WHY WERE WESTERNERS UNSUCCESSFUL AT EXPORTING ARYANISM (MARKETS) by Simon Ström By merely establishing rule, a small minority of conquerors do not have the resources to alter the basic fabric of social organization in a region that is already populous, wealthy and has a rigid socio-political system that works for them and is adapted to the local natural incentives. Like the Mongols in China or Iran, the conquerors are rather the ones who are subject to assimilation, although they might retain or even spread their language and symbolism as a function of its prestige. In order to permeate all society, the imposed, foreign evolutionary strategy must be carried by greater numbers than that, or at least powerful enough mechanisms of overcoming the inertia of “immunological rejection” of non-self cultural impulses. The lesser the primordial differences in genes, culture and natural incentives between conqueror and conquered, the lesser the need of great numbers in order to assimilate through elite dominance. 1. Small minority conquest: dynastic turnover, insignificant gene flow and socio-cultural regression to the median. Examples: Yuan dynasty, Hittites, Gothic Spain, British Raj. (Early Indo-Aryans were close to 1, but gravitated somewhat toward 2) 2. Sizable minority conquest: significant gene flow (amalgamation), socio-cultural regression to the mean. Examples: Corded Ware horizon, Roman Gaul, Latin America. 3. Great majority conquest: displacement, insignificant or no gene flow, complete socio-cultural continuation of the conquerors. Examples: North America, Kosovo, West Bank (future). So the obstacles of exporting our strategy are: – They don’t want it. They can profit from modernization without Westernization. – Military dominance won’t cut it. You need to dominate kinship and the social fabric. – The cost of export is too great because we are too different. Rule might be profitable, but assimilation? Questionable. We have evolved to pursue our strategy for millennia, others have not. – Simon Ström From Curt: The problem with spreading our social order is (a) demographic distribution and (b) degree of civilization. In practice we should see Aryanism (markets for rule) expandable only into areas that did not have the ability to expand the underclass, and did not possess a large underclass, and face little tribal conflict. Conversely we should see the worst behavior among peoples who have expansive underclasses, the agrarian or pastoral ability to expand those underclasses, and lots of territorial competition from other kin groups. And that is what we see
Source: Original Site Post
-
Abrahamism: The Source of Ignorance and Deceit
NOT JUST ISLAM BUT ABRAHAMISM: THE INFORMATION DISEASE: THE SOURCE OF IGNORANCE AND DECIET Um. No. Islam’s destroyed almost all the works of the greeks and romans that they could find. And the reintroduction of greek and roman literature into europe occurred as the academics who were about to be persecuted by the muslims fled to the west for safety. Islam, the Black Blague from China, are followed by communism, the mongol golden horde, as the greatest dealers of death. That means that between Abraham’s Judaism, Christianity, and Islamism, and Abraman’s new religion: the Cosmopolitianism of the Ashkenazi (Boaz, Marx, Freud, Cantor, Mises, the Frankfurt School, and) that Abrahamism is the most deadly plague every to face humanity. Even MORE SO than the black plague. A disease of the mind – from ‘polluted minds’, and a disease of the body (‘from polluted lands’), together are more deadly than any combination of wars in history. If we can struggle to end physical diseases, why do we not equally struggle to end informational diseases? We can. Natural Law’s Testimonial Truth.
-
Abrahamism: The Source of Ignorance and Deceit
NOT JUST ISLAM BUT ABRAHAMISM: THE INFORMATION DISEASE: THE SOURCE OF IGNORANCE AND DECIET Um. No. Islam’s destroyed almost all the works of the greeks and romans that they could find. And the reintroduction of greek and roman literature into europe occurred as the academics who were about to be persecuted by the muslims fled to the west for safety. Islam, the Black Blague from China, are followed by communism, the mongol golden horde, as the greatest dealers of death. That means that between Abraham’s Judaism, Christianity, and Islamism, and Abraman’s new religion: the Cosmopolitianism of the Ashkenazi (Boaz, Marx, Freud, Cantor, Mises, the Frankfurt School, and) that Abrahamism is the most deadly plague every to face humanity. Even MORE SO than the black plague. A disease of the mind – from ‘polluted minds’, and a disease of the body (‘from polluted lands’), together are more deadly than any combination of wars in history. If we can struggle to end physical diseases, why do we not equally struggle to end informational diseases? We can. Natural Law’s Testimonial Truth.
-
Through Brotherhood We Transcend Ourselves, Our People And MN
THROUGH BROTHERHOOD WE TRANSCEND OURSELVES, OUR PEOPLE, AND MAN It is only through the brotherhood of warriors that we can construct the contract of reciprocity, that insures our sovereignty, and as such, as a consequence of that sovereignty, we can only act and speak without violating that contract by use of the natural, common, law of sovereign men, a judicial ‘priesthood’ that masters and evolves the technology of that law, a market for freedom of association and disassociation; a market for reproduction(family); a market for the production of goods, services, and information; a market for the production of commons; a monarchy as a judge of contracts of last resort, and a market for polities under which each clan, tribe, and nation, can construct commons that assist every family, clan, tribe, and nation, in competing against the dark forces of time, ignorance, the vicissitudes of nature, and the devolutionary demands of the ‘lesser peoples’ of this world. Curt Doolittle The Natural Law of Reciprocity The Philosophy of Aristocracy The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine.
-
Through Brotherhood We Transcend Ourselves, Our People And MN
THROUGH BROTHERHOOD WE TRANSCEND OURSELVES, OUR PEOPLE, AND MAN It is only through the brotherhood of warriors that we can construct the contract of reciprocity, that insures our sovereignty, and as such, as a consequence of that sovereignty, we can only act and speak without violating that contract by use of the natural, common, law of sovereign men, a judicial ‘priesthood’ that masters and evolves the technology of that law, a market for freedom of association and disassociation; a market for reproduction(family); a market for the production of goods, services, and information; a market for the production of commons; a monarchy as a judge of contracts of last resort, and a market for polities under which each clan, tribe, and nation, can construct commons that assist every family, clan, tribe, and nation, in competing against the dark forces of time, ignorance, the vicissitudes of nature, and the devolutionary demands of the ‘lesser peoples’ of this world. Curt Doolittle The Natural Law of Reciprocity The Philosophy of Aristocracy The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine.
-
Zero Tolerance
ZERO TOLERANCE?—“I can’t help but think of the little boy who was rail roaded by “Zero Tolerance” All he did was bite his poptart into the shape of a gun… Got suspended…Empirical evidencial judgement is the wind before the chaff.”— Anne Tripp Well the question is, zero tolerance for WHAT? (Same problem as Non Aggression. Non aggression against what?) Did he say or do anything false? (no) Did he try to defraud anyone? (no) Did he impose a cost on others (no) Ergo, no crime. Or as we say ‘no harm no foul’ Conversely, would someone be able to compose such a regulation against a child if we lived under zero tolerance for impositions against natural law? Well, no. See? Natural law solves the problem of decidability. Always and Everywhere. -
Zero Tolerance
ZERO TOLERANCE?—“I can’t help but think of the little boy who was rail roaded by “Zero Tolerance” All he did was bite his poptart into the shape of a gun… Got suspended…Empirical evidencial judgement is the wind before the chaff.”— Anne Tripp Well the question is, zero tolerance for WHAT? (Same problem as Non Aggression. Non aggression against what?) Did he say or do anything false? (no) Did he try to defraud anyone? (no) Did he impose a cost on others (no) Ergo, no crime. Or as we say ‘no harm no foul’ Conversely, would someone be able to compose such a regulation against a child if we lived under zero tolerance for impositions against natural law? Well, no. See? Natural law solves the problem of decidability. Always and Everywhere. -
The Greater Good? Three Branches of Economics, Three Group Strategies
Apr 28, 2017 2:50pm THE GREATER GOOD???? We do not ever know the ‘greater good’ and we are continually saturated with lies as to possible ‘greater goods’ and impossible greater goods. And it turns out that all successful appeals to ‘greater goods’ are in fact, merely pretenses for parasitism. Because we are forever ignorant, we cannot know goods, or truths, only bads or falsehoods. As such the greater good can only be obtained by removal of known bads: the natural common law of torts. The demand for reciprocity. And the punishment of offenders. By this (via-negativa) removal of bads, only voluntary market-produced goods can be brought into existence, in any form, whether as material goods, services, or information for consumption or as material goods, services or information for direct investment, or for material goods, services, or information for the production of commons as an indirect investment. By profits from the (via-negativa) removal of bads, and the production of the voluntary organization of production of private, semi-private, and common goods, services, and information, we are then able to insure one another against the vicissitudes of nature. In the literature we find: 1) Totalitarianism of the underclass socialists to use discretion to organize production and perform discretionary redistribution of proceeds as a means of aggressive transition of people from a state far behind competitors; This approach requires existential information to make use of, and is indifferent to the demographic quality, and absence of market economy. 2) The progressive ‘representational’ use of pareto optimums to justify forcible redistribution and the expansion of the dead weight of the underclass (Rawlsian social democracy) as a means of using population to defeat competitors. This approach requires existential market economies to make use of reduced production of information. 3) And we find the conservative ‘aristocratic’ use of Nash equilibriums (classical liberalism/contractualism under natural law) to justify meritocracy and voluntary cooperation and eugenic reduction of the dead weight of the underclasses as means of remaining ahead of competitors. This approach requires existentially reduced lower classes, existential market economies, and existential high trust within that economy to function. 4) To support these three literatures we find three branches of economics: a) the “Saltwater and Discretionary School”. b) The “Freshwater and Rule of Law School” c) The “German/Austrian Political Economy School” I can answer further questions about political models, demographic demands, and the supposed wisdom of crowds, but you wouldn’t believe how much of the totality of political thought is contained in those few paragraphs.
-
The Greater Good? Three Branches of Economics, Three Group Strategies
Apr 28, 2017 2:50pm THE GREATER GOOD???? We do not ever know the ‘greater good’ and we are continually saturated with lies as to possible ‘greater goods’ and impossible greater goods. And it turns out that all successful appeals to ‘greater goods’ are in fact, merely pretenses for parasitism. Because we are forever ignorant, we cannot know goods, or truths, only bads or falsehoods. As such the greater good can only be obtained by removal of known bads: the natural common law of torts. The demand for reciprocity. And the punishment of offenders. By this (via-negativa) removal of bads, only voluntary market-produced goods can be brought into existence, in any form, whether as material goods, services, or information for consumption or as material goods, services or information for direct investment, or for material goods, services, or information for the production of commons as an indirect investment. By profits from the (via-negativa) removal of bads, and the production of the voluntary organization of production of private, semi-private, and common goods, services, and information, we are then able to insure one another against the vicissitudes of nature. In the literature we find: 1) Totalitarianism of the underclass socialists to use discretion to organize production and perform discretionary redistribution of proceeds as a means of aggressive transition of people from a state far behind competitors; This approach requires existential information to make use of, and is indifferent to the demographic quality, and absence of market economy. 2) The progressive ‘representational’ use of pareto optimums to justify forcible redistribution and the expansion of the dead weight of the underclass (Rawlsian social democracy) as a means of using population to defeat competitors. This approach requires existential market economies to make use of reduced production of information. 3) And we find the conservative ‘aristocratic’ use of Nash equilibriums (classical liberalism/contractualism under natural law) to justify meritocracy and voluntary cooperation and eugenic reduction of the dead weight of the underclasses as means of remaining ahead of competitors. This approach requires existentially reduced lower classes, existential market economies, and existential high trust within that economy to function. 4) To support these three literatures we find three branches of economics: a) the “Saltwater and Discretionary School”. b) The “Freshwater and Rule of Law School” c) The “German/Austrian Political Economy School” I can answer further questions about political models, demographic demands, and the supposed wisdom of crowds, but you wouldn’t believe how much of the totality of political thought is contained in those few paragraphs.
-
Noah J Revoy Ruthless selfishness is not an advantage to a group. In-group prefe
Noah J RevoyRuthless selfishness is not an advantage to a group. In-group preference however is. Whites are still by far the strongest race as judged by what we produce (inventions, culture, GDP), we are still histories best warriors and we can easily take over the whole world if we wanted to. The problem is that we have lost our will to power. Generation X is however a return to our roots. They are pissed off that the Baby Boomers squandered the sacrifices of our ancestors and they are willing to take back our birth right. Whites have hit bottom and we are now starting to turn it around.