banning of Jones “will inevitably lead to the silencing of those with far less controversial opinions.” “What we are seeing in Big Tech is the inherent totalitarian impulse of the Left come into full focus,” Parscale said.

  • Yes Conspiracies Exist.

    –“The recent wave of censorship of conservative voices on the internet by tech giants Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and Apple mirrors a plan concocted by a coalition of George Soros-funded, progressive groups to take back power in Washington from President Trump’s administration. A confidential, 49-page memo for defeating Trump by working with the major social-media platforms to eliminate “right wing propaganda and fake news” was presented in January 2017 by Media Matters founder David Brock at a retreat in Florida with about 100 donors, the Washington Free Beacon reported at the time. On Monday, the Gateway Pundit blog noted the memo’s relationship with recent moves by Silicon Valley tech giants to “shadow ban” conservative political candidates and pundits and remove content. The Free Beacon obtained a copy of the memo, “Democracy Matters: Strategic Plan for Action,” by attending the retreat. The memo spells out a four-year agenda that deployed Media Matters along with American Bridge, Shareblue and Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) to attack Trump and Republicans. The strategies are impeachment, expanding Media Matters’ mission to combat “government misinformation,” ensuring Democratic control of the Senate in the 2018 midterm elections, filing lawsuits against the Trump administration, monetizing political advocacy, using a “digital attacker” to delegitimize Trump’s presidency and damage Republicans, and partnering with Facebook to combat “fake news.” Quashing ‘fake news’ with ‘mathematical precision’ The Free Beacon in its January 2017 story said Brock sought to raise $40 million in 2017 for his organizations. The document claims Media Matters and far-left groups have “access to raw data from Facebook, Twitter, and other social media sites” so they can “systemically monitor and analyze this unfiltered data.” “The earlier we can identify a fake news story, the more effectively we can quash it,” the memo states. “With this new technology at our fingertips, researchers monitoring news in real time will be able to identify the origins of a lie with mathematical precision, creating an early warning system for fake news and disinformation.” Media Matters met with Facebook, which boasts some 2 billion members worldwide, to discuss how to crack down on fake news, according to the memo. The social media giant was provided with “a detailed map of the constellation of right-wing Facebook pages that had been the biggest purveyors of fake news.” Brock’s memo also says Media Matters gave Google “the information necessary to identify 40 of the worst fake new sites” so they could be banned from Google’s advertising network. The Gateway Pundit pointed out that in 2016, Google carried out that plan on the Gateway Pundit blog and other conservative sites, including Breitbart, the Drudge Report, Infowars, Zero Hedge and Conservative Treehouse. Facebook, meanwhile has changed its newsfeed algorithm, ostensibly to combat “fake news,” causing a precipitous decline in traffic for many conservative sites. President Donald Trump himself was affected, with his engagement on Facebook dropping by 45 percent. A study in June by Gateway Pundit found Facebook had eliminated 93 percent of the traffic of top conservative news outlets. Western Journal, in its own study, found that while left-wing publishers saw a roughly 2 percent increase in web traffic from Facebook following the algorithm changes, conservative sites saw a loss of traffic averaging around 14 percent. ‘Totalitarian impulse’ of the left President Trump’s 2020 campaign manager charged last week the giants of Silicon Valley are stifling free speech, particularly conservative speech, manifesting the “inherent totalitarian impulse” of the left. On Friday, Facebook appeared to be “shadow banning” the non-profit education site PragerU, founded by talk-host Dennis Prager, causing a drop in engagement of 99.9999 percent while removing two videos regarded as “hate speech.” After Facebook rejected a highly inspirational ad for a Republican congressional candidate that included images depicting her parents’ persecution under the Khmer Rouge communist regime in Cambodia, Twitter followed up with its own ban. WND reported earlier this month Facebook banned a pro-life video ad by a judicial candidate, giving the same explanation. On Aug. 6, WND reported, Facebook, YouTube and Apple banned commentator Alex Jones and his Infowars website within hours of each other. Last month, WND reported moderate Muslims and counter-terrorist activists were increasingly being restricted by Silicon Valley, while terrorist content remains on social-media platforms, according to researchers. Trump campaign chief Parscale said last week the banning of Jones “will inevitably lead to the silencing of those with far less controversial opinions.” “What we are seeing in Big Tech is the inherent totalitarian impulse of the Left come into full focus,” Parscale said.

  • Why Won’t Nationalists Act

    Reasons: 1) Weak leadership 2) Lack of material (economic, political, military) incentives, rather than LARP incentives (status and norm). 3) Lack of any plan other than mutually reinforcing gossip and fantasizing. 4) Tendency of weak members to fantasize and emote, and degrade the conversation 5) As such tendency to attract larpers not activists.

    People act on (expend energies for) material opportunity. Not LARPing.
  • Why Won’t Nationalists Act

    Reasons: 1) Weak leadership 2) Lack of material (economic, political, military) incentives, rather than LARP incentives (status and norm). 3) Lack of any plan other than mutually reinforcing gossip and fantasizing. 4) Tendency of weak members to fantasize and emote, and degrade the conversation 5) As such tendency to attract larpers not activists.

    People act on (expend energies for) material opportunity. Not LARPing.
  • What Does an Army Look Like?

    by Eric Best The left was once scattered and relatively powerless, though not as much as the true right today, since there weren’t the same societal and institutional pressures keeping them from organizing and acting. They had sources of funding and support both foreign and domestic to lessen the risk they faced. An important fringe leftist in the 60’s would have, for instance, an unassailable position in a University and a circle of admirers among the upper class. Even if a majority of Americans would find them detestable (if they knew who they were), they would not lose their job and more importantly, would not be outcast from their part of society. It took them decades to get where they are now, having taken over so many institutions that their ideology and worldview is now the default. We can’t imitate them because we don’t have 50 years to do it and the social dynamic is totally different. Everyone knows what they can do as an individual in their own life to be better and prepare (i.e. stop being a NEET sperging out uselessly on the internet) but 1 million individuals even of quality do not make an army. What is the first real step to organizing seriously? What does it look like?

  • What Does an Army Look Like?

    by Eric Best The left was once scattered and relatively powerless, though not as much as the true right today, since there weren’t the same societal and institutional pressures keeping them from organizing and acting. They had sources of funding and support both foreign and domestic to lessen the risk they faced. An important fringe leftist in the 60’s would have, for instance, an unassailable position in a University and a circle of admirers among the upper class. Even if a majority of Americans would find them detestable (if they knew who they were), they would not lose their job and more importantly, would not be outcast from their part of society. It took them decades to get where they are now, having taken over so many institutions that their ideology and worldview is now the default. We can’t imitate them because we don’t have 50 years to do it and the social dynamic is totally different. Everyone knows what they can do as an individual in their own life to be better and prepare (i.e. stop being a NEET sperging out uselessly on the internet) but 1 million individuals even of quality do not make an army. What is the first real step to organizing seriously? What does it look like?