Theme: Class

  • The british people invented scientific law, the scientific revolution, and scien

    The british people invented scientific law, the scientific revolution, and scientific government: a market between classes for the production of commons within to the natural law of reciprocity. And we SCREWED IT UP.

    Restore the Empire. I want my kings and queens back. 😉


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-27 18:05:56 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1188517200958763008

    Reply addressees: @directdemocrac7 @Nalo_Nei @JohnMarkSays

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1188516887694577664


    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    @directdemocrac7 @Nalo_Nei @JohnMarkSays THe British and American failure was not creating a house of labor, and a house of family instead of destroying the house of indusry (commons) by diluting it, and letting the church fall to the marxist academy. Same mistake George made when not giving the Colonies a House each.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1188516887694577664


    IN REPLY TO:

    @curtdoolittle

    @directdemocrac7 @Nalo_Nei @JohnMarkSays THe British and American failure was not creating a house of labor, and a house of family instead of destroying the house of indusry (commons) by diluting it, and letting the church fall to the marxist academy. Same mistake George made when not giving the Colonies a House each.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1188516887694577664

  • There is more that I can’t put in tweets, but the idea is that we destroy the po

    There is more that I can’t put in tweets, but the idea is that we destroy the political class (politicians) entirely and we limit public intellectuals to truthful and reciprocal speech that only proposes trades within and between classes in the construction of commons.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-27 17:56:40 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1188514868237873152

    Reply addressees: @directdemocrac7 @Nalo_Nei @JohnMarkSays

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1188514084314079232


    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    @directdemocrac7 @Nalo_Nei @JohnMarkSays Difference is that no contract of the commons may violate the law of reciprocity, so everything must be constructed as a contract – not legislation – with a full accounting.
    Also there is no ‘general fund’ and no ‘pooling and laundering’ of revenues. And all contracts terminate.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1188514084314079232


    IN REPLY TO:

    @curtdoolittle

    @directdemocrac7 @Nalo_Nei @JohnMarkSays Difference is that no contract of the commons may violate the law of reciprocity, so everything must be constructed as a contract – not legislation – with a full accounting.
    Also there is no ‘general fund’ and no ‘pooling and laundering’ of revenues. And all contracts terminate.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1188514084314079232

  • Authority for War, Oligarchy for Growth, Middle class inclusion for going concer

    Authority for War, Oligarchy for Growth, Middle class inclusion for going concerns, dependent class inclusion for periods of windfall. We have not yet restored the common knowledge existing during the roman empire because we are still the victims of the abrahamic deceits.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-27 16:54:36 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1188499245499932673

    Reply addressees: @directdemocrac7 @Nalo_Nei @JohnMarkSays

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1188498760327974912


    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    @directdemocrac7 @Nalo_Nei @JohnMarkSays Democracy vs Tyranny is another false dichotomy to confuse you with moral vs empirical language. It’s like the false dichotomy of capitalism vs socialism when we always must have mixed economies. The goal is RULE OF LAW OF RECIPROCITY. How we select commons after, doesn’t matter.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1188498760327974912


    IN REPLY TO:

    @curtdoolittle

    @directdemocrac7 @Nalo_Nei @JohnMarkSays Democracy vs Tyranny is another false dichotomy to confuse you with moral vs empirical language. It’s like the false dichotomy of capitalism vs socialism when we always must have mixed economies. The goal is RULE OF LAW OF RECIPROCITY. How we select commons after, doesn’t matter.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1188498760327974912

  • INTERSECTIONALITY – AS THE BAIT AND SWITCH BETWEEN FRAMES By: Gearóid Walsh (via

    INTERSECTIONALITY – AS THE BAIT AND SWITCH BETWEEN FRAMES
    By: Gearóid Walsh (via Brandon Hayes)

    Intersectionality – as the bait and switch between frames like ethnicity and class-construct -… https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=493899034540325&id=100017606988153


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-27 14:41:11 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1188465672617103366

  • INTERSECTIONALITY – AS THE BAIT AND SWITCH BETWEEN FRAMES By: Gearóid Walsh (via

    INTERSECTIONALITY – AS THE BAIT AND SWITCH BETWEEN FRAMES

    By: Gearóid Walsh (via Brandon Hayes)

    Intersectionality – as the bait and switch between frames like ethnicity and class-construct – is largely what created the so-called “alt-right”.

    Intersectionality as a theory is a partiality within a partiality, and eschewing all counterpoint that would make it whole, trustworthy and reciprocal, means that it amounts to a folk theory for theft and soft forms of demographic warfare.

    There is a perfect symmetry to the way in which what is strategically unaccounted for became a form of rising opposition. And also in the way such opposition was framed when it did.

    These are not your grandfather’s “neo-nazis”. They are usually moderate, reasonable and sometimes very sophisticated people who realize the game that’s being played and refuse to be mugged by it so as to not appear “problematic”.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-27 10:41:00 UTC

  • For europeans I propose Judiciary, Monarchy as judge of last resort (veto, swiss

    For europeans I propose Judiciary, Monarchy as judge of last resort (veto, swiss method), Houses for Classes and Genders as Juries, Universal Petition of the Government with Proposed Contracts of the Commons. Restores jury (veto) and eliminates politicians. Much much more….


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-26 16:48:16 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1188135266030149633

    Reply addressees: @directdemocrac7 @JohnMarkSays

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1188134554705580032


    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    @directdemocrac7 @JohnMarkSays Using text instead of voice, teaches others as well. 😉
    Rule of law is more important than govt. So Rule of Law first. Next govt (production of commons) scales up down between war, going concern, windfalls of wealth. We include options on how to make decisions within the law.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1188134554705580032


    IN REPLY TO:

    @curtdoolittle

    @directdemocrac7 @JohnMarkSays Using text instead of voice, teaches others as well. 😉
    Rule of law is more important than govt. So Rule of Law first. Next govt (production of commons) scales up down between war, going concern, windfalls of wealth. We include options on how to make decisions within the law.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1188134554705580032

  • The most obvious sophism in the above post, is —“Marxism advocates nothing lik

    The most obvious sophism in the above post, is

    —“Marxism advocates nothing like uniform income.”—

    Not directly, but he presumes (a) people are relatively equal in value, or worse,… https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=493244164605812&id=100017606988153


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-26 15:35:11 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1188116873315004416

  • MARX, MARXISM, THE WESTERN SOLUTION, AND HIS LIFE OF FRAUD, IN HISTORICAL CONTEX

    MARX, MARXISM, THE WESTERN SOLUTION, AND HIS LIFE OF FRAUD, IN HISTORICAL CONTEXT

    —“Folks criticize what they don’t understand. Marxism advocates nothing like uniform income. The central… https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=493235301273365&id=100017606988153


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-26 15:19:41 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1188112972528394243

  • “Apologies. Last night’s ‘Happy Hour’ only served to increase my disdain for ple

    —“Apologies. Last night’s ‘Happy Hour’ only served to increase my disdain for plebs”—Micah Pezdirtz


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-26 13:46:09 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1188089435180720128

  • “The most obvious sophism in the above post, is : ‘Marxism advocates nothing lik

    —“The most obvious sophism in the above post, is : ‘Marxism advocates nothing like uniform income’.”— Tutu

    Not directly, but he presumes (a) people are relatively equal in value, or worse, that many people are not harmful to others by their mere existence; When it is the excess of harmful people that are more influential to the current condition than the beneficial people; (c) western success was as much a product of our thousands of years of eugenics, as it was our truth telling, traditional law of sovereigns, and preference for technology and magic we controlled, over supernaturalism and the occult that controlled us. (d) labor is other than yet another fungible resource, and organization of production takes all the risk and creates all the value – automation has made this painfully obvious over the past fifty years – and it’s escalating.

    Marx was recommending a repeat of the semitic dark ages, this time in pseudoscience instead of supernaturalism, that would expand the underclasses we sought so hard to gracefully reduce, and restore the communalism of the herd, which is the feminine cognitive bias, that appears to separate semitic from european thought, in metaphysical, preferable, intuitionistic, and argumentative methods, including the use of feminine means of conflcit: false promise, baiting into hazard, profiting from the hazard, plausible deniability as pretense of moral cover, using pilpul (sophism) critique(undermining), in a continuous effort to prevent dominant males from organizing a hierarchy, which would cause loyalty gains, asymmetrically more influential than feminine demands for consumption in exchange for sex, affection, and ingroup advocacy.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-26 11:35:00 UTC