MARX WAS WRONG VIA DISTRACTION
It’s not a class war after all. It’s a genetic war. Better genes against worse genes. The better genes work with smaller better populations, and the worse genes, like all of nature, work with larger, worse populations.
I mean. That’s just how it is. If we ‘reconcile’ it’s genetic suicide.
Violence is the only answer.
Source date (UTC): 2013-12-07 05:01:00 UTC
Remember that wonder? Your parents. Your teachers and professors? Great minds in great books? The sense that there exists an endless series of undiscovered valleys where you can shop for interesting ideas, gaining a little more knowledge, power, and control over your world as you learn?
But at some point you may become a master, then a teacher, at another point a professor, and possibly a prophet.
And the process, like aging backwards, is terrifying. There are no undiscovered valleys, neatly plowed and sown. All that’s left is an infinite darkness into which you can, with your accumulated wisdom, peer only a short distance, and even then, dimly; treading cautiously, aware of your ignorance, despite all the shoulders of the past that you stand upon.
it’s not all that pleasant really. It’s just very humbling.
Source date (UTC): 2013-12-06 10:49:00 UTC
DAMN. THE HBD PEOPLE ARE RIGHT
Liberty is genetic.
Sigh.
Moderate testosterone, low impulsivity, totally outbred, good verbal and spatial skills.
Source date (UTC): 2013-12-06 09:19:00 UTC
I REDUCE ALL OF THIS “STUFF” TO ECONOMICS, SIGNALING, AND INCENTIVES
1) Genetic adaptation -> more or less impulsively (time preference)(openness to ‘others’)
2) Reproductives strategy -> Moral Bias
3) Structure of Production -> Family Structure
4) Military Structure -> Property Rights initial structure
5) Inheritance Structure -> Property rights Flexibility
6) Property Rights -> Mobility of Labor
7) Family Structure -> Moderates genetic moral bias
8) Inbreeding and outbreeding -> Trust
Freedom (property rights) requires:
1) Militia (self financed weapons, voluntary participation)
2) Individual Property rights (necessitated by militia)
3) Distrust of the concentration of power / Openness
2) Homogeneity of norms.
3) Outbreeding
4) Lower impulsivity
And institutions to persist it.
5) A family (reproductive) structure that compromises between male and female reproductive strategies.
6) Voluntary (arbitrary, preferential) Inheritance
7) Articulated property rights
And side effects
8) Some means of suppressing the reproduction of underclasses (war, pestilence, climate, calories – all of the above)
Source date (UTC): 2013-11-30 06:37:00 UTC
“Good morning!”
(Enthusiastic hug)
“Doolittle! Coffee!”
(5 minutes)
“Here is your coffee princess.” (Enthusiastic hug)
“Doolittle. Let Go. I am not your toy. I am a person.”
“How does that balance with telling me to make you coffee like a galley slave?”
“You are just a man. I am a woman. This is how it must be.”
I still can’t stop laughing…..
Source date (UTC): 2013-11-29 06:00:00 UTC
RUINING AN AUSTRIAN’S DAY “Man must act” is of course, true, but it is an incomplete sentence. “Man must act to serve his interests” is the full sentence. And completing the sentence demonstrates it’s irrelevance. The meaningful problem is that “Man must voluntarily cooperate.” And that is where the problem becomes difficult. Because man must actually “calculate and choose to outwit the current course of events”. We call Reductio ad absurdum arguments rhetorical fallacies for a reason. ANy act of simplification or categorization is necessarily eliminative. ” One must be careful not to eliminate the causal properties of that which is required for later deduction from first principles. It’s a cute trick of obscurant logic. And the genius is in constructing the (false) obscurant logic. Not in what we can deduce from it. Human cooperation requires the voluntary payment of vast opportunity costs, for which they expect something in return. No activity is conducted for altruistic reasons. All activity is conducted in exchange for something. Most of it for insurance on inclusion in future opportunity. Which Mises ignores and Rothbard intentionally avoids. It’s possible to fix Mises’ Praxeology and Rothbard’s ethics, but only by restoring the recognition of those costs, and the consequential impact those costs have on the program of ethics we libertarians rely upon. Fixing those errors then, returns LIBERTY TO ARISTOCRACY, truth and clarity, and rescues it from the ghetto of obscurant, deceptive language meant intentionally to mislead.
RUINING AN AUSTRIAN’S DAY “Man must act” is of course, true, but it is an incomplete sentence. “Man must act to serve his interests” is the full sentence. And completing the sentence demonstrates it’s irrelevance. The meaningful problem is that “Man must voluntarily cooperate.” And that is where the problem becomes difficult. Because man must actually “calculate and choose to outwit the current course of events”. We call Reductio ad absurdum arguments rhetorical fallacies for a reason. ANy act of simplification or categorization is necessarily eliminative. ” One must be careful not to eliminate the causal properties of that which is required for later deduction from first principles. It’s a cute trick of obscurant logic. And the genius is in constructing the (false) obscurant logic. Not in what we can deduce from it. Human cooperation requires the voluntary payment of vast opportunity costs, for which they expect something in return. No activity is conducted for altruistic reasons. All activity is conducted in exchange for something. Most of it for insurance on inclusion in future opportunity. Which Mises ignores and Rothbard intentionally avoids. It’s possible to fix Mises’ Praxeology and Rothbard’s ethics, but only by restoring the recognition of those costs, and the consequential impact those costs have on the program of ethics we libertarians rely upon. Fixing those errors then, returns LIBERTY TO ARISTOCRACY, truth and clarity, and rescues it from the ghetto of obscurant, deceptive language meant intentionally to mislead.
RUINING AN AUSTRIAN’S DAY “Man must act” is of course, true, but it is an incomplete sentence. “Man must act to serve his interests” is the full sentence. And completing the sentence demonstrates it’s irrelevance. The meaningful problem is that “Man must voluntarily cooperate.” And that is where the problem becomes difficult. Because man must actually “calculate and choose to outwit the current course of events”. We call Reductio ad absurdum arguments rhetorical fallacies for a reason. ANy act of simplification or categorization is necessarily eliminative. ” One must be careful not to eliminate the causal properties of that which is required for later deduction from first principles. It’s a cute trick of obscurant logic. And the genius is in constructing the (false) obscurant logic. Not in what we can deduce from it. Human cooperation requires the voluntary payment of vast opportunity costs, for which they expect something in return. No activity is conducted for altruistic reasons. All activity is conducted in exchange for something. Most of it for insurance on inclusion in future opportunity. Which Mises ignores and Rothbard intentionally avoids. It’s possible to fix Mises’ Praxeology and Rothbard’s ethics, but only by restoring the recognition of those costs, and the consequential impact those costs have on the program of ethics we libertarians rely upon. Fixing those errors then, returns LIBERTY TO ARISTOCRACY, truth and clarity, and rescues it from the ghetto of obscurant, deceptive language meant intentionally to mislead.
RUINING AN AUSTRIAN’S DAY “Man must act” is of course, true, but it is an incomplete sentence. “Man must act to serve his interests” is the full sentence. And completing the sentence demonstrates it’s irrelevance. The meaningful problem is that “Man must voluntarily cooperate.” And that is where the problem becomes difficult. Because man must actually “calculate and choose to outwit the current course of events”. We call Reductio ad absurdum arguments rhetorical fallacies for a reason. ANy act of simplification or categorization is necessarily eliminative. ” One must be careful not to eliminate the causal properties of that which is required for later deduction from first principles. It’s a cute trick of obscurant logic. And the genius is in constructing the (false) obscurant logic. Not in what we can deduce from it. Human cooperation requires the voluntary payment of vast opportunity costs, for which they expect something in return. No activity is conducted for altruistic reasons. All activity is conducted in exchange for something. Most of it for insurance on inclusion in future opportunity. Which Mises ignores and Rothbard intentionally avoids. It’s possible to fix Mises’ Praxeology and Rothbard’s ethics, but only by restoring the recognition of those costs, and the consequential impact those costs have on the program of ethics we libertarians rely upon. Fixing those errors then, returns LIBERTY TO ARISTOCRACY, truth and clarity, and rescues it from the ghetto of obscurant, deceptive language meant intentionally to mislead.
Dear Gods.
Thank you for helping me get my health back. With my health came my love for people again. Thanks for giving me the wisdom to simplify my life. And in doing so possibly save it. Thanks for my friends and family, without whom it would have been impossible.
Every day. A little better. A little stronger. A little smarter. And a lot happier.
It’s a trickle, not a torrent, but I’m getting there.
Source date (UTC): 2013-11-24 14:05:00 UTC