YOU JUST CAN”T UNDERSTAND OUR HIGHEST RULE —“Why won’t America hand over the Turkish priest?”— A Well Meaning Turkish Muslim. NO. AND THIS IS SOMETHING YOU CAN NEVER UNDERSTAND. The west is built on one principle and one principle only, and a principle that is 3500 years old: INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY. From individual sovereignty comes reciprocity truth and duty. From reciprocity truth and duty comes our high trust civilization. From our high trust civilization comes our commons. From our commons comes our ability to out-compete all other civilizations. WE NEVER VIOLATE THIS RULE. Which is what you will never ever understand. THERE ARE NO EXCEPTIONS TO THIS RULE. Unless he has committed a crime by our standards, and we are sure that his sovereignty will be preserved by our standards, and as such he will be tried by our standards, then we cannot break our rule. We hold to this rule even to our detriment. Just as we hold to speaking the truth to our detriment. Just as we avoid imposing costs upon the commons to our detriment. Just as we avoid even petty crime to our detriment. THERE ARE NO EXCEPTIONS TO THIS RULE. Because the legitimacy of our government is dependent ONLY upon this rule. Our entire way of life is dependent upon this rule and only this rule.
Source: Original Site Post
-
Our Highest Rule
YOU JUST CAN”T UNDERSTAND OUR HIGHEST RULE —“Why won’t America hand over the Turkish priest?”— A Well Meaning Turkish Muslim. NO. AND THIS IS SOMETHING YOU CAN NEVER UNDERSTAND. The west is built on one principle and one principle only, and a principle that is 3500 years old: INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY. From individual sovereignty comes reciprocity truth and duty. From reciprocity truth and duty comes our high trust civilization. From our high trust civilization comes our commons. From our commons comes our ability to out-compete all other civilizations. WE NEVER VIOLATE THIS RULE. Which is what you will never ever understand. THERE ARE NO EXCEPTIONS TO THIS RULE. Unless he has committed a crime by our standards, and we are sure that his sovereignty will be preserved by our standards, and as such he will be tried by our standards, then we cannot break our rule. We hold to this rule even to our detriment. Just as we hold to speaking the truth to our detriment. Just as we avoid imposing costs upon the commons to our detriment. Just as we avoid even petty crime to our detriment. THERE ARE NO EXCEPTIONS TO THIS RULE. Because the legitimacy of our government is dependent ONLY upon this rule. Our entire way of life is dependent upon this rule and only this rule.
-
—“Can You Define the Terms Radical Right and Radical Left?”—
THE CORRECT ANSWER (Really)Left (Socialist), …. Female Reproductive Strategy: Equity independent of demonstrated merit. …. Consumption Preference, …. Demand Discretionary rule. …. Values: Exclusively Care, and Proportionality. …. Result: Dysgenic. -> The Radical Left is Activist and willing to forcibly impose their preferred order: Individual > Community > Polity > World (Herds) Libertarian (Classical Liberal), …. Ascendent Male Reproductive Strategy: Meritocracy, …. Capital Generation Preference, …. Demand Rule of Law of Reciprocity. …. Values: Almost Exclusively Liberty. …. Result: Eugenic Tilt. -> The Radical Libertarians are Activist and NOT willing to forcibly impose their preferred order: Individual > Markets. (Solitary Hunters.) Right (Aristocratic), …. Established Male Reproductive Strategy: Meritocracy, …. Capital Accumulation Preference, …. Demand Rule of Law of Reciprocity. …. Values: Complete Spectrum of Care, Proportionality, Loyalty, Hierarchy, Purity. …. Result: Eugenic. -> The Radical Right is Activist and willing to forcibly impose their preferred order: Family > Clan > Tribe > Nation > Nationalism (Packs) Voting Patterns Underclasses, Minorities, and Single White Women vote Left (self), while White males and MarriedWhite females vote right (family). (See Pew research). White women are the only defectors from their tribe. In Simple Terms: Political choices are intuitionistic because they are too general due to representatives and parties to vote with greater discretion. So we see voting patterns and political affiliation reflect Cognitive biases to advance the feminine dysgenic (herd) reproductive strategy or advance the male eugenic (pack) strategy. This is rather obvious given the difference (vast) in male and female reproductive and survival strategies. Really, That’s the answer. And that’s what all the data tells us. And it’s also why representative democracy is a catastrophe waiting to happen.
-
—“Can You Define the Terms Radical Right and Radical Left?”—
THE CORRECT ANSWER (Really)Left (Socialist), …. Female Reproductive Strategy: Equity independent of demonstrated merit. …. Consumption Preference, …. Demand Discretionary rule. …. Values: Exclusively Care, and Proportionality. …. Result: Dysgenic. -> The Radical Left is Activist and willing to forcibly impose their preferred order: Individual > Community > Polity > World (Herds) Libertarian (Classical Liberal), …. Ascendent Male Reproductive Strategy: Meritocracy, …. Capital Generation Preference, …. Demand Rule of Law of Reciprocity. …. Values: Almost Exclusively Liberty. …. Result: Eugenic Tilt. -> The Radical Libertarians are Activist and NOT willing to forcibly impose their preferred order: Individual > Markets. (Solitary Hunters.) Right (Aristocratic), …. Established Male Reproductive Strategy: Meritocracy, …. Capital Accumulation Preference, …. Demand Rule of Law of Reciprocity. …. Values: Complete Spectrum of Care, Proportionality, Loyalty, Hierarchy, Purity. …. Result: Eugenic. -> The Radical Right is Activist and willing to forcibly impose their preferred order: Family > Clan > Tribe > Nation > Nationalism (Packs) Voting Patterns Underclasses, Minorities, and Single White Women vote Left (self), while White males and MarriedWhite females vote right (family). (See Pew research). White women are the only defectors from their tribe. In Simple Terms: Political choices are intuitionistic because they are too general due to representatives and parties to vote with greater discretion. So we see voting patterns and political affiliation reflect Cognitive biases to advance the feminine dysgenic (herd) reproductive strategy or advance the male eugenic (pack) strategy. This is rather obvious given the difference (vast) in male and female reproductive and survival strategies. Really, That’s the answer. And that’s what all the data tells us. And it’s also why representative democracy is a catastrophe waiting to happen.
-
“The earth has too much genetic debt.”
by Curtus Maximus (A Friend’s Alias) A population needs to pay its genetic costs by letting their underclasses be filtered through nature’s grinder. The more underclasses offered up to the gods and to nature’s laws the better a population can thrive. The earth has too much genetic debt. The time for nature to collect that debt is almost upon us because we cannot continue to witness the slow unraveling of sanity and the end of western civilization. This is the battle that has been waged across centuries between the people that wish to protect our dead weight and the people that would gladly shed that weight to attain something greater. Basically, all of human history has been the battle between the female evolutionary strategy vs the male evolutionary strategy. All of human history has been the battle between the matriarchy vs the patriarchy. The patriarchy is empirically better which renders the matriarchy just a lie.
-
“The earth has too much genetic debt.”
by Curtus Maximus (A Friend’s Alias) A population needs to pay its genetic costs by letting their underclasses be filtered through nature’s grinder. The more underclasses offered up to the gods and to nature’s laws the better a population can thrive. The earth has too much genetic debt. The time for nature to collect that debt is almost upon us because we cannot continue to witness the slow unraveling of sanity and the end of western civilization. This is the battle that has been waged across centuries between the people that wish to protect our dead weight and the people that would gladly shed that weight to attain something greater. Basically, all of human history has been the battle between the female evolutionary strategy vs the male evolutionary strategy. All of human history has been the battle between the matriarchy vs the patriarchy. The patriarchy is empirically better which renders the matriarchy just a lie.
-
Philosophy Has Been a Catastrophic Failure
The problem is, that by and large, philosophy has been a catastrophic failure, and arguably has done far more harm than good, while science has been a profound success. Why? Because the difference between philosophizing and theorizing, is that science includes a process for conducting due diligence against error, bias, wishful-thinking, fictionalism (pseudoscience, pseudo-rationalism, supernaturalism) and deceit, and philosophy provides means of justifying error, bias, wishful-thinking, fictionalism and deceit. Philosophy appears in practice to consist largely of sophisms and justifications that like numerology and astrology (or Pilpul and Critique), can construct fallacious arguments in favor of anything imaginable. In this sense philosophy in retrospect appears as little more that either the literature of moral fiction, or the literature of upper middle class appeal for changes to the status quo. In other words, the only difference between religion and philosophy is the same as the difference between numerology and astrology: the justification for an arbitrary means of decidability completely discontiguous with reality. As an economist and theorist in testimony (truthful speech) a non-cursory review of history leads one to the rather obvious conclusion that most philosophers were engaged in acts of fraud. Socrates (or Marxist Critique) and Plato (or Rabbinical Pilpul), against Aristotle (evidence), Machiavelli (evidence), Bacon (empiricism), Darwin and Maxwell (science). One is far better off studying the evolution of the disciplines rather than the secular theology of philosophers — particularly the germans, who, Kant having supplied an artifice of nonsense by which to excuse Rousseau’s nonsense, send the entire germanic world into nothing but secular version of christianity.
-
Philosophy Has Been a Catastrophic Failure
The problem is, that by and large, philosophy has been a catastrophic failure, and arguably has done far more harm than good, while science has been a profound success. Why? Because the difference between philosophizing and theorizing, is that science includes a process for conducting due diligence against error, bias, wishful-thinking, fictionalism (pseudoscience, pseudo-rationalism, supernaturalism) and deceit, and philosophy provides means of justifying error, bias, wishful-thinking, fictionalism and deceit. Philosophy appears in practice to consist largely of sophisms and justifications that like numerology and astrology (or Pilpul and Critique), can construct fallacious arguments in favor of anything imaginable. In this sense philosophy in retrospect appears as little more that either the literature of moral fiction, or the literature of upper middle class appeal for changes to the status quo. In other words, the only difference between religion and philosophy is the same as the difference between numerology and astrology: the justification for an arbitrary means of decidability completely discontiguous with reality. As an economist and theorist in testimony (truthful speech) a non-cursory review of history leads one to the rather obvious conclusion that most philosophers were engaged in acts of fraud. Socrates (or Marxist Critique) and Plato (or Rabbinical Pilpul), against Aristotle (evidence), Machiavelli (evidence), Bacon (empiricism), Darwin and Maxwell (science). One is far better off studying the evolution of the disciplines rather than the secular theology of philosophers — particularly the germans, who, Kant having supplied an artifice of nonsense by which to excuse Rousseau’s nonsense, send the entire germanic world into nothing but secular version of christianity.
-
To State the Obvious We Are Collapsing Exactly as Did Rome.
—“Which historical empire collapse do you see as most similar to our current situation? Mongols? Rome? Habsburg’s? Something else? Or are we so different nothing is really analogous?”—@dagmar_schmitt The study of history tells us all empires collapse for the same reasons: overextension, bureaucratic calcification (rent seeking), demographics dilution and immigration, (disease), and raiding. However, in our case we are most similar to Rome (policing trade to obtain discounts) and less similar to the British (colonies and extraction to obtain premiums). Not really similar at all to the Habsburgs or Mongols or byzantines for that matter. This subject is worth a case by case examination, but we are mirror image of Rome in every single dimension. History does repeat itself. Although what troubles me is the second version of abrahamism (marxism, feminism, postmodernism). We failed to defend against it this time too.
-
To State the Obvious We Are Collapsing Exactly as Did Rome.
—“Which historical empire collapse do you see as most similar to our current situation? Mongols? Rome? Habsburg’s? Something else? Or are we so different nothing is really analogous?”—@dagmar_schmitt The study of history tells us all empires collapse for the same reasons: overextension, bureaucratic calcification (rent seeking), demographics dilution and immigration, (disease), and raiding. However, in our case we are most similar to Rome (policing trade to obtain discounts) and less similar to the British (colonies and extraction to obtain premiums). Not really similar at all to the Habsburgs or Mongols or byzantines for that matter. This subject is worth a case by case examination, but we are mirror image of Rome in every single dimension. History does repeat itself. Although what troubles me is the second version of abrahamism (marxism, feminism, postmodernism). We failed to defend against it this time too.