Theme: Class

  • The Middle Must Rule, and This Is How

    by John Mark To state the obvious, the top and bottom united against the middle, is exactly what we’re seeing now. —“Those who possess the goods of life in moderation are best suited to use reason”— Or, as I’d put it, middle class people are capable enough to not need to steal (like the bottom) and don’t have enough power to abuse (like the top). Thus the middle is the only group that has the balance of incentives to act morally (in reciprocity). Reciprocity produces wealth, which produces a larger middle class *and* a super-rich elite who will be very tempted to abuse their power (act parasitically outside if reciprocity) *as well as* an under/lower class increasingly bitter that they’re at the bottom (ripe for leftist propaganda). The wealth also attracts parasites from without who have no intention/ability to act in reciprocity. In other words, a system that operates in enough reciprocity to create prosperity *also* creates its own destruction, *unless* built into the system is a mechanism by which the middle (for the most part the only ones with incentive to continue acting in reciprocity) can enforce punishment against all violations of reciprocity by the top and bottom. So the middle must rule. How? Rule of law (natural law of reciprocity) enforced by mostly middle class judges & police, militia and military made up of mostly middle class men (many lower class as well in military particularly, where they are domesticated and gain more agency), run by middle class men. Testimonialism (outlaw public/powerful figures lying).

  • The Middle Must Rule, and This Is How

    by John Mark To state the obvious, the top and bottom united against the middle, is exactly what we’re seeing now. —“Those who possess the goods of life in moderation are best suited to use reason”— Or, as I’d put it, middle class people are capable enough to not need to steal (like the bottom) and don’t have enough power to abuse (like the top). Thus the middle is the only group that has the balance of incentives to act morally (in reciprocity). Reciprocity produces wealth, which produces a larger middle class *and* a super-rich elite who will be very tempted to abuse their power (act parasitically outside if reciprocity) *as well as* an under/lower class increasingly bitter that they’re at the bottom (ripe for leftist propaganda). The wealth also attracts parasites from without who have no intention/ability to act in reciprocity. In other words, a system that operates in enough reciprocity to create prosperity *also* creates its own destruction, *unless* built into the system is a mechanism by which the middle (for the most part the only ones with incentive to continue acting in reciprocity) can enforce punishment against all violations of reciprocity by the top and bottom. So the middle must rule. How? Rule of law (natural law of reciprocity) enforced by mostly middle class judges & police, militia and military made up of mostly middle class men (many lower class as well in military particularly, where they are domesticated and gain more agency), run by middle class men. Testimonialism (outlaw public/powerful figures lying).

  • Rand is a Young Adult level of thinker, and merely spreading the middle class as

    Rand is a Young Adult level of thinker, and merely spreading the middle class ashkenazi separatist group strategy, rather than the militialism that made the excellences of the west – but for… https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=289832934946937&id=100017606988153


    Source date (UTC): 2018-09-02 22:04:03 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1036374217602883587

  • Rand is a Young Adult level of thinker, and merely spreading the middle class as

    Rand is a Young Adult level of thinker, and merely spreading the middle class ashkenazi separatist group strategy, rather than the militialism that made the excellences of the west – but for most young men (and some women) she provides a literary and non-technical method of opening the door to philosophical thought via an incentive that is important and intuitive to young aspirants. She’s a high school teacher. But she’s a damned good high school teacher.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-09-02 18:03:00 UTC

  • THE BEST GOVERNORS ARE THE MIDDLE CLASS —“Does Aristotle deem monarchy to be t

    THE BEST GOVERNORS ARE THE MIDDLE CLASS

    —“Does Aristotle deem monarchy to be the best form of government?”—

    by Andy Mansfield, DPhil, former academic, teacher and author.

    Aristotle… https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=289759168287647&id=100017606988153


    Source date (UTC): 2018-09-02 16:52:52 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1036295909670350848

  • THE BEST GOVERNORS ARE THE MIDDLE CLASS —“Does Aristotle deem monarchy to be t

    THE BEST GOVERNORS ARE THE MIDDLE CLASS

    —“Does Aristotle deem monarchy to be the best form of government?”—

    by Andy Mansfield, DPhil, former academic, teacher and author.

    Aristotle discussed the six forms of government, the correct form and its deviant counterpart:

    Monarchy – Tyranny

    Aristocracy – Oligarchy

    Polity – Democracy

    However, monarchy was not the best form. F. Miller provides the answer to your question in ‘Aristotle’s Political Theory’ taken from The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (2011):

    ‘Although his own political views were influenced by his teacher Plato, Aristotle is highly critical of the ideal constitution set forth in Plato’s Republic on the grounds that it overvalues political unity, it embraces a system of communism that is impractical and inimical to human nature, and it neglects the happiness of the individual citizens (Politics II.1–5). In contrast, in Aristotle’s “best constitution,” each and every citizen will possess moral virtue and the equipment to carry it out in practice, and thereby attain a life of excellence and complete happiness (see VII.13.1332a32–8). All of the citizens will hold political office and possess private property because “one should call the city-state happy not by looking at a part of it but at all the citizens.” (VII.9.1329a22–3). Moreover, there will be a common system of education for all the citizens, because they share the same end (Pol. VIII.1).

    If (as is the case with most existing city-states) the population lacks the capacities and resources for complete happiness, however, the lawgiver must be content with fashioning a suitable constitution (Politics IV.11).

    The second-best system typically takes the form of a polity (in which citizens possess an inferior, more common grade of virtue) or mixed constitution (combining features of democracy, oligarchy, and, where possible, aristocracy, so that no group of citizens is in a position to abuse its rights).

    Aristotle argues that for city-states that fall short of the ideal, the best constitution is one controlled by a numerous middle class which stands between the rich and the poor.

    For those who possess the goods of fortune in moderation find it “easiest to obey the rule of reason” (Politics IV.11.1295b4–6). They are accordingly less apt than the rich or poor to act unjustly toward their fellow citizens.

    A constitution based on the middle class is the mean between the extremes of oligarchy (rule by the rich) and democracy (rule by the poor).

    “That the middle [constitution] is best is evident, for it is the freest from faction: where the middle class is numerous, there least occur factions and divisions among citizens” (IV.11.1296a7–9).

    The middle constitution is therefore both more stable and more just than oligarchy and democracy.’

    SUMMARY

    Matt Stewart, B.A. Literature, History, and Philosophy

    No- the best government was the one best suited to the people and culture that are to be governed and which allows its citizens to flourish. Aristotle understood that different nations with different values function differently; whatever system of government allows a particular nation to function correctly and flourish is the best form of government for that particular nation. The Persians flourished under a monarchy, and the Athenians flourished as a democracy. The two states had very different forms of government, yet each flourished in its own way. A properly functioning government is one which incorporates and reflects the values and interests of its people. That is the long and short of Aristotle’s view on government.

    221 Views


    Source date (UTC): 2018-09-02 12:52:00 UTC

  • The Best Governors Are the Middle Class

    The government you end up with is determined by what point on this scale your polity equilibrates. —Justin Allred  x-axis: high trust<->low trust y-axis: distributed political agency<->concentrated political agency Monarchy – Tyranny Aristocracy – Oligarchy Polity – Democracy


    —“Does Aristotle deem monarchy to be the best form of government?”— by Andy Mansfield, DPhil, former academic, teacher and author. Aristotle discussed the six forms of government, the correct form and its deviant counterpart: Monarchy – Tyranny Aristocracy – Oligarchy Polity – Democracy However, monarchy was not the best form. F. Miller provides the answer to your question in ‘Aristotle’s Political Theory’ taken from The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (2011): ‘Although his own political views were influenced by his teacher Plato, Aristotle is highly critical of the ideal constitution set forth in Plato’s Republic on the grounds that it overvalues political unity, it embraces a system of communism that is impractical and inimical to human nature, and it neglects the happiness of the individual citizens (Politics II.1–5). In contrast, in Aristotle’s “best constitution,” each and every citizen will possess moral virtue and the equipment to carry it out in practice, and thereby attain a life of excellence and complete happiness (see VII.13.1332a32–8). All of the citizens will hold political office and possess private property because “one should call the city-state happy not by looking at a part of it but at all the citizens.” (VII.9.1329a22–3). Moreover, there will be a common system of education for all the citizens, because they share the same end (Pol. VIII.1). If (as is the case with most existing city-states) the population lacks the capacities and resources for complete happiness, however, the lawgiver must be content with fashioning a suitable constitution (Politics IV.11). The second-best system typically takes the form of a polity (in which citizens possess an inferior, more common grade of virtue) or mixed constitution (combining features of democracy, oligarchy, and, where possible, aristocracy, so that no group of citizens is in a position to abuse its rights). Aristotle argues that for city-states that fall short of the ideal, the best constitution is one controlled by a numerous middle class which stands between the rich and the poor. For those who possess the goods of fortune in moderation find it “easiest to obey the rule of reason” (Politics IV.11.1295b4–6). They are accordingly less apt than the rich or poor to act unjustly toward their fellow citizens. A constitution based on the middle class is the mean between the extremes of oligarchy (rule by the rich) and democracy (rule by the poor). “That the middle [constitution] is best is evident, for it is the freest from faction: where the middle class is numerous, there least occur factions and divisions among citizens” (IV.11.1296a7–9). The middle constitution is therefore both more stable and more just than oligarchy and democracy.’ SUMMARY Matt Stewart, B.A. Literature, History, and Philosophy No- the best government was the one best suited to the people and culture that are to be governed and which allows its citizens to flourish. Aristotle understood that different nations with different values function differently; whatever system of government allows a particular nation to function correctly and flourish is the best form of government for that particular nation. The Persians flourished under a monarchy, and the Athenians flourished as a democracy. The two states had very different forms of government, yet each flourished in its own way. A properly functioning government is one which incorporates and reflects the values and interests of its people. That is the long and short of Aristotle’s view on government.

  • The Best Governors Are the Middle Class

    The government you end up with is determined by what point on this scale your polity equilibrates. —Justin Allred  x-axis: high trust<->low trust y-axis: distributed political agency<->concentrated political agency Monarchy – Tyranny Aristocracy – Oligarchy Polity – Democracy


    —“Does Aristotle deem monarchy to be the best form of government?”— by Andy Mansfield, DPhil, former academic, teacher and author. Aristotle discussed the six forms of government, the correct form and its deviant counterpart: Monarchy – Tyranny Aristocracy – Oligarchy Polity – Democracy However, monarchy was not the best form. F. Miller provides the answer to your question in ‘Aristotle’s Political Theory’ taken from The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (2011): ‘Although his own political views were influenced by his teacher Plato, Aristotle is highly critical of the ideal constitution set forth in Plato’s Republic on the grounds that it overvalues political unity, it embraces a system of communism that is impractical and inimical to human nature, and it neglects the happiness of the individual citizens (Politics II.1–5). In contrast, in Aristotle’s “best constitution,” each and every citizen will possess moral virtue and the equipment to carry it out in practice, and thereby attain a life of excellence and complete happiness (see VII.13.1332a32–8). All of the citizens will hold political office and possess private property because “one should call the city-state happy not by looking at a part of it but at all the citizens.” (VII.9.1329a22–3). Moreover, there will be a common system of education for all the citizens, because they share the same end (Pol. VIII.1). If (as is the case with most existing city-states) the population lacks the capacities and resources for complete happiness, however, the lawgiver must be content with fashioning a suitable constitution (Politics IV.11). The second-best system typically takes the form of a polity (in which citizens possess an inferior, more common grade of virtue) or mixed constitution (combining features of democracy, oligarchy, and, where possible, aristocracy, so that no group of citizens is in a position to abuse its rights). Aristotle argues that for city-states that fall short of the ideal, the best constitution is one controlled by a numerous middle class which stands between the rich and the poor. For those who possess the goods of fortune in moderation find it “easiest to obey the rule of reason” (Politics IV.11.1295b4–6). They are accordingly less apt than the rich or poor to act unjustly toward their fellow citizens. A constitution based on the middle class is the mean between the extremes of oligarchy (rule by the rich) and democracy (rule by the poor). “That the middle [constitution] is best is evident, for it is the freest from faction: where the middle class is numerous, there least occur factions and divisions among citizens” (IV.11.1296a7–9). The middle constitution is therefore both more stable and more just than oligarchy and democracy.’ SUMMARY Matt Stewart, B.A. Literature, History, and Philosophy No- the best government was the one best suited to the people and culture that are to be governed and which allows its citizens to flourish. Aristotle understood that different nations with different values function differently; whatever system of government allows a particular nation to function correctly and flourish is the best form of government for that particular nation. The Persians flourished under a monarchy, and the Athenians flourished as a democracy. The two states had very different forms of government, yet each flourished in its own way. A properly functioning government is one which incorporates and reflects the values and interests of its people. That is the long and short of Aristotle’s view on government.

  • Connecticut is America’s Greece

    From: @NedLamont —“I believe in Connecticut. I believe we’re a state of boundless potential and unparalleled natural beauty, with some of the brightest, hardest-working people you could ever meet.”— 1) You can believe what you want Ned but this is a nearly unsolvable problem unless you restructure or default on the accumulated (parasitic rent-seeking) by government employee unions that have left the state insolvent and the need to feed them driven every viable business out. 2) Connecticut was (thanks to the ideology provided by Yale, Trinity, and Wesleyan and the huge post war working class population) the most successful at copying the soviet model, and the resettlement of underclasses has destroyed the livable and affordable cities. 3) So now, CONNECTICUT = EUROPE’S GREECE. We have few tax paying and tax generating people, we have a vast working and underclasses, and we have driven out the entrepreneurial classes, and taxed companies such that high capital investment is impossible. 4) We have no substantial technical university as does mass and california. No high IQ population outside of the NYC nexus. No high IQ industries of scale. None that generate entrepreneurship as do MIT and Stanford). And our major university is in the wilderness. 5) Because of these policies our cities are right behind Detroit and Baltimore in their lifecycle and our once lovely small towns either destroyed by resettlement (Middletown and Bloomfield in particular) or starved of anything other than bedroom communities. 6) I haven’t operated a business in Harford in two decades (I had one of the larger civic center spaces) but it was like living in a terrorist zone then and it isn’t much better now. Hartford is dead at night and for good reason. The entire 91 corridor is a wasteland. 7) I feel safer in rural ukraine on the border with russia and the war going on than I do in hartford, meriden, new britain, north haven, new haven, bridgeport, waterbury and danbury. I mean. everything within ten miles of 91, and 95 west of westport is a slum with class and race warfare. 8) This is one of the worst states to live in. And its second to California in hostility to business – and we don’t have their climate. So all the good intentions mean nothing without the money by end the accumulated Greek-like parasitism of the bureaucratic class on the people. —“@SaveCTdotORG: Connecticut State debt per person $23k, population decline esp. high earners fleeing, state economy has contracted in real terms since 2010. Pension and interest expense, already 31% of the budget, will quadruple over the next decade. CT is broke and in a death spiral unless we elect Bob”— That’s where I am too. There is no mechanism for a state to go bankrupt and we are best off testing and possibly creating that possibility in federal law. This state is in even worse condition than Illinois, we just don’t have our MANY bad cities in the news as much as Chicago.

  • Connecticut is America’s Greece

    From: @NedLamont —“I believe in Connecticut. I believe we’re a state of boundless potential and unparalleled natural beauty, with some of the brightest, hardest-working people you could ever meet.”— 1) You can believe what you want Ned but this is a nearly unsolvable problem unless you restructure or default on the accumulated (parasitic rent-seeking) by government employee unions that have left the state insolvent and the need to feed them driven every viable business out. 2) Connecticut was (thanks to the ideology provided by Yale, Trinity, and Wesleyan and the huge post war working class population) the most successful at copying the soviet model, and the resettlement of underclasses has destroyed the livable and affordable cities. 3) So now, CONNECTICUT = EUROPE’S GREECE. We have few tax paying and tax generating people, we have a vast working and underclasses, and we have driven out the entrepreneurial classes, and taxed companies such that high capital investment is impossible. 4) We have no substantial technical university as does mass and california. No high IQ population outside of the NYC nexus. No high IQ industries of scale. None that generate entrepreneurship as do MIT and Stanford). And our major university is in the wilderness. 5) Because of these policies our cities are right behind Detroit and Baltimore in their lifecycle and our once lovely small towns either destroyed by resettlement (Middletown and Bloomfield in particular) or starved of anything other than bedroom communities. 6) I haven’t operated a business in Harford in two decades (I had one of the larger civic center spaces) but it was like living in a terrorist zone then and it isn’t much better now. Hartford is dead at night and for good reason. The entire 91 corridor is a wasteland. 7) I feel safer in rural ukraine on the border with russia and the war going on than I do in hartford, meriden, new britain, north haven, new haven, bridgeport, waterbury and danbury. I mean. everything within ten miles of 91, and 95 west of westport is a slum with class and race warfare. 8) This is one of the worst states to live in. And its second to California in hostility to business – and we don’t have their climate. So all the good intentions mean nothing without the money by end the accumulated Greek-like parasitism of the bureaucratic class on the people. —“@SaveCTdotORG: Connecticut State debt per person $23k, population decline esp. high earners fleeing, state economy has contracted in real terms since 2010. Pension and interest expense, already 31% of the budget, will quadruple over the next decade. CT is broke and in a death spiral unless we elect Bob”— That’s where I am too. There is no mechanism for a state to go bankrupt and we are best off testing and possibly creating that possibility in federal law. This state is in even worse condition than Illinois, we just don’t have our MANY bad cities in the news as much as Chicago.