What is meant by spamming postmodern propaganda instead of political, economic, social, psychological, and cognitive science that clearly demonstrates that people form probabilistic models that accurately judge the character of an individual by his visible traits with extraordinary accuracy?
https://www.quora.com/What-is-meant-by-spillover-bigotry
Kin selection. Family, Kin, Kith, Tribe, Nation, Race. Humans remain tribal. We reside in tribal groups. We mate in tribal groups. We create friendships in tribal groups (often within very narrow genetic distances). We work in tribal groups. We organize reproductively, socially, economically, politically, and religio-militarily in tribal – meaning kinship – groups.
There is political value in the attempted utopian-socialist era we still live in, to create a mythos of universalism. But this survives is only because man is a rationally self interested creatures, and the lower classes will choose the female reproductive strategy (universalism) under alpha-threats, and choose male reproductive strategy (tribalism) under threats from competing underclass threats.
This explains all of world political tensions at the moment.
https://www.quora.com/Where-does-nationalism-come-from
Opinions on this are irrelevant, since the data is overwhelming, the resarch substantial, and it’s quite clear that people vote race, gender, and marital status. In other words – their reproductive strategy.
https://www.quora.com/As-a-voter-do-your-values-inform-your-politics-or-do-your-politics-remodel-your-values
Civil Society means that commons are produced by voluntary actions of citizens rather than by the direction by and payment from government.
Civil societies require high trust. Only northern europeans developed high trust at scale. Ergo civil societies are rare, and the western governments since the war have destroyed most of it through government intervention in under a century.
https://www.quora.com/How-do-you-define-a-civil-society-leader
They will lie to you about it. But no.
https://www.quora.com/Is-Seattle-and-Bellevue-tolerant-with-Muslims-and-vailed-women
To create a word power one requires ~500M people, nuclear weapons, and sufficient access to natural resources that one can sustain an autarkic economy during a period of long conflict.
Russia cannot be a world power. It isn’t. It’s a gas station with nuclear missiles, a lot of unemployed men, and a history of invading and conquering neighbors. The only reason russia exists is that the rest of the world didn’t shut her out of the financial and economic system out of fear she’d use her missiles.
Canada by contrast has something on the order of 75K total military personnel, which cannot even defend itself without the USA paying for it (just like europe).
https://www.quora.com/Why-can’t-Canada-become-as-powerful-as-Russia-given-that-both-nations-share-a-few-similarities-vast-regions-and-are-next-to-a-superpower-China-and-the-US
Think about how illogical the term special interests is
https://www.quora.com/Are-the-Republican-and-Democratic-parties-in-the-US-actually-one-party-controlled-by-special-interests
DO NOT USE SOCIAL MEDIA TO PROPAGATE LIES.
https://www.quora.com/Since-our-good-or-bad-acts-are-decided-when-we-are-in-the-womb-why-we-are-punished-for-bad-deeds-on-the-day-of-Judgement
What is meant by spamming postmodern propaganda instead of political, economic, social, psychological, and cognitive science that clearly demonstrates that people form probabilistic models that accurately judge the character of an individual by his visible traits with extraordinary accuracy?
https://www.quora.com/What-is-meant-by-spillover-bigotry
[I]n price-theory, an externality is any benefit or loss not included in the price of the exchange.
But we can debate whether economics is the study of investment, production, distribution, trade, and consumption, or whether economics is the model under which all social science, from metaphysics, to psychology, to epistemology, to ethics, sociology, law, politics, group evolutionary strategy, and conflict – the entire model for the entire philosophical spectrum.
There remains a conflict between the pseudoscientific(postmodern epistemology, freudian psychology, boazian sociology, marxist political science,) and the scientific social sciences all operating within the single branch of inquiry we call “economics”. (the study of information, incentives, and cooperation).
Since I do understand that economics as a discipline of social science functions as the scientific competitor to the pseudoscientific social sciences, I work with INFORMATION in total, not with PRICES alone. And I extend economic models to include INFORMATION of all kinds, and the consequences of changes in information.
I am fairly certain that this is the CORRECT (meaning true) framing for the general rules which we work to discover in that discipline we ‘archaically’ call economics.
Information is the model in the physical sciences, and information is likewise the model in the social sciences. The fact that Mises, Popper and Hayek did not quite bring this idea to fruition, and why, is one of the great intellectual failings of history – if only because it allowed the competing pseudosciences to gain predominance in our academy and as a consequence, policy.
IN CONTEXT: EXTERNALITIES
In the context of my talk, and in the context of my arguments, there is no difference between the increases or decreases in capital, and the voluntary or involuntary transfers of that capital, by INFORMATION rather than that SUBSET of information that we call PRICES.
In other words, the general rule describing the externalities of prices is but a subset of the general rule describing the externalities of all information.
And unintended consequences are a question of scope of INTENTION, not a question of the scope of the consequences of INFORMATION.
(if you understand this I don’t really require an apology because I realize this is non-trivial material. I make very few errors. But I am always constrained by the limits of time and circumstance and I cannot explain every concept that I rely upon in every utterance I make. It’s just not possible. )
NOW ONTO KEYNESIANISM
Just as I rely on information to produce conditions of DECIDABILITY, I also explain the differences between the natural law (mengerian/austrian), rule of law (friedmanite/chicago), and discretionary rule (keynesian/freshwater) branches of economic theory. In each of these theoretical systems the originators relied upon a method of decidability (or what in math is called ‘axiom of choice’) in order to justify the use of their model over the competing models.
The Natural Law group takes the position of do no harm (do not ‘lie’ using the pricing system).
The Rule of Law group takes the position of do as little harm as possible, so that we are not lying but ‘correcting’ information problems under rule of law. So that there is a trade between the disinformation we provide and the information system we call prices and incentives. It seeks to restore a condition of natural law.
The Discretionary Rule group (Keynesians) take the position that any disinformation we produce now, produces such profound gains, that it’s not only immoral to resist using disinformation, but that its unlikely that any negative consequences we produce would be outweighed by intertemporal gains, that we can fix those problems we cause later on with the proceeds.
Under this model of economics, decidability in economic theory that is not provided by the axiomatic model is provided by an axiom of choice: ie: subjective valuation.
This issue of decidability is not solved yet although the general austrian prescription that we cannot in fact ‘cheat’, seems to be correct given the increasing duration and severity of depressions. This is why the debate has calmed so significantly since 2008’s crisis. The mainstream relies upon keyensian decidability to justify increased rates of consumption at the expense of genetic, normative, and institutional capital degradation, under the assumption of genetic, normative, and (possible) institutional equality.
(which if stated this way, is clearly false).
It has only been since the worldwide abandonment of marxist economics, and the worldwide adoption of consumer capitalism, and fiat credit, that the west’s asymmetrical technological advantage let us assume that the trend of constant growth was available to us without intertemporal consequences.
KEYNESIAN IN THE CONTEXT OF DECIDABILITY
So, when I spoke of Keynesianism it is the method of decidability that I was referring to.
Again, I tend not to make mistakes. I make many mistakes of brevity, and there are many unintended consequences of my brevity. But all common communication requires information loss or the burden would silence us.
Cheers.
Curt Doolittle
The Philosophy of Aristocracy
The Propertarian Institute