THE RULE OF THREES: Three minutes without oxygen Three days without water Three weeks without food NOW ADD: three hours of power three days of water three weeks of food. three months of order. three years of habitual memory. Police, fire, and emergency are staffed for steady state, not extremes. Local extremes require national resources. Multiple local extremes overloads national resources. Expectations determine behavior under stress. Remove expectation of ‘this will end’ and remove support for the status quo. *people will do anything to restore order*. Very simple rules of revolution.
Source: Original Site Post
-
Revolution: The Rule of Threes:
THE RULE OF THREES: Three minutes without oxygen Three days without water Three weeks without food NOW ADD: three hours of power three days of water three weeks of food. three months of order. three years of habitual memory. Police, fire, and emergency are staffed for steady state, not extremes. Local extremes require national resources. Multiple local extremes overloads national resources. Expectations determine behavior under stress. Remove expectation of ‘this will end’ and remove support for the status quo. *people will do anything to restore order*. Very simple rules of revolution.
-
Pandora’s Box of Democracy
There are always weak men. They are never sufficient in numbers, and easily shamed by the strong. There are however far too many weak women, and they will not be shamed by the strong, only doubling-down on their impulses. As such, opening Pandora’s Box by the inclusion of women into the process of political decisions, without expressly limiting the impulses of women, allowed for the combination of weak men, weak women, and those who would profit from enabling weak men and weak women – the inverse of those who traditionally carried the burden to shaming and policing weak men and weak women.
- A separate house for women would have done it.
- Limiting the vote to married households would have done it.
- Limiting the vote to married households with children and property would have done it best of all.
- But while as families we share common interests, as individuals we do not.
-
Pandora’s Box of Democracy
There are always weak men. They are never sufficient in numbers, and easily shamed by the strong. There are however far too many weak women, and they will not be shamed by the strong, only doubling-down on their impulses. As such, opening Pandora’s Box by the inclusion of women into the process of political decisions, without expressly limiting the impulses of women, allowed for the combination of weak men, weak women, and those who would profit from enabling weak men and weak women – the inverse of those who traditionally carried the burden to shaming and policing weak men and weak women.
- A separate house for women would have done it.
- Limiting the vote to married households would have done it.
- Limiting the vote to married households with children and property would have done it best of all.
- But while as families we share common interests, as individuals we do not.
-
You Are Not Special
by Brandon Hayes We instill the expectation of success without the subsequent struggle. When we do this early in children’s lives we set them up for failure; or more specifically with no tools to deal with failure (the inevitable kind). [a graduation speech entitled “You Are Not Special” sounds like the perfect speech and message] Here’s a great book on the crisis in the US:https://amzn.to/2JIYVMU -
You Are Not Special
by Brandon Hayes We instill the expectation of success without the subsequent struggle. When we do this early in children’s lives we set them up for failure; or more specifically with no tools to deal with failure (the inevitable kind). [a graduation speech entitled “You Are Not Special” sounds like the perfect speech and message] Here’s a great book on the crisis in the US:https://amzn.to/2JIYVMU -
An Alternative Economic Order …
Athens (and Rome for that matter) was policed by young aristocratic males as part of their duty of service. Aristocrats had to rotate offices. Nobility performed ceremonies. Men earned the franchise (right to own land) through military service. Men who owned land were required to provide military service. When I was in Ukraine, during the revolution, groups of 100 young men would form a line and travel the streets. I never felt safer in my life unless I was hunting with other men with rifles. While the de-facto need for military service (preservation of the commons) requires a broader (or at least different) range of skills, the construction of infrastructure (engineers), and the increase in beauty (aesthetics, decoration, maintenance) is just as necessary a function for a polity. There is no reason we cannot shift from all this rent seeking, to employment of men in the service of the commons in exchange for the franchise. We would produce more socialized, stronger, healthier boys and men. Since the primary desire of the aristocracy from the rest is to behave in construction, preservation, and improvement of the commons – including their behavior, there is no reason why we cannot implement shareholder returns to citizens the same way we do so to common shareholders in corporations. This would radically restructure compensation since if we did so, people could just about survive on those dividends, and then work wages could free-float, and be used for entertainment not survival. As such the construction of commons can be produced at far lower costs – rivaling the rest of the world’s infrastructure costs – by the virtue of shifting the compensation methods from high rent to no rent.
-
An Alternative Economic Order …
Athens (and Rome for that matter) was policed by young aristocratic males as part of their duty of service. Aristocrats had to rotate offices. Nobility performed ceremonies. Men earned the franchise (right to own land) through military service. Men who owned land were required to provide military service. When I was in Ukraine, during the revolution, groups of 100 young men would form a line and travel the streets. I never felt safer in my life unless I was hunting with other men with rifles. While the de-facto need for military service (preservation of the commons) requires a broader (or at least different) range of skills, the construction of infrastructure (engineers), and the increase in beauty (aesthetics, decoration, maintenance) is just as necessary a function for a polity. There is no reason we cannot shift from all this rent seeking, to employment of men in the service of the commons in exchange for the franchise. We would produce more socialized, stronger, healthier boys and men. Since the primary desire of the aristocracy from the rest is to behave in construction, preservation, and improvement of the commons – including their behavior, there is no reason why we cannot implement shareholder returns to citizens the same way we do so to common shareholders in corporations. This would radically restructure compensation since if we did so, people could just about survive on those dividends, and then work wages could free-float, and be used for entertainment not survival. As such the construction of commons can be produced at far lower costs – rivaling the rest of the world’s infrastructure costs – by the virtue of shifting the compensation methods from high rent to no rent.
-
The Adaptability of Women and A Lesson for Men
The specialty of women is their ability to adapt to whatever local condition is necessary, whether it be her children, the women who she supports and is supported by, the micro polity she is constrained within, the macro polity she is constrained within – the polity consisting of the constraints of men. Men cannot do this – we specialize for fit into groups, and we lose our ability to adapt fairly quickly, and as such are at long term disadvantages under change of groups. The problem of women’s extraordinary adaptability is the illusion of agreement and shared understanding that they demonstrate when ‘adapting’ to a male. For example, it’s very common for a man (me included) to love his exe’s but understand their incompatible. Or even to cast a woman as crazy but still love her. But women very often un-adapt to men (my ex wife for example), and produce anything from dislike, to antagonistic anger, to absolute hatred of him. What men forget is that this is part of the seductive capability of a woman. And that their loyalty is to their children, and rarely to their husbands, and in those cases where there is loyalty it certainly appears to be reducible to social and economic security. Whereas for most men, loyalty is the most important emotion we feel, and govern our behavior by. (For evolutionary reasons it was necessary for group survival.) So all but a very few women have far less agency than we do. And because of that we are easily convinced that they are more compatible and loyal than we are. They are very different, they are less loyal, they possess lower agency, but they adapt extraordinarily. For this reason a woman is very different about every seven years of her life. While a man is fairly fixed in temperament by his late teens, and once he matures in his early to mid twenties, he will simply have more knowledge and less energy as the years pass. It is extremely important that you share core values and roles, because over time, sexual attraction, the social status of marriage, the financial benefit of a shared household, the economic utility of incomes. But you must never forget that in general she has less agency, and more adaptability, and less loyalty than you do. Love women. Help them nest. Increase their social status with her friends at every opportunity. Listen. Demonstrate understanding. Do not argue or reason with women about what is good or preferable. The only answer is yes we can, yes I can, yes I can but not until next year, no I can’t, no I won’t. Help her be the best she can be. Never let them nag you ever. It is a cancer that women evolved for the raising and training of children which must never be directed to a male. Never let them take you for granted. Never give them control of your income, only some agreed upon portion of it. The first time you see her give you a ‘disgust response’ in her facial expressions (including eye rolls) sell all the assets you can, separate the assets you can’t sell, and leave or divorce her. Once a woman has given you the disgust response it is only a matter of her planning her exit.
-
The Adaptability of Women and A Lesson for Men
The specialty of women is their ability to adapt to whatever local condition is necessary, whether it be her children, the women who she supports and is supported by, the micro polity she is constrained within, the macro polity she is constrained within – the polity consisting of the constraints of men. Men cannot do this – we specialize for fit into groups, and we lose our ability to adapt fairly quickly, and as such are at long term disadvantages under change of groups. The problem of women’s extraordinary adaptability is the illusion of agreement and shared understanding that they demonstrate when ‘adapting’ to a male. For example, it’s very common for a man (me included) to love his exe’s but understand their incompatible. Or even to cast a woman as crazy but still love her. But women very often un-adapt to men (my ex wife for example), and produce anything from dislike, to antagonistic anger, to absolute hatred of him. What men forget is that this is part of the seductive capability of a woman. And that their loyalty is to their children, and rarely to their husbands, and in those cases where there is loyalty it certainly appears to be reducible to social and economic security. Whereas for most men, loyalty is the most important emotion we feel, and govern our behavior by. (For evolutionary reasons it was necessary for group survival.) So all but a very few women have far less agency than we do. And because of that we are easily convinced that they are more compatible and loyal than we are. They are very different, they are less loyal, they possess lower agency, but they adapt extraordinarily. For this reason a woman is very different about every seven years of her life. While a man is fairly fixed in temperament by his late teens, and once he matures in his early to mid twenties, he will simply have more knowledge and less energy as the years pass. It is extremely important that you share core values and roles, because over time, sexual attraction, the social status of marriage, the financial benefit of a shared household, the economic utility of incomes. But you must never forget that in general she has less agency, and more adaptability, and less loyalty than you do. Love women. Help them nest. Increase their social status with her friends at every opportunity. Listen. Demonstrate understanding. Do not argue or reason with women about what is good or preferable. The only answer is yes we can, yes I can, yes I can but not until next year, no I can’t, no I won’t. Help her be the best she can be. Never let them nag you ever. It is a cancer that women evolved for the raising and training of children which must never be directed to a male. Never let them take you for granted. Never give them control of your income, only some agreed upon portion of it. The first time you see her give you a ‘disgust response’ in her facial expressions (including eye rolls) sell all the assets you can, separate the assets you can’t sell, and leave or divorce her. Once a woman has given you the disgust response it is only a matter of her planning her exit.