[W]ith the exception of the (restored) Spanish and (created) Belgium monarchies–all the surviving monarchies of Europe are either Protestant (UK, Netherlands, Denmark, Norway, Sweden) or tiny (Luxembourg, Liechenstein, Monaco), with Catholic (Italy, Portugal, France, Austria) and Orthodox (Russia, Greece) national monarchies having a much higher failure rate than Protestant ones (Germany), suggests that being able to engage in (and keep) broad social bargains is a survival trait in a monarchy. (Being overthrown by Soviet occupation or Soviet-supported post-Nazi insurrection–Bulgaria, Romania, Hungary, Yugoslavia, Albania–can be discounted.) The Protestant “naked before God” all-in-this-together outlook, including different time perspectives, being an advantage over the Catholic & Orthodox absolution-available, hierarchy-rules approach.
Theme: Civilization
-
MONUMENTS – OUR HIGHEST ART. Monuments serve as incontrovertible title registrie
MONUMENTS – OUR HIGHEST ART.
Monuments serve as incontrovertible title registries.
Source date (UTC): 2014-12-20 00:58:00 UTC
-
ten posts of the year by the leading blogger on the effect of marital patterns.
https://hbdchick.wordpress.com/2014/12/16/top-ten-list-2014/Top ten posts of the year by the leading blogger on the effect of marital patterns.
(Fellow autistic if the female persuasion
Source date (UTC): 2014-12-18 08:59:00 UTC
-
CURT ON THE UNGRATEFUL OPPRESSED If you think you are oppressed, then let me int
CURT ON THE UNGRATEFUL OPPRESSED
If you think you are oppressed, then let me introduce you to some of my ancestors. They thought of it as ‘settling’, ‘civilizing’ or ‘conquering’. And the fact is that getting settled, civilized and conquered by them was a pretty good thing compared to some of the alternatives. So if you really think that your current state is unjust, then I think it’s perhaps time to remind you what ‘unjust’ can be.
Besides. If we don’t. Others will do it in our stead.
Because you’re a dead end.
Source date (UTC): 2014-12-17 13:58:00 UTC
-
We have grown used to our luxuries – spending our heritage. Spending down our no
We have grown used to our luxuries – spending our heritage. Spending down our normative capital. And we have been able to spend it down only because of a temporary technological advantage. We have inserted tremendous risk into our civilization by assuming that the economic advantage of fossile fuels, upon which industrial and post industrial modernity is built, is something that we can perpetuate – which seems at least possible – and that we will retain our advantage over the rest of the world, and that all others in the world will not equilibrate that advantage – which seems impossible.
The problem is that we cannot exit the risk that your assumption places on the rest of us, while you can internalize the opportunity of your preference without exporting the risk onto us.
Source date (UTC): 2014-12-15 04:54:00 UTC
-
When Did They Start Teaching Us To Lie?
Question: One thing I wonder is: How many generations ago did we sell out and start lying to our children, until the lie was forgotten? – Molly
[I]t started fairly early. But it is largely a product of the strategic application of the Ten Planks. But, in addition world circumstances helped a great deal:
Education evolved along with industry so education stopped being a craftsmanly product for small shops delivered by professionals, and instead became a manufacturing process delivered as were all manufactured goods. This is the heart of it.
Soldiers in WW1 were widely distributed in ability ( the southern problem was real at that point it appears) mostly due to literacy and ignorance.
The expansion of consumer society in tandem with first inexpensive print, then radio, then television, meant that the public was constantly hammered with sentimental nonsense at low levels of education, in order to sell new consumers newly available household goods.
We had successfully integrated ‘the flood’ of post-civil war immigration into ‘the american way’ by 1960, but the postwar economic period, in which the world manufacturing and production system had been destroyed leaving only the USA intact, led to a class-shift as our lower classes were paid middle class wages due to temporary scarcity (which has been ending, now that the world has recovered, and former socialist and communist countries have entered the world economy). These new people now were able to exercise influence in the market and in politics, and even in the educational market because of their newly acquired wealth. And sought to rebel against previous generations – just as all generations do.
The addition of the underclasses to the university system postwar provided great incentive, and lack of regulation of colleges and universities allowed the dilution of the meaning of education.
The (real) problem of integrating less capable minorities into grade schools dependent upon 110 IQ’s. (yes). Then once they had been, getting them into colleges where 110iq was necessary to manage the work. This is not statistically possible since the Pareto optimum is around 115 – meaning that only about 20% of people or so actually could complete college course work (adjusting for willingness to work on the down side, and character flaws on the up side.) So education had to be dumbed down **A LOT** so that this many people could get into and graduate from college.
The economic incentive of selling college tuition to women – which like selling representation, or ANYTHING for that matter, is more effective than selling to men (I go by the data and that’s what it says).
The success of cosmopolitan socialism in the 1960’s because of their successful capture of media and the ‘soft disciplines’ in colleges (white collar occupational training) and universities (‘education proper’).
Big mistakes were not having many but smaller schools, not keeping boys separate from girls, and not keeping multiple grades in the same room, low standards for teachers (still), reducing time reading, and reducing the physical education (movement) time.
In other words we should educate our children as large families where they are subject to the same material repeated over and over, and then bring them together to play a few sports and get some exercise.
Curt Doolittle
-
When Did They Start Teaching Us To Lie?
Question: One thing I wonder is: How many generations ago did we sell out and start lying to our children, until the lie was forgotten? – Molly
[I]t started fairly early. But it is largely a product of the strategic application of the Ten Planks. But, in addition world circumstances helped a great deal:
Education evolved along with industry so education stopped being a craftsmanly product for small shops delivered by professionals, and instead became a manufacturing process delivered as were all manufactured goods. This is the heart of it.
Soldiers in WW1 were widely distributed in ability ( the southern problem was real at that point it appears) mostly due to literacy and ignorance.
The expansion of consumer society in tandem with first inexpensive print, then radio, then television, meant that the public was constantly hammered with sentimental nonsense at low levels of education, in order to sell new consumers newly available household goods.
We had successfully integrated ‘the flood’ of post-civil war immigration into ‘the american way’ by 1960, but the postwar economic period, in which the world manufacturing and production system had been destroyed leaving only the USA intact, led to a class-shift as our lower classes were paid middle class wages due to temporary scarcity (which has been ending, now that the world has recovered, and former socialist and communist countries have entered the world economy). These new people now were able to exercise influence in the market and in politics, and even in the educational market because of their newly acquired wealth. And sought to rebel against previous generations – just as all generations do.
The addition of the underclasses to the university system postwar provided great incentive, and lack of regulation of colleges and universities allowed the dilution of the meaning of education.
The (real) problem of integrating less capable minorities into grade schools dependent upon 110 IQ’s. (yes). Then once they had been, getting them into colleges where 110iq was necessary to manage the work. This is not statistically possible since the Pareto optimum is around 115 – meaning that only about 20% of people or so actually could complete college course work (adjusting for willingness to work on the down side, and character flaws on the up side.) So education had to be dumbed down **A LOT** so that this many people could get into and graduate from college.
The economic incentive of selling college tuition to women – which like selling representation, or ANYTHING for that matter, is more effective than selling to men (I go by the data and that’s what it says).
The success of cosmopolitan socialism in the 1960’s because of their successful capture of media and the ‘soft disciplines’ in colleges (white collar occupational training) and universities (‘education proper’).
Big mistakes were not having many but smaller schools, not keeping boys separate from girls, and not keeping multiple grades in the same room, low standards for teachers (still), reducing time reading, and reducing the physical education (movement) time.
In other words we should educate our children as large families where they are subject to the same material repeated over and over, and then bring them together to play a few sports and get some exercise.
Curt Doolittle
-
anything cooler than this? Seriously? Look at what these maps show us about huma
http://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_G2a_Y-DNA.shtmlIs anything cooler than this? Seriously? Look at what these maps show us about human history. A horizontal expansion. Now contrast this with the celtic north-south axis. So damned cool. Then exaggerate mountains deserts and rivers.
We flow like water.
Source date (UTC): 2014-12-12 02:46:00 UTC
-
How To Present Mises and Rand in the Context of the 20th Century?
[I] would present it (as I do) as a last ditch desperate attempt to reach the enlightenment utopia embodied in both cosmopolitan middle class universalism, and anglo puritanical middle class universalism. But that both movements were failures and had to be, because universalism and equality are merely utilitarian merchant philosophies of self interest made possible by temporary economic advantage….
It is cheaper to believe everyone is your friend rather than your competitor. It’s not only the europeans who have converted the cost of defense to consumption – it’s all of western civilization.
Writing up presentation on Mises, Rand and the 20th Century. In a very un-Rand thing to do, crowd source, what points would you stress? If you‘re at all familiar with me you will know where I‘d go in this, but where would you go?
– Peter Boettke -
How To Present Mises and Rand in the Context of the 20th Century?
[I] would present it (as I do) as a last ditch desperate attempt to reach the enlightenment utopia embodied in both cosmopolitan middle class universalism, and anglo puritanical middle class universalism. But that both movements were failures and had to be, because universalism and equality are merely utilitarian merchant philosophies of self interest made possible by temporary economic advantage….
It is cheaper to believe everyone is your friend rather than your competitor. It’s not only the europeans who have converted the cost of defense to consumption – it’s all of western civilization.
Writing up presentation on Mises, Rand and the 20th Century. In a very un-Rand thing to do, crowd source, what points would you stress? If you‘re at all familiar with me you will know where I‘d go in this, but where would you go?
– Peter Boettke