Theme: Class

  • AND CLASS RESIST REGRESSION (please read) (jayman) Jayman explains that while of

    http://www.unz.com/jman/regression-to-the-mean/CASTE AND CLASS RESIST REGRESSION

    (please read) (jayman)

    Jayman explains that while offspring regress toward the mean, each generation’s offspring regress toward their familial mean. ergo, selective reproduction maintains aristocracy.

    Conversely, (which he doesn’t cover) suppression of rates of reproduction of the lower classes increase rates of regression toward the group mean: higher median abilities.

    This is what I try to get across with my ‘soft eugenics’ of paying the lower classes to maintain the commons and to have only one child.

    This is how I explain northern european success: manorialism, requirements for property before marriage and reproduction, delayed reproduction improving women’s choice of mate and teaching her work related skills, freedom from arranged marriages (women’s reproductive rights), and enthusiastic use of culling in the form of hanging in public which selects out the impulsive.

    And this is why I am not a racist but a classist: while there are visible differences in talents in the races that are not explicable by impulsivity: aggression/competitiveness, verbal intelligence vs mechanical vs spatial, creative and novel vs persistent and repetitive – the general trend of increasing humanity’s mean abilities benefits all of us and brings about our evolution (transcendence).

    The reason I am concenred about race is democracy, because people vote in blocks to conduct warfare via government policy that regresses toward the mean rather than the constant improvement of man under aristocratic (japanese, chinese or european) paternalism.

    More another time, but you can probably see how I work this problem using incrementalism, that does not punish the current generation by asking them to suffer. I merely ask that we constrain the reproduction of the lower classes so that we continue to evolve in greater peace and prosperity by the ongoing ‘pacification’ of our genes, the life we share the planet with, nature, and the universe.


    Source date (UTC): 2015-10-26 07:34:00 UTC

  • LIES AND MORE LIES

    http://hotair.com/archives/2015/10/21/the-fundamental-dishonesty-of-income-inequality-arguments/LIES LIES AND MORE LIES


    Source date (UTC): 2015-10-25 17:12:00 UTC

  • Untitled

    https://mises.org/blog/poor-us-are-richer-middle-class-much-europe

    Source date (UTC): 2015-10-25 14:30:00 UTC

  • WHAT IS THE UTILITY OF OFFSHORE WEALTH COMPARED TO GOVERNMENT CORRUPTION? I cann

    http://ftalphaville.ft.com/2015/10/21/2142483/the-case-against-luxembourg/BUT, WHAT IS THE UTILITY OF OFFSHORE WEALTH COMPARED TO GOVERNMENT CORRUPTION?

    I cannot imagine in my wildest dreams that whatever is held offshore by private individuals and put to work in the economy is not the best possible use of that money for mankind. I am far more concerned about worldwide political corruption, and world wide political rent seeking, and world wide parasitism than I am about people seeking to put money to much better uses than all extant governments appear to.


    Source date (UTC): 2015-10-24 15:23:00 UTC

  • IF CONTROVERSIAL, CONTRARIANISM Just to state something terribly controversial:

    http://blog-imfdirect.imf.org/2015/10/22/empowering-women-tackling-income-inequality/NECESSARY IF CONTROVERSIAL, CONTRARIANISM

    Just to state something terribly controversial: women currently live in an extreme period of privilege never before extant in history, and despite that privilege continue to seek to expand it even further: a demonstration of hyper-consumption without regard to the future that matches the uniqueness of their privilege.

    I understand that just as the State-Military-Industrial complex served the interests of males and the expansion of the Absolute Nuclear Family, the State, Academy, and Media Complex is incentivized to advance the interests of women, in order to advance the rate of consumption, at the expense of the accumulation of intergenerational capital, and to profit themselves by doing so, just as the church profited by the sale of indulgences: the closest thing to a non-stem-degree history provides for us as analogy.

    But that does not mean that either feminine privilege, expansion of the State, Academy, Media Consumption-Complex, or further expansion of female ‘privilege’ is anything more than an attempt to “Harrison Bergeron” males, destroy not only the Absolute Nuclear Family, but the Nuclear Family, and the Traditional Family as both the central institution of the reproductive, normative, and productive economy, at the expense of males, and transfer rates of reproduction from the productive to the unproductive classes, in total reversal of over three thousand years of soft eugenics through various forms of manorialism, and a thousand years of aggressive eugenics (hanging half a percent of the population or more every year). Both of which were essential to the development of the high trust society and the corresponding economic velocity that made female participation in the work place as well as in politics, a unique possibility.

    Given that the data shows that women voters have been entirely responsible for the constant leftward shift that has granted them greater privilege than was ever available to males, Given that they have voted to ensure the impoverishment of almost all in old age, Given that they have destroyed the family, starting with black families now white. Given that they have voted to destroy rule of law. And given that none of this would have been possible without women voters, and given that the incrementalism displayed by the left continues from equality under the law, to equality in voting, to equality of opportunity to equality of outcome, to privilege for women in outcomes at the expense of increasing suicides and impoverishment of males, it is somewhat hard to ‘make the case’ that more privilege should be given to females, and that instead, perhaps, we should separate the houses by gender, and return to separation of houses by class, so that such privilege is prevented from occurring ever again.

    We just had the female century and the ashkenazi century, and we are overthrowing the mythos of both – mostly generated by Boaz, Marx, Cantor, Mises, the Frankfurt School, the Postmodernists, the feminists, and the Rawlsians – using old fashioned modernism and empirical science. In retrospect these authors have been pseudoscientists, novelists masquerading as philosophers, and outright liars.

    It would perhaps be superior for all if we ended the fallacy of majority rule and returned to a government consisting of a Market For the Production of Commons Between the Classes, in which we conducted voluntary exchanges rather than majority induced ‘privileges’.

    Rule of law was enough. Equality under the law was enough. Voluntary exchange was enough. Science and Public Speech as Truthful Testimony was enough.

    As Hayek warned us, the twentieth century will be remembered in history as one of great wars, the suicide of the west, and as a reaction to Darwin an era of reemergent Mysticism, and the second attempted Conversion of the west by that ‘intentional’ attempt at conquest by conversion of women to the new religion. He unfortunately used the word mysticism rather than pseudoscience and failed to understand the power of the media to implement pseudoscience was just as great as the pulpit was for christianity, and the printing press was for protestantism.

    That is the Contrarian View of Things.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Philosophy of Aristocracy

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine


    Source date (UTC): 2015-10-23 06:33:00 UTC

  • ITS POSSIBLE TO BREAK THE BIG FINANCIAL HOUSES Contrary to common argument, it i

    ITS POSSIBLE TO BREAK THE BIG FINANCIAL HOUSES

    Contrary to common argument, it is trivially easy to break the big finance houses.

    But all those rent seekers both in finance and government could no longer seek rents.

    This is why we will require revolution. It is not possible to replace those rents and those incentives.

    For us to win they must lose.

    Which is enough incentive for me.


    Source date (UTC): 2015-10-20 06:24:00 UTC

  • THE INCENTIVES TO MARRY REGRESS TO THE NOBILITY ALONE (There is currently no eco

    THE INCENTIVES TO MARRY REGRESS TO THE NOBILITY ALONE

    (There is currently no economic benefit to marriage for those who do not have property and wish to transfer property across generations – building a clan. So we return to normal form: serial relationships. Marriage evolved as a means of preventing violence over mates, second as a means of controlling property, and third as a means of supporting children, lastly as a means of regulating access to land, and finally of regulating access to ‘respectable society” by imitation of those with children, property, and land. If those needs no longer exist, many will not practice them.)


    Source date (UTC): 2015-10-20 05:10:00 UTC

  • Yes. Postwar Privilege Ended. That’s Why.

    http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2015/09/when-america-was-great-taxes-were-high-unions-were-strong-and-government-was-big/407284/ [L]ets Look at History: 1) Americans conquered a new continent 2) They sold off this continent to immigrants 3) They sold consumer goods to these immigrants. 4) They caused a collapse in prices in Europe (like china does to americans today) 5) They created new fiat money to give credit to these immigrants. 6) They directed these profits to investment in everything including the 20’s boom. 7) Europeans sought to control german expansion and created the european civil war. 8) The resulting correction and the oppressive settlement with Germany led to the second world war, which was merely an extension of the first, and which destroyed the word’s economy. 9) Americans inherited control of the British empire’s trading lanes and took over as the reserve currency. 10) American workers benefitted from producing expensive but low quality products to a world largely destroyed by war. 12) It took to the 1970’s for the world to reasonably rebuild. 13) In 1990 the effects of Chinese abandonment of communism and their entry into world labor started the dramatic shift in american consumption of consumer goods, just as america had done to Europe more than a century before. 15) In 2007 the rest of the world has largely adopted the same fiat money and consumer capitalist techniques. 16) In 2015, Americans have lost most competitive advantages EXCEPT for their GERMANIC high trust ethics and rule of law. 17) By 2040 Americans will lose their advantage in high trust ethics and rule of law to cultural and genetic conquest.

  • Yes. Postwar Privilege Ended. That’s Why.

    http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2015/09/when-america-was-great-taxes-were-high-unions-were-strong-and-government-was-big/407284/ [L]ets Look at History: 1) Americans conquered a new continent 2) They sold off this continent to immigrants 3) They sold consumer goods to these immigrants. 4) They caused a collapse in prices in Europe (like china does to americans today) 5) They created new fiat money to give credit to these immigrants. 6) They directed these profits to investment in everything including the 20’s boom. 7) Europeans sought to control german expansion and created the european civil war. 8) The resulting correction and the oppressive settlement with Germany led to the second world war, which was merely an extension of the first, and which destroyed the word’s economy. 9) Americans inherited control of the British empire’s trading lanes and took over as the reserve currency. 10) American workers benefitted from producing expensive but low quality products to a world largely destroyed by war. 12) It took to the 1970’s for the world to reasonably rebuild. 13) In 1990 the effects of Chinese abandonment of communism and their entry into world labor started the dramatic shift in american consumption of consumer goods, just as america had done to Europe more than a century before. 15) In 2007 the rest of the world has largely adopted the same fiat money and consumer capitalist techniques. 16) In 2015, Americans have lost most competitive advantages EXCEPT for their GERMANIC high trust ethics and rule of law. 17) By 2040 Americans will lose their advantage in high trust ethics and rule of law to cultural and genetic conquest.

  • Democrats vs Liberals: Democrats are low IQ people who vote for free stuff. Libe

    Democrats vs Liberals:

    Democrats are low IQ people who vote for free stuff.

    Liberals are high IQ people who use free stuff to win votes.

    qotd: Shaun Moss


    Source date (UTC): 2015-10-15 13:06:00 UTC