TO TALEB (THE WESTERN CULT IS SOVEREIGNTY AND LAW) (possibly important post for followers) Replying to @nntaleb @bryan_caplan @tylercowen Nassim: a) Substitute “Warranty and Liability” for “Skin in the Game” and you switch from discourse under colloquial, rhetorical, propter-hoc, low trust, heterogeneous, bazaars, to scientific post-hoc, high trust, homogenous, rule-of-law ‘markets’ proper. Nassim: b) I’ve watched you slowly move this direction, but I haven’t seen you include the fact that western civ and all it’s +/-‘s are the result of the primacy of sovereignty and reciprocity in the traditional law back into oral (pre-)history. Nassim: c) And so, my reading of history, is that the aristocracy was taught to rule (meaning decide, not direct), and the nobility to govern (direct), and labor to obey. (Indo European Tripartism). Otherwise I’m certain your positioning of the ‘Doctrine’ vs ‘Techne’ is correct. Nassim: d) So my read is the law is taught as a craft (practiced) and the ‘liberal arts” are taught as doctrines, and we are wasting a phenomenal amount of money not separating Techne(craft), Religion(obedience), and Law(Rule). Meaning the problem is the Academy (secular church). Nassim e: (Closing) So my intuition is that we all carry our cultures with us and possibly to some degree in our genes, and that this cultural difference is what you are intuiting, but expressing in literary, rational, and mathematical rather than western (legal,scientific) form.
Source: Original Site Post
-
The Mythos of General Plan Ost
THE MYTHOS OF NAZI GENERAL PLAN OST All general staffs develop war plans. The war plan to use asymmetric warfare against ukraine was produced somewhere between 2010 and 2012. Every single general staff in the world has hundreds of such plans. They vary from the trivial, to the devious, to the genocidal. That is what general staffs do. Yet these plans are rarely if ever used. The american Plan Red was to conquer canada so that the british couldn’t for example (I know this because they bought my great-grandparents farm to use as an airport in case they needed to put the plan into action. The plans that are currently in the russian (and soviet) archives are horrific, and include nuclear saturation of the west, and rapid movement of artillery and armor through that territory. There are plans to take finland, to take sweden, to defend from china, to take back constantinople. These are not likely to happen, but they are the research and development plans that all general staffs occupy their time with so that they are NEVER in a position of lacking a plan for any possible contingency. Generalplan Ost existed in six only in preliminary versions from January 1940 to the last one dated 23. Dec. 1942 named “Generalsiedlungsplan”. The plan was subject to a continuous ongoing development, and no version of it was ever approved. Further development of the plan was abandoned in 1943. The 2′nd, 3′rd and 4′th versions of the plan have never been found. Their existence and content is only known from other secondary documentary references. In other words, this is more propaganda. As far as I know the general solution was to resettle people in order to prevent communist expansion from the soviets into european spaces where it could threaten germans. Fascism was a reaction to soviet communism. That’s all. Just as russians today want to defend their ‘resettled’ people in eastern europe, (despite the fact that they are despised in every country), the germans wanted to defend their settled peoples, because they had been incrementally civilizing europe through commerce since the beginning of the Hansa league. I never believe anyone’s history. I look at the economics, and the demographics, and search for incentives. People just make excuses to justify seizure of opportunities. And history is nothing but such excuses. The only measure of a people is trust and the technical, and economic velocity that results from it. The measure of any philosophy or ideology is the long term condition of those who practice it.
-
The Mythos of General Plan Ost
THE MYTHOS OF NAZI GENERAL PLAN OST All general staffs develop war plans. The war plan to use asymmetric warfare against ukraine was produced somewhere between 2010 and 2012. Every single general staff in the world has hundreds of such plans. They vary from the trivial, to the devious, to the genocidal. That is what general staffs do. Yet these plans are rarely if ever used. The american Plan Red was to conquer canada so that the british couldn’t for example (I know this because they bought my great-grandparents farm to use as an airport in case they needed to put the plan into action. The plans that are currently in the russian (and soviet) archives are horrific, and include nuclear saturation of the west, and rapid movement of artillery and armor through that territory. There are plans to take finland, to take sweden, to defend from china, to take back constantinople. These are not likely to happen, but they are the research and development plans that all general staffs occupy their time with so that they are NEVER in a position of lacking a plan for any possible contingency. Generalplan Ost existed in six only in preliminary versions from January 1940 to the last one dated 23. Dec. 1942 named “Generalsiedlungsplan”. The plan was subject to a continuous ongoing development, and no version of it was ever approved. Further development of the plan was abandoned in 1943. The 2′nd, 3′rd and 4′th versions of the plan have never been found. Their existence and content is only known from other secondary documentary references. In other words, this is more propaganda. As far as I know the general solution was to resettle people in order to prevent communist expansion from the soviets into european spaces where it could threaten germans. Fascism was a reaction to soviet communism. That’s all. Just as russians today want to defend their ‘resettled’ people in eastern europe, (despite the fact that they are despised in every country), the germans wanted to defend their settled peoples, because they had been incrementally civilizing europe through commerce since the beginning of the Hansa league. I never believe anyone’s history. I look at the economics, and the demographics, and search for incentives. People just make excuses to justify seizure of opportunities. And history is nothing but such excuses. The only measure of a people is trust and the technical, and economic velocity that results from it. The measure of any philosophy or ideology is the long term condition of those who practice it.
-
Fact and Fiction of Nazi Aryan History
FROM QUORA —“Leaving racial supremacy theories aside, what is the fact and what is the fiction behind the Nazi version of Aryan history?”—CONTROVERSIAL 1) The Nazi propaganda was absolutely pseudoscientific nonsense. We have to understand that the Nazi program was aesthetic – a sort of secular religion – to inspire people who were utterly hopeless and defeated. It was the most successful pseudo-religious program after Marxism – and it was invented largely to oppose marxism (bolshevism) as was all fascism. So the nazis were speaking in a sort of secular religious prose of nationalism the same way that today’s american and western postmodernists speak in a sort of secular religious prose (“Political Correctness”). These are outright falsehoods, and todays academy (postmodernists) openly admit that they are speaking falsehoods because “all that matters is power, not truth, and truth is a weapon of the aristocracy”. The problem arises when we try to treat these movements with anglo-empirical-legal understanding rather than continental-fictional-philosophical understanding, which is simply religious “fictions” (falsehoods) or political ‘ideologies’. It’s inspirational, like myth and religion, not historical or scientific. 2) HOWEVER, first, the late 19th century archeologists were correct, in that the indo europeans were of Aryan (PIE) origins, and that that origin was in Europe (or at least in Ukraine), and that these people moved westward in waves, and brought with them aryanism (paternal, aristocratic, sky worshipping, expansionary, militaristic, technological) civilization, and that they settled in what is today’s poland, spread, and spread into high (Denmark,German) middle (Celtic), and lower (Ital and Hellenic) civilizations, without major impact on old europe (balkans) who were the first major metalworkers. How do we know? a) neoteny (domestication) (morphology, endocrine expression, personality traits) c) verbal acuity (appears we have been trading spatial for verbal for a long time) b) demographic distribution (very little underclass, if any). c) Selection for long winters, close quarters, indoors. In other words, the dozen or so minor races began local speciation, and the delta is highest in Haplogroup I(nordics), and gentility highest (apparently) in slavs. Manorialism began in today’s Holland in the 7th or 8th century, and served to extend the meritocracy of scandinavians, high germans, and baltics. It spread southward (via the Hajnal line). And the germanic prohibition on capital punishment was eliminated first by romans, but by the 12th century reversed, and capital punishment was aggressively used through the end of the 19th century. The far east and far west achieved higher rates of neoteny, albeit from different generations of homo sapiens sapiens, with greater selection pressure on the most northern peoples. (Something happens with cro-magnon generation and we don’t know yet what that was.) The simple difference of lactose tolerance meant 40% more calories from the same food source for doing nothing, and this, with bronze, wheel, horse, voluntary militia, and Individual Sovereignty is the reason for indo european expansion. The steppe and desert (Tribal peoples) did not go thrugh this process and instead under fertile crescent food production, expanded the underclasses. So the asymmetry of our cultures is due in large part to the differences in selection pressures resulting in asymmetric distribution of classes. In other words, far east and far west reduced underclasses, and everyone else increased them. The difference between far east and far west is western verbal acumen, and easter spatial acumen. The reason for this I think I understand, but is due to the time at which each group left africa.
-
Fact and Fiction of Nazi Aryan History
FROM QUORA —“Leaving racial supremacy theories aside, what is the fact and what is the fiction behind the Nazi version of Aryan history?”—CONTROVERSIAL 1) The Nazi propaganda was absolutely pseudoscientific nonsense. We have to understand that the Nazi program was aesthetic – a sort of secular religion – to inspire people who were utterly hopeless and defeated. It was the most successful pseudo-religious program after Marxism – and it was invented largely to oppose marxism (bolshevism) as was all fascism. So the nazis were speaking in a sort of secular religious prose of nationalism the same way that today’s american and western postmodernists speak in a sort of secular religious prose (“Political Correctness”). These are outright falsehoods, and todays academy (postmodernists) openly admit that they are speaking falsehoods because “all that matters is power, not truth, and truth is a weapon of the aristocracy”. The problem arises when we try to treat these movements with anglo-empirical-legal understanding rather than continental-fictional-philosophical understanding, which is simply religious “fictions” (falsehoods) or political ‘ideologies’. It’s inspirational, like myth and religion, not historical or scientific. 2) HOWEVER, first, the late 19th century archeologists were correct, in that the indo europeans were of Aryan (PIE) origins, and that that origin was in Europe (or at least in Ukraine), and that these people moved westward in waves, and brought with them aryanism (paternal, aristocratic, sky worshipping, expansionary, militaristic, technological) civilization, and that they settled in what is today’s poland, spread, and spread into high (Denmark,German) middle (Celtic), and lower (Ital and Hellenic) civilizations, without major impact on old europe (balkans) who were the first major metalworkers. How do we know? a) neoteny (domestication) (morphology, endocrine expression, personality traits) c) verbal acuity (appears we have been trading spatial for verbal for a long time) b) demographic distribution (very little underclass, if any). c) Selection for long winters, close quarters, indoors. In other words, the dozen or so minor races began local speciation, and the delta is highest in Haplogroup I(nordics), and gentility highest (apparently) in slavs. Manorialism began in today’s Holland in the 7th or 8th century, and served to extend the meritocracy of scandinavians, high germans, and baltics. It spread southward (via the Hajnal line). And the germanic prohibition on capital punishment was eliminated first by romans, but by the 12th century reversed, and capital punishment was aggressively used through the end of the 19th century. The far east and far west achieved higher rates of neoteny, albeit from different generations of homo sapiens sapiens, with greater selection pressure on the most northern peoples. (Something happens with cro-magnon generation and we don’t know yet what that was.) The simple difference of lactose tolerance meant 40% more calories from the same food source for doing nothing, and this, with bronze, wheel, horse, voluntary militia, and Individual Sovereignty is the reason for indo european expansion. The steppe and desert (Tribal peoples) did not go thrugh this process and instead under fertile crescent food production, expanded the underclasses. So the asymmetry of our cultures is due in large part to the differences in selection pressures resulting in asymmetric distribution of classes. In other words, far east and far west reduced underclasses, and everyone else increased them. The difference between far east and far west is western verbal acumen, and easter spatial acumen. The reason for this I think I understand, but is due to the time at which each group left africa.
-
The Possibility of an American Revolution
THE POSSIBILITY OF AMERICAN REVOLUTION Replying to @DiasporaDiabhal @thefaceberg 1) While historically a small percentage (under 3%) of unwed males have been the cause for most revolutions (men being a surplus resource of violence like any other resource) it is trivial at this point in time for very small numbers to bring an end to the american government. 2) In fact I cannot think of a time in history where such a revolution would be so trivially brought about. Not just because of a small number of men, but because, like the fall of the roman empire, the basis of our civilization (military service and common law) has been undermined and the common man married or not are in rebellious mood. 3) In the ancient world, judaism was invented to resist, christianity to subvert, then islam used to conquer, and destroy all the great civilizations of the ancient world, creating the Abrahamic Dark Ages. So immigration of hostiles, the conversion of our women and underclass…. 4) Localized rebellion, invasion, the costs of land vs marine policing, the plagues, and the islamic conquest of mediterranean and indian ocean trade, combined with a surplus of males able to retreat into deserts, destroyed every single great civilization between 100 and 1200 … 5) … with the Fresh Reserves of newly islamicized Turks, assisted by plague. accomplishing what the exhausted arabs could not in 1453. It took until 1683 to exhaust the Turks, who could not govern the arabs either. So we have fought islam for 1400 years. 6) And so far, only China, Japan, and Korea, on one end, and America on the other, have resisted the Muslim Conquests. Today muslims are accomplishing through migration what they could not achieve through martial means. It’s just numbers. 7) So imagine something as simple as cutting off EBT (welfare payments) to urban centers by serial overloading (shorting) of power lines, and cutting of transmission lines. That is one of only a hundred similar techniques that do not require armed conflict so much as “just letting the pressure of the dam, do its work”.
-
The Possibility of an American Revolution
THE POSSIBILITY OF AMERICAN REVOLUTION Replying to @DiasporaDiabhal @thefaceberg 1) While historically a small percentage (under 3%) of unwed males have been the cause for most revolutions (men being a surplus resource of violence like any other resource) it is trivial at this point in time for very small numbers to bring an end to the american government. 2) In fact I cannot think of a time in history where such a revolution would be so trivially brought about. Not just because of a small number of men, but because, like the fall of the roman empire, the basis of our civilization (military service and common law) has been undermined and the common man married or not are in rebellious mood. 3) In the ancient world, judaism was invented to resist, christianity to subvert, then islam used to conquer, and destroy all the great civilizations of the ancient world, creating the Abrahamic Dark Ages. So immigration of hostiles, the conversion of our women and underclass…. 4) Localized rebellion, invasion, the costs of land vs marine policing, the plagues, and the islamic conquest of mediterranean and indian ocean trade, combined with a surplus of males able to retreat into deserts, destroyed every single great civilization between 100 and 1200 … 5) … with the Fresh Reserves of newly islamicized Turks, assisted by plague. accomplishing what the exhausted arabs could not in 1453. It took until 1683 to exhaust the Turks, who could not govern the arabs either. So we have fought islam for 1400 years. 6) And so far, only China, Japan, and Korea, on one end, and America on the other, have resisted the Muslim Conquests. Today muslims are accomplishing through migration what they could not achieve through martial means. It’s just numbers. 7) So imagine something as simple as cutting off EBT (welfare payments) to urban centers by serial overloading (shorting) of power lines, and cutting of transmission lines. That is one of only a hundred similar techniques that do not require armed conflict so much as “just letting the pressure of the dam, do its work”.
-
Do Smart People Lack Common Sense (Intelligence)
–“DO SMART PEOPLE LACK COMMON SENSE?”– Well, there are a couple of issues here we can discuss. 1) IQ increases the rate at which you learn, and the degrees of indirection between what’s learned. 2) IQ is the most dominant personality trait, with industriousness second, and all others comparatively far less influential. 3) By and large, after the age of 22, we effectively sort by IQ. Or at least every 1/2 standard deviation (7 points). And it applies (generally) to all walks of life. 4) People with average IQ’s tend to collect information from peers. People with high IQ’s rely less on the opinions of others. 5) So average people network more and pursue less risky, or novel (innovative) ends, and smarter people do the opposite. 6) This is why science has been so important because as we have learned science and reduce errors, the ‘habits’ of scientific thought have been adopted by mainstream people and they ‘calculate’ together fairly successfully. 7) My point of view, is that together we create a sufficiently homogenous set of habits that we believe we understand far more than we do – (overconfidence) – when all we are doing is habituating norms that survived evolution and markets. 8) Roughly speaking, 140 innovates, 130 explains 120’s apply, 110’s organize, 100’s do, 90’s follow, 80s do the best they can and are generally angry about it, and 70s stumble through life despite the fact that no matter what they do it seems not to work. That’s an exaggeration, but it’s close enough that it serves as a general rule of understanding. We are just as specialized as ants, but the similarity of emotion, want, and language convinces us that we are more similar than we are. Hence why we generally choose every aspect of our lives so that we function with people within six degrees of separation.
-
Do Smart People Lack Common Sense (Intelligence)
–“DO SMART PEOPLE LACK COMMON SENSE?”– Well, there are a couple of issues here we can discuss. 1) IQ increases the rate at which you learn, and the degrees of indirection between what’s learned. 2) IQ is the most dominant personality trait, with industriousness second, and all others comparatively far less influential. 3) By and large, after the age of 22, we effectively sort by IQ. Or at least every 1/2 standard deviation (7 points). And it applies (generally) to all walks of life. 4) People with average IQ’s tend to collect information from peers. People with high IQ’s rely less on the opinions of others. 5) So average people network more and pursue less risky, or novel (innovative) ends, and smarter people do the opposite. 6) This is why science has been so important because as we have learned science and reduce errors, the ‘habits’ of scientific thought have been adopted by mainstream people and they ‘calculate’ together fairly successfully. 7) My point of view, is that together we create a sufficiently homogenous set of habits that we believe we understand far more than we do – (overconfidence) – when all we are doing is habituating norms that survived evolution and markets. 8) Roughly speaking, 140 innovates, 130 explains 120’s apply, 110’s organize, 100’s do, 90’s follow, 80s do the best they can and are generally angry about it, and 70s stumble through life despite the fact that no matter what they do it seems not to work. That’s an exaggeration, but it’s close enough that it serves as a general rule of understanding. We are just as specialized as ants, but the similarity of emotion, want, and language convinces us that we are more similar than we are. Hence why we generally choose every aspect of our lives so that we function with people within six degrees of separation.
-
The Experiment Failed.
–“I never understood how letting everyone vote is a good thing”–Peter Sorrentino Well, I think originally jefferson’s idea was that being as inclusive as possible decreased the chances of concentrating power. Universal white males in 1856 White women in 1920 Minorities in 1965. So you can see what happens rather rapidly. The experiment has been a failure. We just need to rule. Return to rule for money and profit. 😉 Militia > King (General) > Judge > Sheriff > Family > Individual.