Source: Twitter X

  • RT @dr_duchesne: @AyoCaesar Ash, let’s debate this, or are you afraid I will ref

    RT @dr_duchesne: @AyoCaesar Ash, let’s debate this, or are you afraid I will refute you the way I always do against haters of whites? My th…


    Source date (UTC): 2024-08-08 19:52:41 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1821635665521787195

  • Agreed

    Agreed.


    Source date (UTC): 2024-08-08 19:52:05 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1821635515671535779

    Reply addressees: @23snakehead

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1821635439838564660

  • THE PROBLEM OF MODERNITY AND THE REASON WHY RELIGION FAILED AND LEFTIST PSEUDOSC

    THE PROBLEM OF MODERNITY AND THE REASON WHY RELIGION FAILED AND LEFTIST PSEUDOSCIENCE AND IDEOLOGY ARE THE NEW CULTS.
    Most humans are cognitively simple. Very. Most cannot grasp more than one dimension of causality, and the vast majority cannot grasp even one logical negative within that one dimension. Largely humans imitate, they rarely think and reason in any sense of the term because they lack the ability to.

    It’s a miracle that we survive in modernity at all.

    If there is a relative monopoly of frames of reference, and that frame varies little from the physical (material), natural (cooperative), and evolutionary (genetic, cultural, institutional) laws, then the burden of reason is reduced by the vast distribution of knowledge production transportation and incentives.

    The problem is that religion can do so but at very high cost of resistance to evolutionary, cultural, and institutional development – because religion on its face does and must counter these laws. So one can produce a monopoly that is trivially easy to grasp, trivially easy to practice, but also trivially easy to stagnate, produce dysgenia, and decline.

    So we must produce the equivalent of a religion that is relatively easy to grasp even if it takes training, but does not diverge from the Physical and Natural, and Evolutionary Laws.

    Cheers
    CD


    Source date (UTC): 2024-08-08 19:50:27 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1821635104294174720

  • RT @spaceangelvoice: you truly have no idea just how militarily dominant the US

    RT @spaceangelvoice: you truly have no idea just how militarily dominant the US alone is, let alone all of NATO. but despite what both the…


    Source date (UTC): 2024-08-08 19:40:56 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1821632706221883785

  • @ItIsHoeMath Suggestion to add to your portfolio of wisdom: Doing what imposes c

    @ItIsHoeMath
    Suggestion to add to your portfolio of wisdom:
    Doing what imposes costs on others hurts everyone by either depriving the producers or disabling, creating dependency, and exaggerating the reproduction of the non-producers.
    Instead, we all benefit from NOT doing things that impose costs upon others.
    If enough of us live in proximity that we all benefit from not imposing costs on others we develop trustworthiness and trust.
    If we develop homogenous trustworthiness and trust when living in proximity, we lower opportunity costs, and lower the risk and in doing so lower transaction costs.
    If we create the informal commons of trustworthiness and trust, lowering opportunity and transaction costs, then can then use some percentage of proceeds from not doing things to one another, that we can create commons of both formal institutions, and physical infrastructure to further lower our opportunity, transaction, information, goods, and services costs.
    If we further lower our costs of opportunity, transaction, information, goods and services in an environment of homogenous trust in proximity to one another, we create an advantage that attracts others who will conform to those norms and institutions which again lowers opportunity and transaction costs further and increases the division of labor decreasing the costs of more complex and diverse goods, services and information.
    The lesson is that we all benefit from the prohibition on imposition of costs upon others, including the prohibition on others free riding on the production of commons that lower opportunity, transaction, and material costs.
    Conversely, we all experience harm from the tolerance for imposition of costs upon others, especially those directly, or indirectly by free riding on the production of commons – including the commons of trustworthiness and trust that made all our benefits possible.
    This is why we are converting from a high trust northern european population to a lower and lower and lower one – and discovering the informal, formal, and material costs that follow that decline.
    Cheers
    CD

    Reply addressees: @ItIsHoeMath


    Source date (UTC): 2024-08-08 19:36:42 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1821631643129434112

  • The quality of the work is more important than the medium. Though the cost of pr

    The quality of the work is more important than the medium. Though the cost of producing the medium does impact the perceived value of a thing, just as all perceptions of cost impact such value. Most monochrome great work is created in pencil then amplified by line, brush, or engraving for the purpose of durability. But assuming you use a high quality cotton low acid paper, and apply a fixative spray over the top there is no reason you cannot produce a work of both economic and aesthetic value.

    Reply addressees: @partymember55 @whatifalthist


    Source date (UTC): 2024-08-08 18:57:16 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1821621719070629888

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1821608943342551495

  • Adam (@Know_More_News) Yes you’re correct. Let’s science it: Two videos for you:

    Adam (@Know_More_News)
    Yes you’re correct. Let’s science it:

    Two videos for you:
    1) The Cause and Crisis of Our Age: the evolution of and institutionalization of the feminine means of sedition, treason, and warfare.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bq9cVBEQ53I

    2) The Abrahamic Method of…


    Source date (UTC): 2024-08-08 18:01:45 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1821607747437391985

  • Adam (@Know_More_News) Yes you’re correct. Let’s science it: Two videos for you:

    Adam (@Know_More_News)
    Yes you’re correct. Let’s science it:

    Two videos for you:
    1) The Cause and Crisis of Our Age: the evolution of and institutionalization of the feminine means of sedition, treason, and warfare.
    https://t.co/tp1uOW7HKe

    2) The Abrahamic Method of Manipulation, Deceit, Sedition, Treason as application of the feminine means of sedition treason and warfare.
    https://t.co/rrqkfH8LVA

    It explains the evolution of the feminine means of undermining into a systemic competitor to empiricism, history, philosophy, mythology, by combining masculine systematization (european/greek) with feminine empathy and social construction (semitic/jewish)

    Closing
    I work and our organization works, to produce law that equally suppresses feminine antisociality, undermining, sedition, treason, and war as we have suppressed masculine means

    To do so requires a science and logic of both what it consists of, how it is constructed, and how to outlaw it.

    Thanks for your work on behalf of our people.

    Sincerely
    CD


    Source date (UTC): 2024-08-08 18:01:45 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1821607747223523329

  • Its possibly a misunderstood statement because I didnt complete the explanation:

    Its possibly a misunderstood statement because I didnt complete the explanation: They took law from us, Yes, but our law was negativa (what not to do) and they used law more abstractly to explain their group strategy as a positiva (what to do as well). So my work does both.


    Source date (UTC): 2024-08-08 17:50:48 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1821604991658029336

    Reply addressees: @Lord__Sousa @NatLawInstitute

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1821514057066684898

  • Its possibly a misunderstood statement because I didnt complete the explanation:

    Its possibly a misunderstood statement because I didnt complete the explanation: They took law from us, Yes, but our law was negativa (what not to do) and they used law more abstractly to explain their group strategy as a positiva (what to do as well). So my work does both.


    Source date (UTC): 2024-08-08 17:50:48 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1821604991582539776