ZERO TOLERANCE
—” …really let that sink in…. conflation… that’s all it took. A bit of ambiguity and a bit of repetition and the cult of non-submission became a slave society.”—Bill Joslin
Zero Tolerance is the only defense against incrementalism.
Source date (UTC): 2018-10-16 21:07:39 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1052305092806893569
(UNPLEASANTNESS IN THE NEWS: OK. We have a new competition. Apparently the Saudis are now trying to be scarier than the Russians…. lolz. I mean, it was always the Russians (“make an example”) followed by the Israelis (“we will get the job done – with plausible deniability.”), followed by the chinese (“Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.”) But I mean, the Saudis are clearly gunning for pole position on the “OMFG” list of SCARY. (They cut him up with a bone saw while he was still alive? On a DESK in an OFFICE? In the CONSULATE???? OMG. Seriously???? ) Not that necessarily I disapprove mind you. Our American ‘way’ (“we will eventually find you”) is pretty tame by international standards, and of questionable value. So, you know, it’s just, …. well, always surprising to see a “new team” leap a head of the pack in the finals of “Horribleness”. Wow. … And I thought it was all ‘made up’ nonsense. Nope. Color me awed. Ouch. )
Source date (UTC): 2018-10-16 20:13:00 UTC
VLAD’S SIMPLE STRATEGY
Vlad’s strategy was ‘scorched earth’. A territory with no crops, and no farmers to work it is a desert to a ruler who wishes to collect taxes from it. Tepes made it irrational to pursue him because (a) he had already penetrated the sultan’s camp to assassinate him, (but the sultan had moved on), (b) there is nothing to feed an army if the land is empty and the crops are burned, (c) there is nothing to tax if the people are dead. So the sultan left because it was better to use insurrection (funding Vlad’s brother to defeat him) than fight a man who would scorch the earth. The romans did even worse to the Carthaginians (Phoenicians) and salted the earth and tore down the buildings as well. The Russians just threw bodies at germans to collect bullets until the winter came. The french killed off their aristocracy entirely, and doomed france to mediocrity for eternity. The northerners murdered and burned their way across the south for similar reasons. The jews raided the Philistines (metal workers) until they were able to burn their cities to the ground. Stories go on and on. Americans were stagnated in vietnam for not understanding the rice trade. Today we would just infect the rice with biochemistry and everyone would starve and die in less than a year.
Source date (UTC): 2018-10-16 18:44:00 UTC
ABSOLUTISM IS NONSENSE. ZERO TOLERANCE IS NOT. 1) We pursue what we can both undrestand and suits our interests. 2) Absolutism is easy to understand. It’s the children’s-blocks version of political problem solving. 3) Absolutism is easy to use when ‘backward’ or ‘at war’, but extremely error prone at competition and production. It is an extremely weak form of organization compared to markets. It depends on retaining the attention of the populace through constant manipulation. It is expensive. Hence absolute military, absolute law, market economy, limited charity is the optimum order. (India vs China. China has better demographics, is ethnically homogenous, and has the red army. India has none of the above.) 4) one can organize the vast network of productions in an polity by authority (fear), compensation (reward), or deceit (fear or promise). But we are no longer in a position where the information system can be monopolized and the population is ignorant. 5) The purpose of advancing markets (liberalism et all) is to provide those in power with the means of holding and expanding power cheaply and easily. In other words, one is naive to think he can capture attention and power without material incentives, and we are all victims of overestimating our deviation from the norm. 6) The optimum government is flexible (Roman) with Authoritarianism for War, Markets for growth, and Redistribution for Windfalls. 7) In other words: Money Scales Power. And the vast majority are always and everywhere motivated by (a) access to mates, (b) food and food prices (now energy as well), (c) change in economic condition (d) release from perceived oppression (taxation, competition, conquest). POWER REQUIRES WEALTH REQUIRES MARKET ORDER REQUIRES RULE OF LAW – which is what Putin has had to learn. OUR RULE OF LAW IS SIMPLY TOO TOLERANT. (Ergo – stop stroking your dicks, and masturbating to manga-fantasies of absolutism.)
ABSOLUTISM IS NONSENSE. ZERO TOLERANCE IS NOT. 1) We pursue what we can both undrestand and suits our interests. 2) Absolutism is easy to understand. It’s the children’s-blocks version of political problem solving. 3) Absolutism is easy to use when ‘backward’ or ‘at war’, but extremely error prone at competition and production. It is an extremely weak form of organization compared to markets. It depends on retaining the attention of the populace through constant manipulation. It is expensive. Hence absolute military, absolute law, market economy, limited charity is the optimum order. (India vs China. China has better demographics, is ethnically homogenous, and has the red army. India has none of the above.) 4) one can organize the vast network of productions in an polity by authority (fear), compensation (reward), or deceit (fear or promise). But we are no longer in a position where the information system can be monopolized and the population is ignorant. 5) The purpose of advancing markets (liberalism et all) is to provide those in power with the means of holding and expanding power cheaply and easily. In other words, one is naive to think he can capture attention and power without material incentives, and we are all victims of overestimating our deviation from the norm. 6) The optimum government is flexible (Roman) with Authoritarianism for War, Markets for growth, and Redistribution for Windfalls. 7) In other words: Money Scales Power. And the vast majority are always and everywhere motivated by (a) access to mates, (b) food and food prices (now energy as well), (c) change in economic condition (d) release from perceived oppression (taxation, competition, conquest). POWER REQUIRES WEALTH REQUIRES MARKET ORDER REQUIRES RULE OF LAW – which is what Putin has had to learn. OUR RULE OF LAW IS SIMPLY TOO TOLERANT. (Ergo – stop stroking your dicks, and masturbating to manga-fantasies of absolutism.)
October 16th, 2018 5:34 PM DEHUMANIZE THEM? THE OTHER WAY AROUND. By Eli Harman [D]ehumanize them? The issue is that they don’t regard US as human, or our preferences or values as valid, or legitimate – and so, in exchange, regarding THEM as people and THEIR preferences and values as valid and legitimate is giving them something for nothing. Treating them as people entails real and material costs. We have to tolerate them. We have to include them. We have to give them the vote. We have to do what they vote for and give them what they vote for (when they vote to plunder, destroy, and enslave.) But they will NEVER give us the same considerations in return. When they win they go for the jugular. When they lose they cry foul and delay, obstruct, and use every underhanded stratagem to try and get their way ANYWAY. They moralize and try to dictate terms from a position of weakness. They slander, libel and defame to sow division amongst us and turn us against one another. They lie, cheat, and steal. They bully, intimidate, manipulate, censor, resort to street violence, and attempt assassinations. They incite lawless disorder amongst their lowlife supporters. Sympathetic (Feminine) arguments virtually DEMAND that we try, at all costs, to cooperate or negotiate with them. But that is not a worthwhile demand to meet because THEY are not meeting it for us. If anyone is putting that demand to them, they are simply ignoring it. As So shall WE, henceforth – until the present unpleasantness is concluded (however it is concluded.) Which we expect will be violently.
DEHUMANIZE THEM? THE OTHER WAY AROUND.
By Eli Harman
Dehumanize them? The issue is that they don’t regard US as human, or our preferences or values as valid, or legitimate – and so, in exchange, regarding THEM as people and THEIR preferences and values as valid and legitimate is giving them something for nothing.
Treating them as people entails real and material costs. We have to tolerate them. We have to include them. We have to give them the vote. We have to do what they vote for and give them what they vote for (when they vote to plunder, destroy, and enslave.)
But they will NEVER give us the same considerations in return. When they win they go for the jugular. When they lose they cry foul and delay, obstruct, and use every underhanded stratagem to try and get their way ANYWAY. They moralize and try to dictate terms from a position of weakness. They slander, libel and defame to sow division amongst us and turn us against one another. They lie, cheat, and steal. They bully, intimidate, manipulate, censor, resort to street violence, and attempt assassinations. They incite lawless disorder amongst their lowlife supporters.
Sympathetic (Feminine) arguments virtually DEMAND that we try, at all costs, to cooperate or negotiate with them. But that is not a worthwhile demand to meet because THEY are not meeting it for us. If anyone is putting that demand to them, they are simply ignoring it.
As So shall WE, henceforth – until the present unpleasantness is concluded (however it is concluded.)
Which we expect will be violently.
Source date (UTC): 2018-10-16 17:34:00 UTC
THE PROBLEM OF POLITICAL STABILITY
by Michael Churchill
The left cannot function once its means are revealed. Its leaders understand that, hence the cultivation of Antifa as shock troops.
Democracy may be in the process of phasing out as an optimal political solution, because it creates a monopoly, and one side cannot accept the other side’s victory if it’s a given that it is not one country but two enemy camps.
Even Bolsonaro is a manifestation of that.
So the interesting question is what will the political map look like in 20 years around the globe. A mix of right and left wing dictatorships?
The problem with dictatorship is that it is not really stable if it’s imposed on half the population against their will. Thus it would seem to me something else would be more likely to come about.
( CD: Ergo, Nationalism(Fascism) by Political Order. )
Source date (UTC): 2018-10-16 12:33:00 UTC
October 14th, 2018 2:22 PM [I] mean, I don’t mind if people want to form their own little socialist (authoritarian parasitic and dysgenic) or democratic socialist (consensual parasitic and dysgenic) countries – I just won’t let them continue to extract from me and mine. And this attempt to steal a continent that we conquered, by means of conquest by immigration is just not going to happen. THE WEST: “Agency, Sovereignty, Reciprocity, Rule of Law, Truth, Duty, and Markets in Everything: association, cooperation, reproduction, production, commons, polities, and war.”
October 14th, 2018 1:33 PM CULTURAL DIFFERENCES IN ACTIVE WARFARE STRATEGIES
—“Curt, are Russians Pragmatists?”—
[R]ussians (Orthodoxy) learned from Mongols (Brutality) and Bolshevik Jews (Propaganda, and Polluting the CIvic Informational Well) that the CHEAPEST WARFARE is gossip and undermining (propaganda and ideology). The gradual decay of the will of the people to care for and defend one another. Just as judaism and christianity undermined the roman empire, allowing the north (germans) and east (muslims) to invade in times of weakness due to over expansion, the Russians (orthodox, mongols) and the Bolsheviks (Jewish Socialists and Communists) understood that they don’t need to do anything to the west except sew dissent by feeding envy. The west runs on trust, risk taking, commons, and rule of law. It is the most difficult and expensive set of norms to develop. Because commons have higher returns(multipliers) than private investments. All Enemies have to do is destroy the trust between the classes (martial, priesthood, burgher, labor), and the cultural, economic and military advantage of the west (commons) is destroyed. Russians are not pragmatists, they are persistent goal oriented, expansionist underminers, who wait, then invade and hold territory in a rush, and destroy the capital structure, and take possession of all assets. Russians are at present only a power becauase of their inventory of missiles. But they have a tiny economy unable to wage war, or even produce weapons in sufficient numbers to conduct current warfare on other than a narrow channel into russian territory. Russians did the same thing in Crimea twice now that they did in the caucuses twice now. They are doing the same thing in ukraine: keep raiding, funding dissent, informational undermining, blowing up industry, blowing up ammunition, conducting assassinations, setting arson fires, and when the West is in a moment of weakness they will expand to at least the Dnipr if not all the way to the mountains. Because with the mountains they can reach south again. 1 – The Chinese slowly move, assimilate, and boil the frog. 2 – The Russians(Mongols) undermine, and then seize opportunities. 3 – The Jews and muslims (Semites) invade, undermine, and seize opportunities from within. 4 – The Hindus (Hindu) do nothing except take care of themselves. 5 – The West (Christian Monarchies) is optimistic and stupid and fights as if we are still fighting our own. 6 – And america has spent a century trying to preserve the british empire so that everyone could evolve into a good international citizen at the cost of much blood and treasure, and so that we never have another world war. Unfortunately, the CHinese, Russians, Semites (jews and muslims), and now the frenc-german alliance, are cumulatively making that ORDER impossible. The primary reason? Hispanic immigration. THat’s right. With that threat we cannot maintain the martial civic order that exports that power. We are done. Curt Doolittle