http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=f54_1337075813Watch Lotharingia.
It matters.
Source date (UTC): 2013-11-27 17:34:00 UTC
Theme: Civilization
-
Lotharingia. It matters
-
One Thousand Years Of The Anglo Saxon Absolute Nuclear Family
“The English are descended from the Germanic conquerors who brought to England the ‘integrated nuclear family,’ in which nuclear families formed separate households, but stayed close to their relatives for mutual cooperation and defense. These people were illiterate, so we have no written records from those times, and we cannot know precisely how they organized their family life. But what we do know for sure is that over time the original Germanic family type developed into the ‘Absolute Nuclear Family,’ or ‘ANF,’ which we have today. It appears that the family type we have now has existed for about a thousand years.” — America 3.0. p51
-
One Thousand Years Of The Anglo Saxon Absolute Nuclear Family
“The English are descended from the Germanic conquerors who brought to England the ‘integrated nuclear family,’ in which nuclear families formed separate households, but stayed close to their relatives for mutual cooperation and defense. These people were illiterate, so we have no written records from those times, and we cannot know precisely how they organized their family life. But what we do know for sure is that over time the original Germanic family type developed into the ‘Absolute Nuclear Family,’ or ‘ANF,’ which we have today. It appears that the family type we have now has existed for about a thousand years.” — America 3.0. p51
-
The Melting Pot That Isn't
Data is data. Turns out that what we melt is purely scientific, legal, and commercial; and what doesn’t melt is family, morality, metaphysics, and therefore politics. Or, what I would describe in Propertarian terms, as “explicitly calculable” implicit knowledge vs “inexplicitly calculable” tacit knowledge. We can structure formal institutions only for a subset of knowledge. Myth, tradition, ritual, family, morals, ethics, and manners are something that can also be institutionalized. And that us the conservative vision: formal institutions are not enough.
-
The Melting Pot That Isn’t
Data is data. Turns out that what we melt is purely scientific, legal, and commercial; and what doesn’t melt is family, morality, metaphysics, and therefore politics. Or, what I would describe in Propertarian terms, as “explicitly calculable” implicit knowledge vs “inexplicitly calculable” tacit knowledge. We can structure formal institutions only for a subset of knowledge. Myth, tradition, ritual, family, morals, ethics, and manners are something that can also be institutionalized. And that us the conservative vision: formal institutions are not enough.
-
The Melting Pot That Isn't
Data is data. Turns out that what we melt is purely scientific, legal, and commercial; and what doesn’t melt is family, morality, metaphysics, and therefore politics. Or, what I would describe in Propertarian terms, as “explicitly calculable” implicit knowledge vs “inexplicitly calculable” tacit knowledge. We can structure formal institutions only for a subset of knowledge. Myth, tradition, ritual, family, morals, ethics, and manners are something that can also be institutionalized. And that us the conservative vision: formal institutions are not enough.
-
The Melting Pot That Isn’t
Data is data. Turns out that what we melt is purely scientific, legal, and commercial; and what doesn’t melt is family, morality, metaphysics, and therefore politics. Or, what I would describe in Propertarian terms, as “explicitly calculable” implicit knowledge vs “inexplicitly calculable” tacit knowledge. We can structure formal institutions only for a subset of knowledge. Myth, tradition, ritual, family, morals, ethics, and manners are something that can also be institutionalized. And that us the conservative vision: formal institutions are not enough.
-
Why Progressives Are In Denial
Why progressives are in denial over the immorality of GROWTH via CONSUMPTION and IMMIGRATION, rather than GROWTH via CONSTANT POPULATION and INVENTION. Because if they don’t stay buried in denial, they have to admit that their greatest ‘achievement’ of the 20th century was a catastrophic failure that destroyed the inter-GENERATIONAL system of calculation, cooperation and incentives. You know, there isn’t much difference between the necessity of money and prices for temporal coordination, and for the necessity of credit and interest for short inter-temporal coordination, and for the accumulation of wealth, and borrowing for long term, intergenerational coordination. These means of calculating are necessary, not arbitrary. FACTS The following are true; (a) consumption requires that population increases. (b) growth requires that innovation increases (c) consumption is not growth it is expansion – there is a difference. (d) consumption can finance growth. (e) the limit of consumption to finance growth is determined by the rate of invention produced by the financing of consumption. (There is a tidy graph defined here, but I”m not interested enough to go draw it, so I’ll leave it up to your imagination.) I don’t need to bring up that growth via consumption is dysgenic, and growth via invention is eugenic. We have to think about THE PLANET after all. I also don’t need to bring up that growth via consumption is the (mindless) female reproductive strategy that depends on regulation by nature, and that growth via invention is the (mindful) male reproductive strategy, and that this largely provides the explanation for the differences in voting behavior. NO FREE LUNCH http://charleshughsmith.blogspot.com/2013/11/the-generational-injustice-of-social.html
-
Why Progressives Are In Denial
Why progressives are in denial over the immorality of GROWTH via CONSUMPTION and IMMIGRATION, rather than GROWTH via CONSTANT POPULATION and INVENTION. Because if they don’t stay buried in denial, they have to admit that their greatest ‘achievement’ of the 20th century was a catastrophic failure that destroyed the inter-GENERATIONAL system of calculation, cooperation and incentives. You know, there isn’t much difference between the necessity of money and prices for temporal coordination, and for the necessity of credit and interest for short inter-temporal coordination, and for the accumulation of wealth, and borrowing for long term, intergenerational coordination. These means of calculating are necessary, not arbitrary. FACTS The following are true; (a) consumption requires that population increases. (b) growth requires that innovation increases (c) consumption is not growth it is expansion – there is a difference. (d) consumption can finance growth. (e) the limit of consumption to finance growth is determined by the rate of invention produced by the financing of consumption. (There is a tidy graph defined here, but I”m not interested enough to go draw it, so I’ll leave it up to your imagination.) I don’t need to bring up that growth via consumption is dysgenic, and growth via invention is eugenic. We have to think about THE PLANET after all. I also don’t need to bring up that growth via consumption is the (mindless) female reproductive strategy that depends on regulation by nature, and that growth via invention is the (mindful) male reproductive strategy, and that this largely provides the explanation for the differences in voting behavior. NO FREE LUNCH http://charleshughsmith.blogspot.com/2013/11/the-generational-injustice-of-social.html
-
The Mythology Of The Enlightenment
The enlightenment mythos was almost as damaging was christianity. The greatest tragedy in human history may have been the christianization of Europe. The empirical side of the enlightenment was desperately needed to escape jewish mysticism that held us in ignorance for a millennia. Equality under the law, was important for the spread of commerce. But, just as moving people from christianity’s mysticism via Darwin was, let’s say … incomplete, it is very hard to move people from equality of property rights, equality under the law, and the equality of family interests, to what the socialists accomplished, which was equality of opportunity, material equality, inequality under the law, eradication of the common law by legislative law, and the destruction of the nuclear and absolute nuclear family in pursuit of ‘individualism’. We have a very hard time overturning this mythos. This mythos is even rampant in libertarianism. Libertarians are just as enamored of the fallacy of equality as are socialists. Libertarians want to retain meritocracy, sure. But most of us assume the same naive belief that if others ‘only understood’ they would adopt our system of values. But that’s just demonstrably false, both logically, praxeologically, and empirically. The majority of the world detests property rights and individualism.