Sure it does. It requires they dont seize the opportunity to benefit from coercing you for their benefit. In other words, whether the a prescription to, or proscription to not, you are still demanding a change in behavior from others.
I’m not sure why this isn’t obvious but…
Source date (UTC): 2024-01-16 21:41:33 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1747373548207837638
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1747372867069559042
Labor costs. the soviet system militarized the economy and forced employment at very low wages without market competition driving up wages.
Source date (UTC): 2024-01-16 04:00:46 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1747106596566499674
Reply addressees: @Culture_Crit
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1746943292481159578
(brilliant. true.)
–“Libertarians will tell you there’s no such thing as free lunch and then look confused when you tell them there’s no such thing as free rights.”–Martin Štěpán (@AutistocratMS) https://twitter.com/AutistocratMS/status/1747031721785143400
Source date (UTC): 2024-01-15 23:40:16 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1747041037527224448
https://twitter.com/AutistocratMS/status/1747031721785143400
(brilliant. true.)
–“Libertarians will tell you there’s no such thing as free lunch and then look confused when you tell them there’s no such thing as free rights.”–Martin Štěpán (@AutistocratMS)
Source date (UTC): 2024-01-15 23:40:16 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1747041037455876097
RE: The Court: Prohibition on Guns in the Post Office Is Unconstitutional
–“Federal law first barred guns in government buildings in 1964 and post offices in 1972. These precedents are apparently not old enough to be considered a part of America tradition of historical tradition of firearm regulation. No historical practice dating back to the 1700s justified the ban, she said.”–
The judge is correct. The post office is a place of work. The court is a place of conflict resolution where the court seeks resolution and settlement and some people are highly dissatisfied with the court’s attempt at resolution and settlement. And as such seek to use violence to contradict the court, the coury, and it’s processes. As such the court is condition different from all other conditions other than war.
In the broader context the court sees itself as correcting the mistakes of the positive law era where the court overstepped it’s responsilities.
As such the court continues to restore originalism (words are a system of weights and measures at the time of the writing, not open to putting the thumb on the scales to alter the meaning of words) and as such all extensions of the law must pass the concurrency of the people by the concurrency of the legislature to prevent circumvention of the people by the circumvention of the legislature. That’s the court’s objective. To return decisions to the people rather than legislate from the bench – which violates the entirety for the purpose of the system of government.
In europe, under continental law, the people are not soverign, the state is. In the states, by design, the people are sovereign, not the state. The only limit upon the people is what we would call the natural law as undersetood at the time and represented by blackstone.
If you are overly convinced that your interpretation of human nature is correct then you may interpret the court’s defense of the right to bear arms as folly. If you have the opposite interpretation of human nature, then you consider the court’s position wise and correct.
As far as I know, the left is wrong about human nature almost universally, and actively engages in denial and science denial as a core tenet of it’s political position. The right consists of at least three factions, and only one of those factions, the religious, engages in science denial. The (cognitively feminine) left tends to deny the nature of man, and the (cognitively masculine) right tends to deny the nature of the universe. Unfortunately, the left causes more damage than the right.
Cheers
Source date (UTC): 2024-01-15 17:35:16 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1746949180902297600
RT @LukeWeinhagen: Those we’ve granted the authority to wield violence in our stead continue to demonstrate their inability to wield that v…
Source date (UTC): 2024-01-15 02:50:56 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1746726633380229490
Maybe y’all don’t undersetand but the greeks (eastern roman empmire) imposed christianity by force on the west so that it could destroy teh remaining aristocracy, destroy the remaining agovernment, and bring it under eastern rule. Can’t happen though because germanics are not…
Source date (UTC): 2024-01-14 19:03:59 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1746609120986165461
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1746608589634990568
Not all good things at all. It destroyed the ethics necessary for the political participation in norms, traditions, economiies, politics and war, and produced an alternative political order the consequences of which were a dark age. The fundamental problem was that aristocratic religions and p hilosophy were too challenging for women the lower clases and slaves and so christianity provided a religion for the underclasses and was as destructive in the ancient world as marxism-to-woke is in th emodern. Marxism to woke is just a psudoscientific reformation of the false promises of the supernatural cults. Same false promies. Same lies. Same methods. Just promise of an afterlife vs promise after whiteness, where whiteness means aristocracy and aristocracy means responsibilty and competency.
Reply addressees: @libertreee
Source date (UTC): 2024-01-14 18:58:01 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1746607619077283840
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1746555378152976713
THE TWO LEGITIMATE REASONS FOR SUPERNATURAL CHRISTIAN RELIGION – UNTIL THERE IS A SUPERIOR ALTERNATIVE
–“The non-existence of “God” is so completely obvious that, absent state coercion or peer pressure, few truly intelligent individuals could ever believe, or profess to believe, in it”– Coach VTCG
Coach,
While that’s likely true, let me add two utilitarian exceptions that mean the provisions of christian religion must be provided by market demand, by some means:
Reason 1
Human personalities form a distribution of the feminine empathic to the masculine systematizing, and from the feminine neurotic to the masculine stable, at the extremes from the self regulatory to the masculine schizophrenic and the feminie psychotic.
The truth is, that there are quite a few people, more than you might imagine, and in particular men and women with feminine neurological composition, that cannot provide self regulation and therefore require external regulation by social reinforcement, or, as in the case of christian religion, both social reinforcement AND rituals and beliefs that are proxies for social reinforcement. And without them their neuroticism (prey response really) is unbearable, and is increasingly expressed in self harming to socially harming ways (antisocial behavior).
So, religion is the CHEAPEST method of teaching moral foundations that ALSO captures these people in a net.
The answer? To use more expensive education to teach people through cognitive behavioral therapy the self regulation, and to provide social groups with that same training to provide cognitive, emotional, and psychological stability. (Stoicism-Epicureanism is the only non-false set of teachings, rituals, and social system that provide mindfulness.)
The masculine systematizing mind cannot imagine the chaos and burden of the female mind, and the far greater chaos and burden of the neurotic to psychotic mind is not only unimaginable, but if imagined it would likewise be unbearable.
Reason 2
There is overwhelming evidence that chrsitian ‘training’ – meaning the resulting christian personality – is extremely advantageous for the less able and the poor, because it produces and extraordinary pro-sociality that makes possible the high trust society. The criticism that people NOT trained as such, even though most of us depart the faith we retain the psychological benefits of it, are better prosocial people than those who are not trained in it and disregard it. This evidence is overwhelming.
So while we can teach an alternative to what is, in the end, cognitive behavioral therapy against the normal distsribution of natural human genetic instinct, impulse, intuition and reason, we should not presume that christianity serves no function until them.
I’m raised in both catholic and protestant traditions, though mostly catholic. And my position remains that the church of england has it right. “It doesn’t matter what you believe after childhood if by childhood you have learnd the behaviors the church seeks to instill in you as a child.”
Because in the end, you will behave by christian intuition, ethics, and morals. And if so, the church has done its only necessary job.” The rest is taking care of the … less fortunate in mental blessings.
Affections
Curt Doolittle
Reply addressees: @smugalongsmugly
Source date (UTC): 2024-01-14 14:50:52 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1746545422967902208
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1746539519745147031
There is no such as eighth amendment in Ukraine, Russia, or in fact, anywhere other than the west.
Please stop behaving as a naive ignorant western privileged nitwit. 😉 They refer to you as the russian equivalent of ‘suckers’ by the way. In islam the refer to you as the arabic equivalent of ‘victims’ because you’re so naive that you’re easily taken advantage of. In fact, you don’t realize it, but they’re also calling you effeminate by implication.
The world doesn’t care about your naive kindergarden morals. The rest of the world consists of grownups with serious problems and serious scarcity in an environment of low trust.
Reply addressees: @MrWiggles64
Source date (UTC): 2024-01-13 18:18:47 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1746235358797238273
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1746233504839434686