Theme: Coercion

  • CIVILIZATIONAL DIFFERENCES IN STRATEGY AND CONFLICT (very important) (summary) (

    CIVILIZATIONAL DIFFERENCES IN STRATEGY AND CONFLICT

    (very important) (summary)

    (Warning: This is the most important subject of our age, but it might trigger (offend) you so please move on if having your sacred cows slaughtered by science is unacceptable.)

    Pre-marine-trade Europeans like all other peoples didn’t have writing – few people did. Writing requires the evolution of debt-trade and taxation. The population density of territorial regions, the rate of production of territorial areas, and the cost of political control, all inhibit it, which is why the river valleys and the coasts developed writing.

    The europeans like all people, had oral history. Although it is most interesting that the europeans seem to have invented history as we understand it. The Atlantics, the Mediterraneans, the indo europeans, the beaker people, the Germanics, and certainly the Celts had oral history and had an industry for training their priesthood.

    The jews had history, and didn’t write it down, because of the prestige of memorizing it (just like europeans), and only wrote it down under advice, question, or command of the greeks. Like the dictionary froze english spelling, writing froze jewish, then christian, then islamic dogma. This isn’t the same for european, Indian, or Chines thought which was advice (wisdom literature) not command (authoritarian literature).

    Besides the universal lying and face before truth of the semitic tribal peoples, and this authoritarian literature, the middle east developed jewish pilpul and critique (lying) and muslim recitation and stagnation (avoidance of adaptation).

    The Chinese pursued harmony of their wisdom literature which limited their adaptation, and they followed sun tzu in war by delay and deceit, and their culture followed.

    The Iranic branch in India (Hindus) could not (as is happening to Americans) rule such a vast population of lower classes, and so chose a corporeal organization of class roles – a military organization familiar to the iranics, replicating the class structure of warriors, priests, and workers, each with different responsibilities.

    The Chinese had chosen hierarchical family, and europeans had chosen a hierarchical military.

    The Jewish-Palestinian-Arab semites chose universal resistance to all forms of aristocracy including the Egyptian by the adoption of universal slave resistance as a strategy.

    This failure to produce a durable military still plagues the jewish- Palestinian and less so Arab (raiding) peoples today. The jews in particular because they have neither the ethical tradition of land holders (and cant hold land) nor the ethical tradition of a working class (who fight) or an ethical tradition of a market between the elites. Which is why we wanted to move all jews to Israel, making a Netherlands of the middle east that may drag the primitive peoples out of authoritarian monopoly slave-resistance into market modernity – AND insulate us from jewish and muslim undermining at the same time.

    The Chinese strategy of course is to eradicate islam by incremental domestication of the muslim people and prohibiting entry of the jewish people. There is no force in Asia that can compete with Chinese domestication of other peoples. They have been doing it for thousands of years.

    The Europeans, having conquered the continent by military and technological means, had the pressure of a small population using maneuver, adaptation, technology, and a universal voluntary and therefore entrepreneurial military to produce a hierarchy – and produced as a consequence an entrepreneurial wisdom literature of markets including technology(science), law, philosophy, theology that competed with one another under their only immutable strategy – the sovereignty of the entrepreneurial warrior.

    Europeans maneuver, adapt, and invent with small number , Chinese resist and defeat by delay and deceive using numbers, semites deceive seduce with false promise and undermine and weaken – and the muslims consume and destroy, and Indians ignore because they are unconquerable by other than a cancer like islam – and get temporarily conquered by every passing malcontent even if they have the most beautiful of cultures and religions for the average person (except for the filth and irresponsibility for the commons).

    So as usual, when comparing civilizations we don’t disambiguate the truth-telling-empirical races, from the delay and deceive races, from the lying races – which is the entire purpose of my work.

    Ending abrahamic method of lying by jewish, christian, muslim generation-one theology, and marxism, cultural marxism, postmodern, feminism, denialism, by abrahamic generation-two pseudoscience and sophism.

    Because lying – especially baiting into hazard and undermining, are (empirically) easier and more profitable, as we can see from financial, insurance, gambling, advertising, media, entertainment, pornography, ad education – all of which allow undermining host peoples by false promise, absent warranty, under claims of plausible deniability of innocence.

    Which is where the Ashkenazi Jews have specialized: in every single form of profiting by false promise, baiting into hazard, – because that is the group strategy, just like every other group strategy I’ve mentioned above.

    And this is why the Ashkenazi were the most literate people in Europe but contributed absolutely nothing to thought, politics, law, technology, medicine, science, or arts until baited into the franchise in exchange for adopting european Aristotelian if not christian ethics – and failed.

    And its why they were kicked out of Egypt and every other host civilization; why they lost their territory and were dispersed, and why they have been systematically removed from every host population once they become intolerable by achieving critical mass of influence on the people and can no longer deny their strategy.

    This is the scientific basis of the conflict of civilizations including the conflict between jewish and muslim civilizations and EVERY OTHER civlization on this earth.

    Yet no matter what opportunity every people give the jews and muslims the outcome is the same – neither jews nor muslims adapt. Because that is the nature of their authoritarian monopoly parasitic group strategy: slave resistance that preys on the social and economic orders of aristocratic meritocratic people until they are reduced to genetic, institutional, political, cultural, normative, economic and military ruin – it is the strategy of uncontrolled dysgenic growth used by cancers. And the only ‘cure’ for this method of deceit is the light of truth and the law to punish it in a via-negativa market for the continuous suppression of profit by plausible deniability of accountability.

    The worst you can say about europeans is that we dragged humanity out of tyranny, rent seeking, free riding, deceit, ignorance, superstition, hard labor, starvation, disease, suffering, child mortality, early death, and the vicissitudes of an uncaring nature – but could have done it better.

    That’s the worst you can say. That is not the worst we can say for the semitic dark ages and 1billion dead in the ancient world, and 100M dead in just this past century and a half, and we still are not ‘cured’ of this second attempt at another semitic dark age.

    We have domesticated and Germanicized Christianity – but we must make it impossible for the Jews and Muslims to create another dark age for mankind.

    My hope is that we cure both physical and informational cancers in this century. And I’m doing my part for the latter by extending the law to prohibit these forms of crime. That is the sole purpose of my work. To prohibit, reverse, and perform restitution for the crimes against civilization by the use of abrahamic methods of deceit- so that we may continue mankind’s transcendence into the gods we imagined.

    People have very little agency. We are trial and error gene computers with firmware that imitates others, evolving software for no purpose other than negotiation with others – and what little agency we have is determined by the limits of whatever it is we learn by imitation and negotiation.

    Very, very, few of us transcend the animal from semi-consciousness to consciousness. The result of doing so – is love for man like we love our domesticated animals, pets, and children. “all we can do is help them. we are too few to do much else.”


    Source date (UTC): 2020-01-30 09:10:00 UTC

  • PEACE IS JUST WAR BY NON-MILITARY MEANS. We are always at war. Evolution is warf

    PEACE IS JUST WAR BY NON-MILITARY MEANS.

    We are always at war. Evolution is warfare. Politics and economics are simply productive means of warfare. Anglos domesticated economic warfare, but the chinese and europeans have broken it. Europeans domesticated military warfare but russians and iranians and muslims have broken it. And the Chinese are in the process of breaking it, so we are back to undomesticated warfare, of man against man huddling in subterranean tunnels trying to escape swarms of automated weaponry that will rapidly replace tanks and artillery.

    Peace is just war by non-military means.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-01-29 20:17:00 UTC

  • If our ancestors didn’t have capital punishment for other than cowardice in batt

    If our ancestors didn’t have capital punishment for other than cowardice in battle and adultery, how did they get rid of malcontents?

    Sacrifice. See. Then it was for the gods. No one was responsible.

    I like that method.

    😉


    Source date (UTC): 2020-01-28 16:30:00 UTC

  • “Do you think people will ever stand up to the current tyranny in America? I am

    —“Do you think people will ever stand up to the current tyranny in America? I am worried that people will talk about it and talk about it and never stand up completely. It is one thing to rally but an entirely different thing to take up arms.”–Brandon Williams

    1) If you asked this question five years ago, and you ask this question this month, what reaction would you expect?

    I did. People called me nuts. Today people just ask when.

    2) If you got a call today from me or someone like me, to show up in a certain town at a certain date would you go? Would you have gone five years ago? Would you go today? Will you go in 90 days?

    If the answer to that question isn’t “I’ll show up” then you’re the f–king problem so shut the f—k up.

    If the answer is “I’ll show up”, then we win.

    There is nothing in the world that can stop 100k of us.

    We are the largest army in the world.

    But only if hand-wringers show up.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-01-28 15:05:00 UTC

  • Q: Why do we have the right to prevent a criminal from hanging himself?

    Q: Why do we have the right to prevent a criminal from hanging himself?


    Source date (UTC): 2020-01-28 14:44:00 UTC

  • PUBLIC DUELS BETWEEN SEXES PROVIDE PSYCHOLOGICAL RELEASE —“The man fights whil

    PUBLIC DUELS BETWEEN SEXES PROVIDE PSYCHOLOGICAL RELEASE

    —“The man fights while in a hole and the woman gets a weapon as a handicap for a fair duel. I imagine the comedic value alone of such an event was often enough to diffuse a situation lol”—John Papadopoulos

    The truth of this statement, regarding pitting, dunking, stocks, and hangings, can’t be overstated. Public exorcism of frustrations is about as good as it gets for humans.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-01-28 09:39:00 UTC

  • FIXING COURT AND STATE (important) –“Women are able to make false accusations (

    FIXING COURT AND STATE

    (important)

    –“Women are able to make false accusations (for example of domestic violence), and they can lie to the courts without repercussion. How would you deal with this?”—Will Peavy

    This is one of the examples of ‘female privilege’ that has gotten out of hand. In my divorce, Allora said I had threatened to burn the house down as a means of coercing the court to lock the house and seize the assets. This was a lie. We had discovered black mold in the house, and I had said that we would have to burn the house down to fix it. But we all know how that false accusation was drummed up. I said I wouldn’t settle without withdrawal of that accusation. My lawyer said they wouldn’t do so because it was admission of perjury. If I hadn’t been rapidly declining from cancer (which they also used to manipulate me) I would have pursued the matter on principle. So, this happens every day and women get away with it every day because lying and undermining is the female strategy of warfare.

    HOW DO YOU FIX IT?

    You fix this by restoring punishment for it with zero tolerance. You fix zero tolerance by punishing judges, prosecutors, and lawyers for tolerating it.

    And I am very close to preferring the British system of a three stage legal system (paralegal, lawyer, barrister, (plus specialized barristers) and specialized judges rather than this one size fits all american system.

    In general, the British system has survived far better than the american system in a number of ways.

    1. Our written “Transactional”, Natural Law” constitution is FAR better. Even if P-Law will take it further.

    2. Our supreme court is a far better solution.

    3. Our only failure was a process for returning undecidable propositions to the legislature, thereby preventing legislation from the bench.

    4. A territorial senate like the house of lords has been erroneously diluted in both systems.

    5. A Senate (house of lords) and Congress (parliament) like our roman and greek ancestors remains successful, but in both systems new houses should have been added for non-propertied (non-business owners), and another for women. In this way the classes could have continued trading instead of producing monopoly race to the bottom.

    6. A monarch and prime minister is a better system than president. Washington was wrong.

    7. The continental party system of proportional seating appears to have been more effective at producing coalitions(ideologies), and consistent policy, and the anglo system seems to have been better at producing classes(practicalities). So, in this sense

    8. My goal is to end the monopoly of majoritarianism, and instead restore the original intent of the parliament: a market for commons between the classes of those demonstrating competence and contributions the commons: monarchy, senate (territory), commons (business), and consumers (labor, women). This failure to understand the rise of the consumer class and to provide a house for consumers – especially women, who are the vast majority of dependents and consumers, and who consume the vast majority of common goods – is probably the primary failure of post medieval political thought.

    9. There is a good argument to be made that monarchy is without question the best form of government if mirrored by a militia and a constitution of natural law with universal standing – because there is no evidence that democratic governments are anywhere near as effective as monarchical. In western civilization – prior to napoleon – one ‘voted with one’s feet’ via negativa (right of exit). Something we do even more so today. The court provides individual defense via-negativa (right of juridical defense). And a parliament that must approve new law and new levies provides political defense via negativa (right of legislative dissent). With these three, we use POLITIES not parties or houses to compete. And this is the most effective market for political excellence, just as business is the most effective market for productive excellence.

    10. However, if by common consensus democracy (voting) we obtain better loyalty to one another and the state(territory, constitution, laws, culture) and polity, and we obtain a sense of belonging and harmony, then as long as the constitution prohibits even the mention of the irreciprocal (unconstitutional) then this is a trade off we can make. As such we can choose the following choices:

    a) Elected Representative Voters (vote initiatives up and down)[Works with multiple houses and creates a market]

    b) Direct Household Voting (vote initiatives up and down)[works with multiple houses]

    c) Direct Equalitarian Voting (vote initiatives up and down) [works with multiple houses]

    d) Direct Economic Voting (vote to fund initiatives, and what’s funded passes, and unfunded closes) [requires most informed public]

    e) Randomly Selected Jury (votes up and down – the original function of parliament) Parliament is an extension of the jury.

    That should provide you with a bit of understanding.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-01-28 08:58:00 UTC

  • Yeah. File this under “stupid libertarian games by the application of stupid Pil

    Yeah. File this under “stupid libertarian games by the application of stupid Pilpul games from Abrahamic theology”. You can’t have a contract with someone or something that can’t empathize and sympathize, cooperate, negotiate terms, or hold to a contract.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-01-27 13:55:57 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1221793973985054720

    Reply addressees: @FrostieCash @clairlemon

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1221746316272906240


    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/1221746316272906240

  • Me and mine who pay for the commons because commons produce extraordinary return

    Me and mine who pay for the commons because commons produce extraordinary returns, want to know why you shouldn’t be imprisoned, enslaved, enserfed, ostacized or hung for obtaining the benefits of our commons without paying for them.

    Why should we permit you any freedom or liberty at all? Why is it that we don’t hang you? What’s your reason?

    (The difference between capitalizing commons, common infrastructure that improves trade, and redistributive consumption that is not a commons – I assume is rather obvious.)


    Source date (UTC): 2020-01-27 09:58:00 UTC

  • PROBLEMS THE POLICE FACE (1) police are expensive and patrol large territories i

    PROBLEMS THE POLICE FACE

    (1) police are expensive and patrol large territories in expensive vehicles with expensive equipment.

    (2) because police are expensive they do not travel in groups, and do not practice european policing of de-escalation- europe is small and densely populated.

    (3) Therefore officers rely on manipulation, deception, intimidation, and force, to subdue an individual and ‘drag him into the system’. Whereas you or I only need to break contact, they have to bring people into the system. The reason is that they don’t have discretionary power (as do sheriffs and judges.) This is because they can get sued if they are forgiving but you do something stupid. So their only defense is to get you into the system.

    (4) Revenue for a police department and justice system is funded by taxes, tickets and fines, and worst of all, property seizures. This has produced the malincentives we predicted.

    (5) Police are in a position of high risk, high responsibility, and under multiple conflicting incentives for which they can lose job and pension for any normal human error. This is a no-win situation for them. So they tend to develop procedures that are the safest for them and their careers, by choosing processes that put the officer in the position of making THE FEWEST DECISIONS. This is the problem.

    (6) The police do not control the bad laws that they operate under. Their job is to bring people into the system and let the system and system processes do the work – thereby (mostly) using time and isolation for heated afraid or excited people to calm down.

    (7) The data is what it is and the cops know the data: Black americans are disproportionately impulsively violent and will run, drug users are disproportionately unpredictable and dangerous even with bodily fluids or needles, and hispanic americans are disproportionately involved in gangs and dangerous, and white americans are disproportionately cunning and dangerous.

    (8) Police will not stay in the job if they have IQ’s over 105, so they hire average people for the job, because frankly it’s a lot of paperwork, and a lot of putting up with unpleasant people, and a lot of very high stress followed by very boring procedure. So for an average guy it’s a high income high status job – with decision making above his pay grade.

    (9) Some police forces are run well and others not, and there is no requirement that police come from the area nor stay in an area and learn the ‘crook book’ for the area. Instead, better police forces hire and train better officers, who then take positions that pay more money in less ‘prime’ territories.

    So there are just a lot of things going on. Where instead, we should probably have three classes of officers, at three pay grades, the top being criminal lawyers (proto-judges), the middle being today’s armed officers, and the bottom being de-escalation officers, and we should try to use numbers rather than concentration of force to deescalate and bring people in.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-01-27 07:19:00 UTC