—“A woman’s alliance and allegiance depend on who is filling the role of husband for her… be it a man, party, or state.”— Anne Summers
Source: Original Site Post
-
Look. I Won’t Get On The Anti-Anyone Bandwagon. I Prosecute Ideas, Arguments, Falsehoods, And Lies.
We must all advocate for our kin first. Yes. But small-state nationalism is the answer. —“…if you’re not racist…”– A ‘friend’ Racial Realism is very different from racism (criticism of others). Other races or tribes, or cults, or parties are only a problem if YOU LET THEM BE. The primary difference between the races appears to be degree of neotonic evolution, and the degree of suppression of the reproduction of the underclasses. The higher the distribution (suppression of the underclass) and the higher the neoteny (slowing of maturity) the greater the trust, the higher the velocity, the greater the production of knowledge and wealth. As far as I know, that’s the science. My opinion remains: if you’re bitching about others you’re just like some woman gossiping because she doesn’t like her position in the status hierarchy. If you say act to alter that condition for the preservation of your kin, and your status, due to the competitive advantage of your elites, by changing yourself, your government, to preserve that advantage from competitors, then that’s just boring ordinary scientific rationality. -
Look. I Won’t Get On The Anti-Anyone Bandwagon. I Prosecute Ideas, Arguments, Falsehoods, And Lies.
We must all advocate for our kin first. Yes. But small-state nationalism is the answer. —“…if you’re not racist…”– A ‘friend’ Racial Realism is very different from racism (criticism of others). Other races or tribes, or cults, or parties are only a problem if YOU LET THEM BE. The primary difference between the races appears to be degree of neotonic evolution, and the degree of suppression of the reproduction of the underclasses. The higher the distribution (suppression of the underclass) and the higher the neoteny (slowing of maturity) the greater the trust, the higher the velocity, the greater the production of knowledge and wealth. As far as I know, that’s the science. My opinion remains: if you’re bitching about others you’re just like some woman gossiping because she doesn’t like her position in the status hierarchy. If you say act to alter that condition for the preservation of your kin, and your status, due to the competitive advantage of your elites, by changing yourself, your government, to preserve that advantage from competitors, then that’s just boring ordinary scientific rationality. -
Perfect Government
They are all just women. That is all that they can be. It is what most prefer to be. And truth is irrelevant to women, since that is a matter of contractual constraint and non compromise. They care only for non-conflict( consensus), possibility, consumption. So the journey for men, is to limit women to reciprocity and possibility, not preference, good, or truth. “I can do that for you”, and “I cannot do that for you”, and “I can only do that for you (when conditions are met)”, are in the vocabulary of women’s understanding. The fact that we added women to the men’s voting pool, but did not provide for them a separate house, as we had the nobility(lords), the property owners people(commons), and the labor (church) is the problem of modernity – not their participation in the market for commons or the market for labor. Markets force cooperation on means despite incompatibility of ends, and construct compromises. Whereas democracy and false equality create markets for propaganda, deception, and bribery of voters through forcible takings and distributions.. When we have opposing reproductive and evolutionary interests, and we have different means of coercion of one another (violence vs seduction), different preferences (numbers versus excellences, equality and consensus vs hierarchy and truth), then the only solution to cooperation that preserves an honest high trust society is a market constructed for the purpose of trade between peoples of different interests. The market for consumption (Self), the market for fixed capital (home), the market for reproduction (family), the market for production(goods, services, and information), the market for the production of commons(‘govt’), and the market for polities, all regulated by the one law of reciprocity – provides a ‘perfect’ hierarchy of ‘perfect’ institutions that assist us in achieving our differing goals, with differing abilities, by the service of one another’s means, despite our differing ends. We had the perfect government, built by the aristocracy, and the failure of the aristocracy to expand the houses to replace the church (family and labor), and to expand the houses to include women, broke the meritocratic hierarchy that for millennia had maximized liberty and prosperity by demonstrated merit, by assisting in incremental, demonstrated loyalty and ability by the product of one’s efforts, and the demonstrated consistency of the intergenerational family as an insurer of individual performance. The one law of reciprocity (tort). An independent ‘cult’ of the law: the judiciary. An hereditary monarch as a judge of last resort. A cabinet of professionals in service of the monarch. A market for the production of commons (non-consumables) consisting of houses for each of the classes: military, judicial, regional (governors), commerce (property), mothers (women), and dependents(underclasses). That market produces contracts, not legislation or law. All contracts ascend unless vetoed by the military, judiciary or King as judge of last resort. All funds raised are produced by contract between the houses. All employees the monarchy serve at the pleasure of the king – without exception. The only ‘Tax’ (non-discretionary cost) for all is 3% of GDP for the military and militia, 1% for the monarchy(use with total discretion), and .01% for the judiciary, raised by the houses. -
Perfect Government
They are all just women. That is all that they can be. It is what most prefer to be. And truth is irrelevant to women, since that is a matter of contractual constraint and non compromise. They care only for non-conflict( consensus), possibility, consumption. So the journey for men, is to limit women to reciprocity and possibility, not preference, good, or truth. “I can do that for you”, and “I cannot do that for you”, and “I can only do that for you (when conditions are met)”, are in the vocabulary of women’s understanding. The fact that we added women to the men’s voting pool, but did not provide for them a separate house, as we had the nobility(lords), the property owners people(commons), and the labor (church) is the problem of modernity – not their participation in the market for commons or the market for labor. Markets force cooperation on means despite incompatibility of ends, and construct compromises. Whereas democracy and false equality create markets for propaganda, deception, and bribery of voters through forcible takings and distributions.. When we have opposing reproductive and evolutionary interests, and we have different means of coercion of one another (violence vs seduction), different preferences (numbers versus excellences, equality and consensus vs hierarchy and truth), then the only solution to cooperation that preserves an honest high trust society is a market constructed for the purpose of trade between peoples of different interests. The market for consumption (Self), the market for fixed capital (home), the market for reproduction (family), the market for production(goods, services, and information), the market for the production of commons(‘govt’), and the market for polities, all regulated by the one law of reciprocity – provides a ‘perfect’ hierarchy of ‘perfect’ institutions that assist us in achieving our differing goals, with differing abilities, by the service of one another’s means, despite our differing ends. We had the perfect government, built by the aristocracy, and the failure of the aristocracy to expand the houses to replace the church (family and labor), and to expand the houses to include women, broke the meritocratic hierarchy that for millennia had maximized liberty and prosperity by demonstrated merit, by assisting in incremental, demonstrated loyalty and ability by the product of one’s efforts, and the demonstrated consistency of the intergenerational family as an insurer of individual performance. The one law of reciprocity (tort). An independent ‘cult’ of the law: the judiciary. An hereditary monarch as a judge of last resort. A cabinet of professionals in service of the monarch. A market for the production of commons (non-consumables) consisting of houses for each of the classes: military, judicial, regional (governors), commerce (property), mothers (women), and dependents(underclasses). That market produces contracts, not legislation or law. All contracts ascend unless vetoed by the military, judiciary or King as judge of last resort. All funds raised are produced by contract between the houses. All employees the monarchy serve at the pleasure of the king – without exception. The only ‘Tax’ (non-discretionary cost) for all is 3% of GDP for the military and militia, 1% for the monarchy(use with total discretion), and .01% for the judiciary, raised by the houses. -
You’re either a soulless heartless ‘man’ that ignores all female manipulation, o
You’re either a soulless heartless ‘man’ that ignores all female manipulation, or an easily manipulable tool (good man), or a sexual predator. -
You’re either a soulless heartless ‘man’ that ignores all female manipulation, o
You’re either a soulless heartless ‘man’ that ignores all female manipulation, or an easily manipulable tool (good man), or a sexual predator. -
We can demonstrate, suggest, and convince ourselves that a scientific truth is v
We can demonstrate, suggest, and convince ourselves that a scientific truth is valid. But proof? That’s an impossibility for science. -
We can demonstrate, suggest, and convince ourselves that a scientific truth is v
We can demonstrate, suggest, and convince ourselves that a scientific truth is valid. But proof? That’s an impossibility for science. -
“Is Truth then Relative or Absolute?”—Ken Cavallon It’s a false dichotomy. We
—“Is Truth then Relative or Absolute?”—Ken Cavallon It’s a false dichotomy. We use the term TRUE for “agreement on correspondence”, |TRUTH CLAIM| Undecidable > Possible > Relative > Consensual > Contingent > Probable > Decidable > Necessary > Analytic > Tautological. As far as I know, all statements remain contingent, if only for the imprecision of definitions alone. I’ll deflate it further into TESIMONY, DEMAND, and WARRANTY. TESTIMONY: demand for agreement(x), degree of necessity(y) and degree of warranty(z). DEMAND: I can hold an agreement on correspondence with myself, with someone else, with others, with everyone, with anyone. WARRANTY: I can warranty my testimony corresponds to the possible, probable, contingent, decidable, necessary, analytic, and tautological. And agreement can be possible, personally actionable, collectively actionable, collectively decidable, and collectively irrefutable, and collectively tautological. We use ‘Truth’ for all those purposes: “true enough for the circumstance.” The question is whether one uses the truth that is sufficient for the circumstances.