The threat is interesting because it serves to disintermediate the individual pledging and the community who will punish that individual, from personal responsibility, and as such, prevent retaliation cycles.
Everything in human history is logical when explained in p-law.
Reply addressees: @NinasNiche
Theme: Coercion
-
The threat is interesting because it serves to disintermediate the individual pl
-
The threat is interesting because it serves to disintermediate the individual pl
The threat is interesting because it serves to disintermediate the individual pledging and the community who will punish that individual, from personal responsibility, and as such, prevent retaliation cycles.
Everything in human history is logical when explained in p-law.
Source date (UTC): 2020-10-12 19:08:27 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1315731071565271043
Reply addressees: @NinasNiche
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1315729822447001600
-
Philosophy = You may (via positive w/ threat of loss of opportunity) Theology =
Philosophy = You may (via positive w/ threat of loss of opportunity)
Theology = You should (via positive w/ threat of ostracizatin)
Law = You must (via negative w/ threat of harm)
Reply addressees: @bishkebab4 -
Philosophy = You may (via positive w/ threat of loss of opportunity) Theology =
Philosophy = You may (via positive w/ threat of loss of opportunity)
Theology = You should (via positive w/ threat of ostracizatin)
Law = You must (via negative w/ threat of harm)
Source date (UTC): 2020-10-04 15:03:57 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1312770438376943616
Reply addressees: @bishkebab4
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1312750542335041536
-
Well, again, that depends on the degree of suppression of reciprocity in the mar
Well, again, that depends on the degree of suppression of reciprocity in the market for suppression of irreciprocity we call the courts. Given that our jurists do not apply a uniform logic of the law (strict natural law), the market no longer functions to provide rule of law.
Reply addressees: @bishkebab4 @kenationalist_ -
Well, again, that depends on the degree of suppression of reciprocity in the mar
Well, again, that depends on the degree of suppression of reciprocity in the market for suppression of irreciprocity we call the courts. Given that our jurists do not apply a uniform logic of the law (strict natural law), the market no longer functions to provide rule of law.
Source date (UTC): 2020-10-01 18:03:37 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1311728490107072513
Reply addressees: @bishkebab4 @kenationalist_
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1311675186769403904
-
“I’m sorry but when the president ‘mean tweets’ you that’s not a threat to journ
—“I’m sorry but when the president ‘mean tweets’ you that’s not a threat to journalistic integrity.”— Glen Greenwald
Agreed. But when leftists mean-publish an article it is a threat to journalistic integrity.
Difference? We know the president’s being sarcastic. -
“I’m sorry but when the president ‘mean tweets’ you that’s not a threat to journ
—“I’m sorry but when the president ‘mean tweets’ you that’s not a threat to journalistic integrity.”— Glen Greenwald
Agreed. But when leftists mean-publish an article it is a threat to journalistic integrity.
Difference? We know the president’s being sarcastic.
Source date (UTC): 2020-09-29 03:23:34 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1310782243594526720
-
Winning is only possible by force. The question is which goat to apply it to. 😉
Winning is only possible by force. The question is which goat to apply it to. 😉
Reply addressees: @ContraFabianist -
Winning is only possible by force. The question is which goat to apply it to. 😉
Winning is only possible by force. The question is which goat to apply it to. 😉
Source date (UTC): 2020-09-29 00:17:59 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1310735538375331841
Reply addressees: @ContraFabianist
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1310716238444675072