We are going to destroy them you know: 1) Reinforce Trademarks, Eliminate Copyrights and Drastically limit patents. 2) Outlaw lying in the commons by involuntary liability and warranty of words. 3) De-financialize the credit system and eliminate consumer interest on consumer capital assets (residences and appliances and autos). 4) Eliminate the transportability (escape) of debt instruments while institutionalize the rights to income from it. 5) Reform shareholder laws to prevent hostile takeovers, and to equalize risk and exit. 6) Restructure taxation rates to reflect risk. Eliminate double taxation of dividends. This will have the effect of destroying nearly all manipulation of the population and all rent seeking. This will be the greatest competitive advantage since the invention of fiat credit. It means that there are no rents that allow you to escape the market – anywhere. Even at scale. Taxes for entrepreneurs, particularly small and medium businesses will nearly disappear. Huge reallocation of intellectual capital. Huge reduction in propaganda. Huge temporary expansion of courts and litigation until enough law accumulates on the books. STARVE THE BEAST.
Source: Original Site Post
-
We Will Destroy Them Forever
We are going to destroy them you know: 1) Reinforce Trademarks, Eliminate Copyrights and Drastically limit patents. 2) Outlaw lying in the commons by involuntary liability and warranty of words. 3) De-financialize the credit system and eliminate consumer interest on consumer capital assets (residences and appliances and autos). 4) Eliminate the transportability (escape) of debt instruments while institutionalize the rights to income from it. 5) Reform shareholder laws to prevent hostile takeovers, and to equalize risk and exit. 6) Restructure taxation rates to reflect risk. Eliminate double taxation of dividends. This will have the effect of destroying nearly all manipulation of the population and all rent seeking. This will be the greatest competitive advantage since the invention of fiat credit. It means that there are no rents that allow you to escape the market – anywhere. Even at scale. Taxes for entrepreneurs, particularly small and medium businesses will nearly disappear. Huge reallocation of intellectual capital. Huge reduction in propaganda. Huge temporary expansion of courts and litigation until enough law accumulates on the books. STARVE THE BEAST.
-
Interest
I don’t have antipathy toward interest. I have an antipathy toward rents. And if we are borrowing from the treasury and paying interest that’s just rents. Banks, in the era of fiat money function only as insurers of borrowing from the treasury, with interest as fee for insuring one another’s borrowings from the treasury. But since in practice there is nearly zero risk and liability, that interest is not earned. Ergo if we are converting capital from future to present there is no CHOICE of investment wherein the private holder of an asset is paying an opportunity cost.
-
Interest
I don’t have antipathy toward interest. I have an antipathy toward rents. And if we are borrowing from the treasury and paying interest that’s just rents. Banks, in the era of fiat money function only as insurers of borrowing from the treasury, with interest as fee for insuring one another’s borrowings from the treasury. But since in practice there is nearly zero risk and liability, that interest is not earned. Ergo if we are converting capital from future to present there is no CHOICE of investment wherein the private holder of an asset is paying an opportunity cost.
-
White Religions and Our Differences
“Pagans(scandinavians)”, Protestants(northern europeans), catholics (central, southern, and eastern europeans), and orthodox(eastern europeans) have different traditional (ancestral) cohesions to draw upon. We cannot intuit across traditions without living them and trying hard to adopt each. I am working to eliminate all falsehood. My bias is to eliminate falsehood. The way I learn to eliminate falsehood is by deflation: I attack all falsehoods without exception until i understand the problem such that only the underlying truths remain. I never make excuses for convenient falsehoods. I understand that goods come from falsehoods, but that betters come from truths. I try to discover those truths and construct the ‘goods and betters’ without the falsehoods. Some people can tolerate this degree of dispassionate slaughtering sacred cows, and some cant. Orthodox peoples have not had scandinavian, germanic, or catholic histories – although the history they do have is closest to the germanic(martial), and culturally closer to the catholic(lower trust) than to the scandinavian (including english), and german (highest trust). Commensurability and compatibility exists across truths but not across falsehoods. So while I can understand you, with some effort, you cannot understand me without much more effort.
-
White Religions and Our Differences
“Pagans(scandinavians)”, Protestants(northern europeans), catholics (central, southern, and eastern europeans), and orthodox(eastern europeans) have different traditional (ancestral) cohesions to draw upon. We cannot intuit across traditions without living them and trying hard to adopt each. I am working to eliminate all falsehood. My bias is to eliminate falsehood. The way I learn to eliminate falsehood is by deflation: I attack all falsehoods without exception until i understand the problem such that only the underlying truths remain. I never make excuses for convenient falsehoods. I understand that goods come from falsehoods, but that betters come from truths. I try to discover those truths and construct the ‘goods and betters’ without the falsehoods. Some people can tolerate this degree of dispassionate slaughtering sacred cows, and some cant. Orthodox peoples have not had scandinavian, germanic, or catholic histories – although the history they do have is closest to the germanic(martial), and culturally closer to the catholic(lower trust) than to the scandinavian (including english), and german (highest trust). Commensurability and compatibility exists across truths but not across falsehoods. So while I can understand you, with some effort, you cannot understand me without much more effort.
-
Territorial Property Requires Capital Improvements
As I’ve argued in my “Ancestral Lands” video, Lands belongs to those who improve it (invest in it), not those who merely make use of it – that’s true of all property. Possession is just possession. Property is the result of transformation (investment). Typically (historically) monuments and physical infrastructure determine ownership (property). It’s not clear why Boer conquest of SA territory is different from Bantu conquest of Khoi and San territory – except that the investment has been profoundly more effective – there wasn’t any before the Boers. None. It’s not clear that the slaughter of south african whites is anything more than a repetition of the past slaughter of african tribes by one another. My prescription is that if there is evidence of fighting, the separation is the only solution. I would prefer africa for africans and europe for europeans at least until we are at demographic, social and economic parity. But some people want globalization where none of us is safe from competitors. There is a minimum difference in distribution of ability, knowledge and custom that is necessary for peaceful cooperation. Beyond that, then one group must oppress or kill the other. And that is the worst of all possible solutions.
-
Territorial Property Requires Capital Improvements
As I’ve argued in my “Ancestral Lands” video, Lands belongs to those who improve it (invest in it), not those who merely make use of it – that’s true of all property. Possession is just possession. Property is the result of transformation (investment). Typically (historically) monuments and physical infrastructure determine ownership (property). It’s not clear why Boer conquest of SA territory is different from Bantu conquest of Khoi and San territory – except that the investment has been profoundly more effective – there wasn’t any before the Boers. None. It’s not clear that the slaughter of south african whites is anything more than a repetition of the past slaughter of african tribes by one another. My prescription is that if there is evidence of fighting, the separation is the only solution. I would prefer africa for africans and europe for europeans at least until we are at demographic, social and economic parity. But some people want globalization where none of us is safe from competitors. There is a minimum difference in distribution of ability, knowledge and custom that is necessary for peaceful cooperation. Beyond that, then one group must oppress or kill the other. And that is the worst of all possible solutions.
-
—“you can’t prove that [insert random anti-religious statement]”—
–“I’m a philosopher and you can’t prove that [insert random anti-religious statement]”— Some Well Meaning Fool. Well, let us play a game then. Because while you state are a philosopher, I state that I am a scientist specializing in testimony (Truth). And that means that proofs (tests of internal consistency in axiomatic and therefore declaratives systems) only assist us in falsification outside of reductio (trivial) conditions. And that justificationism in philosophy and theology in all its forms is a sophism for the purpose of deception. And that tests of truth in existential systems (hypothesis, theory, law) require due diligence against ignorance, error, bias, and deceit. And that fablsificationism in all its forms (science and law) evolved for the purpose of defeating deceptions. And that the possible dimensions of criticism we are aware of are consistency, correspondence, existential(operational) possibility, rational choice (volition), reciprocity, completeness, parsimony, and coherence. In other words, while in textual interpretation, scriptural argument, and application of extant law, one justifies a proposition, one does not and cannot prove a statement – instead we seek to falsify propositions and test whether it survives criticism. My assertion is: (a) that one cannot testify to the existence of a creator; (b) that one cannot testify that the works attributed to a creator are not fictions and fictionalisms (lies); (c) that those who created and perpetuated those lies had motives for spreading those lies, and; (d) that the consequences of spreading those lies has been the cause of the thousand year dark age, the destruction of the five great civilizations of the ancient world, and the death of somewhere between half a billion and a billion people; (e) that the argumentative technique invented in order to perpetuate those lies (sophisms), in both via positiva (pilpul and justificationism, using idealism and supernaturalism, with promise of reward/thread of lost opportunity) and via negativa (critique using loading, framing, obscurantism, overloading, suggestion, straw manning, and heaping of undue praise) are open to scientific measurement which defines them as successful methods of deception, (f) that Boazian anthropology, Freudian psychology, Cantorian Infinities, Marxist History, Economics, and Sociology, Scientific socialism, Feminism, and postmodernism, all make use of this same technique, this time with pseudoscience as a substitute for supernaturalism, and economic and political reward as a substitute for reward in current or afterlife. (g) And that only warranty of due diligence under the available dimensions of human action: consistency, correspondence, existential(operational) possibility, rational choice (volition), reciprocity, completeness, parsimony, and coherence (Testimony), can defend an assertion (proposition, argument) against ignorance, error, bias, fraud, and deceit, and the spread of consequences thereof.
-
—“you can’t prove that [insert random anti-religious statement]”—
–“I’m a philosopher and you can’t prove that [insert random anti-religious statement]”— Some Well Meaning Fool. Well, let us play a game then. Because while you state are a philosopher, I state that I am a scientist specializing in testimony (Truth). And that means that proofs (tests of internal consistency in axiomatic and therefore declaratives systems) only assist us in falsification outside of reductio (trivial) conditions. And that justificationism in philosophy and theology in all its forms is a sophism for the purpose of deception. And that tests of truth in existential systems (hypothesis, theory, law) require due diligence against ignorance, error, bias, and deceit. And that fablsificationism in all its forms (science and law) evolved for the purpose of defeating deceptions. And that the possible dimensions of criticism we are aware of are consistency, correspondence, existential(operational) possibility, rational choice (volition), reciprocity, completeness, parsimony, and coherence. In other words, while in textual interpretation, scriptural argument, and application of extant law, one justifies a proposition, one does not and cannot prove a statement – instead we seek to falsify propositions and test whether it survives criticism. My assertion is: (a) that one cannot testify to the existence of a creator; (b) that one cannot testify that the works attributed to a creator are not fictions and fictionalisms (lies); (c) that those who created and perpetuated those lies had motives for spreading those lies, and; (d) that the consequences of spreading those lies has been the cause of the thousand year dark age, the destruction of the five great civilizations of the ancient world, and the death of somewhere between half a billion and a billion people; (e) that the argumentative technique invented in order to perpetuate those lies (sophisms), in both via positiva (pilpul and justificationism, using idealism and supernaturalism, with promise of reward/thread of lost opportunity) and via negativa (critique using loading, framing, obscurantism, overloading, suggestion, straw manning, and heaping of undue praise) are open to scientific measurement which defines them as successful methods of deception, (f) that Boazian anthropology, Freudian psychology, Cantorian Infinities, Marxist History, Economics, and Sociology, Scientific socialism, Feminism, and postmodernism, all make use of this same technique, this time with pseudoscience as a substitute for supernaturalism, and economic and political reward as a substitute for reward in current or afterlife. (g) And that only warranty of due diligence under the available dimensions of human action: consistency, correspondence, existential(operational) possibility, rational choice (volition), reciprocity, completeness, parsimony, and coherence (Testimony), can defend an assertion (proposition, argument) against ignorance, error, bias, fraud, and deceit, and the spread of consequences thereof.