Theme: Class

  • WHY ARE PEOPLE ATTRACTED TO SOCIALISM? INFANTILISM. It is because you begin with

    WHY ARE PEOPLE ATTRACTED TO SOCIALISM? INFANTILISM.

    It is because you begin with the child’s relationship to the parent (family), not the political relationship between families, clans, tribes, and nations.

    1 – The first question of rational choice is “why don’t I commit suicide”.

    2 – The first question of ethics, is, and always will be, “Why don’t I kill you and take your stuff?”

    3 – The first question of politics, is, and always will be “why don’t me and mine, kill you and yours, and take your stuff.

    4 – The first question of all relations is “why don’t I/we kill you/you(plural) and take your stuff?”

    It is only after answering the question, that we decide how we cooperate or not.

    TRANSFORMATION INTO ADULTHOOD VS INFANTILIZATION

    A female, a child, (and a beta male) all admit their weakness and irrelevance when they begin with the presumption of the value of cooperation.

    Cooperation is only valuable until it is not.

    Hence, as an advocate for the organizational model of the family, all of whom demonstrate kin selection, you are attracted to the extension of that kin selection outside of your kin, and to the socialist’s (child,female) strategy.

    You seek it as ideal for the underclass family (genetic inferiors) but is not the ideal for the middle and upper class family (genetic superiors).

    And the markets for association, cooperation, reproduction, production, commons, and polities, are the means by which the competent evolve and the incompetent are removed from the gene pool – or at least, some equilibrium is maintained. Hence why those of us who exterminated our underclasses (east asians and western europeans) possess higher distributions in the middle and upper middle and the other groups possess lower distributions in the lower middle, and lower classes, and especially the extremely costly underclasses.

    So some of us are fully mature adults and understand this, and some of us are still infantilized (or coddled) and do not.

    The strong and able need a reason not to kill, enslave, enserf the weak and less able. And markets and rule of law, are the only means by which it is more profitable to cooperate for all than for the strong and able to enserf, enslave, prey upon, or kill the weak and unable.

    It takes about .001% of the male population to alter the political order. Socialism provides the incentive for the strong to defeat the weak. The only reason socialism had any footing whatsoever is that the christian peoples have a desperate desire to virtue signal their magnanimity – as a means of imitating their ancestral nobility.

    Everywhere even the most feeble attempt has been tried, the outcome has been cyclical degeneration of knowledge, craft, economy, norm, and tradition. Just as religions produced a cyclical degeneration of the same.

    Thus endeth the lesson.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-03-10 09:58:00 UTC

  • In european history, it actually starts before then, at the very beginning, when

    In european history, it actually starts before then, at the very beginning, when it took a family, and their holdings to finance a warrior and his equipment. And it too multiple families to create a war band. So it begins with the ‘militia’ of equals.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-03-08 19:02:26 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/971823475869536257

    Reply addressees: @Alrenous @xmjEE

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/971818761299812352


    IN REPLY TO:

    @Alrenous

    @xmjEE @curtdoolittle I was thinking about the origins of common law.
    Warring barons realized nobody wins a war, so when two were about to go to war, they agreed to get adjudicated instead by some individual.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/971818761299812352

  • so density will remain traditional, with cities functioned as expensive central

    so density will remain traditional, with cities functioned as expensive central markets, ringed (as are most european cities) with slums, and the suburbs containing the middle classes, and the rural areas continuing to depopulate. The future is brazil not star trek.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-03-07 13:41:45 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/971380385270714368

  • The other direction is Sanibel or Carmel on one hand, and any of the top 20 smal

    The other direction is Sanibel or Carmel on one hand, and any of the top 20 small communities that make the lists every year. Personally, if they are more conservative communities with a college I think that’s pretty much the best livability. But some want to be in the action.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-03-07 13:36:52 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/971379153680310272

    Reply addressees: @AlHernandez21

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/971377106092548096


    IN REPLY TO:

    Original post on X

    Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/971377106092548096

  • It depends upon your earning capacity, because the best places to live are very

    It depends upon your earning capacity, because the best places to live are very expensive. It was seattle in the 90’s, Bellevue in the 00’s. It has been san-fran since then although the bay area is ‘done’ I think. It’s probably the research triangle in North Carolina or Austin.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-03-07 13:35:23 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/971378781238697984

    Reply addressees: @AlHernandez21

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/971377106092548096


    IN REPLY TO:

    Original post on X

    Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/971377106092548096

  • (humor) A Woman. A Typical New England Liberal. A passionate participant in ‘The

    (humor) A Woman. A Typical New England Liberal. A passionate participant in ‘The Narrative’. So, I put Parental Controls on MSNBC. Out of the blue, it asks for a code. I ask “what do they put on that channel that is harmful to children?” And, “why would they feel the need to censor MSNBC?” No suspicion whatsoever. Unfortunately I couldn’t control myself…. ha…. ha, ha, ha.. aaaaaaah ha ha ha ha! omg….. I can’t breathe. lol
  • (humor) A Woman. A Typical New England Liberal. A passionate participant in ‘The

    (humor) A Woman. A Typical New England Liberal. A passionate participant in ‘The Narrative’. So, I put Parental Controls on MSNBC. Out of the blue, it asks for a code. I ask “what do they put on that channel that is harmful to children?” And, “why would they feel the need to censor MSNBC?” No suspicion whatsoever. Unfortunately I couldn’t control myself…. ha…. ha, ha, ha.. aaaaaaah ha ha ha ha! omg….. I can’t breathe. lol
  • (humor) A Woman. A Typical New England Liberal. A passionate participant in ‘The

    (humor)

    A Woman. A Typical New England Liberal.

    A passionate participant in ‘The Narrative’.

    So, I put Parental Controls on MSNBC.

    Out of the blue, it asks for a code.

    I ask “what do they put on that channel that is harmful to children?” And, “why would they feel the need to censor MSNBC?”

    No suspicion whatsoever.

    Unfortunately I couldn’t control myself….

    ha…. ha, ha, ha.. aaaaaaah ha ha ha ha!

    omg….. I can’t breathe. lol


    Source date (UTC): 2018-03-07 09:13:00 UTC

  • 2 – And Trotsky was the progenitor of the neoconservatives. Abrahamism version t

    2 – And Trotsky was the progenitor of the neoconservatives. Abrahamism version two came in the classes: feminists, postmodernists, marxists, libertarians, neocons. with aristocracy (meritocracy, sovereignty, reciprocity, evidentiary truth) as the target of their undermining.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-03-04 15:30:58 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/970320703563149312

    Reply addressees: @Lord_Keynes2

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/970319506013872130


    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    @Lord_Keynes2 I did answer. 1) The left (secular priesthood) pursued power by its historical means: moral fictionalism. The right (aristocracy) has practiced it by their usual means (law) since at least 700ad (bipartite manorialism and aggressive hanging), if not 2300bc. (land constraints).

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/970319506013872130


    IN REPLY TO:

    @curtdoolittle

    @Lord_Keynes2 I did answer. 1) The left (secular priesthood) pursued power by its historical means: moral fictionalism. The right (aristocracy) has practiced it by their usual means (law) since at least 700ad (bipartite manorialism and aggressive hanging), if not 2300bc. (land constraints).

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/970319506013872130

  • I did answer. 1) The left (secular priesthood) pursued power by its historical m

    I did answer. 1) The left (secular priesthood) pursued power by its historical means: moral fictionalism. The right (aristocracy) has practiced it by their usual means (law) since at least 700ad (bipartite manorialism and aggressive hanging), if not 2300bc. (land constraints).


    Source date (UTC): 2018-03-04 15:26:12 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/970319506013872130

    Reply addressees: @Lord_Keynes2

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/970312347976810498


    IN REPLY TO:

    Original post on X

    Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/970312347976810498