Theme: Coercion

  • ELI ON FEMALE COERCION —“This is what women do. They mostly can’t think. And t

    ELI ON FEMALE COERCION

    —“This is what women do. They mostly can’t think. And they mostly can’t argue. So to get their way, and to get what they want, they deploy “the feminine means of coercion” (shaming, ridicule, mockery, rallying, scolding, nagging, gossip, psychoanalysis) to try and raise the social and emotional costs of disagreement WITHOUT addressing legitimate points of controversy or noncomplience with their demands WITHOUT offering anything of value in return.

    These means are dishonest, because they can be deployed to attack any point of view to advance or defend any other. They have no necessary connection to the truth. They are parasitic, because they are means of attempting to secure the *benefits* of cooperation, for the practitioner, at a discount – without paying all of the necessary costs. And they poison the dialog and lead to a general breakdown in cooperation and good order, and to hostility, acrimony, and bile instead, often boiling over into violence and other, more costly forms of conflict (e.g. “fighting words.”)

    That’s why our ancestors punished and suppressed such behavior by a variety of means.But as restrictions on the use of violence and masculine coercion have proliferated and intensified, restrictions on rhetorical violence and feminine coercion have been lifted and abolished, feminizing and emasculating our society and placing it under the harping, nagging, screeching, demanding, devouring, parasitic, stifling, control of bitchy, entitled, overbearing, unplesent and mentally and emotionally fragile women.

    At a time like this, over a medium like this, physical retaliation or other means of imposing costs to discourage such behavior are not realistic. But I’m damn sure not going to back down in the face of such c-ntery. I’m only going to escalate and double down to deprive its practitioners of satisfaction and let them know that we are not cooperating, that I do not need or desire their cooperation, and if they are going to deploy dishonest and parasitic methods I am going to consider us to be in conflict and seek to escalate that conflict by any and all means at my disposal, principally (here) by retaliation in kind (insults.)”— Eli Harman


    Source date (UTC): 2018-05-25 08:09:00 UTC

  • Yeah. the grammars are as important as testimonial truth, acquisitionism, proper

    Yeah. the grammars are as important as testimonial truth, acquisitionism, propertarianism, and the division of perception/cognition, and the coercion of the classes.

    The grammars solve an awful lot of problems by making all forms of discourse commensurable.

    I didn’t think it was such a big deal originally but it’s one of the more important insights.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-05-24 08:52:00 UTC

  • Um, Underclass Reproduction Is Oppression of The Entire Polity.

    —“The classes were not oppressed, but domesticated through the use of organized violence, manorialism, and religion to cull sufficient numbers from the population that only those not a drag on the rest of humanity remained.”—Curt Doolittle —“Um since when does this so-called “domestication” not count as oppression?”—Ian Heckman, PhD student in philosophy. I think most of us call it ‘the minimum eugenics necessary to insure the median agency of the population exceeds the median demands of competitive survival’. I mean, evidence is evidence: The single best investment people can make in developing a high trust polity with a standard of living above the malthusian limit is to cull the underclasses as aggressively as possible. So by any and every measure, underclass reproduction oppresses the entirety of the polity and keeps them in violence, low trust, poverty, and disease. It’s my job to state the truth. It’s up to other people what they do with it. —NOTE TO CLARIFY— —“the mean value the third generation of children are regressing to is the mean of their respective families”—Jayman You don’t regress to the mean of the population but to the mean of your respective families. Due to sortition, populations (which are collections of families) tend to regress to the mean of the collection of families. https://jaymans.wordpress.com/2015/10/21/regression-to-the-mean/
    May 23, 2018 11:45am
  • Um, Underclass Reproduction Is Oppression of The Entire Polity.

    —“The classes were not oppressed, but domesticated through the use of organized violence, manorialism, and religion to cull sufficient numbers from the population that only those not a drag on the rest of humanity remained.”—Curt Doolittle —“Um since when does this so-called “domestication” not count as oppression?”—Ian Heckman, PhD student in philosophy. I think most of us call it ‘the minimum eugenics necessary to insure the median agency of the population exceeds the median demands of competitive survival’. I mean, evidence is evidence: The single best investment people can make in developing a high trust polity with a standard of living above the malthusian limit is to cull the underclasses as aggressively as possible. So by any and every measure, underclass reproduction oppresses the entirety of the polity and keeps them in violence, low trust, poverty, and disease. It’s my job to state the truth. It’s up to other people what they do with it. —NOTE TO CLARIFY— —“the mean value the third generation of children are regressing to is the mean of their respective families”—Jayman You don’t regress to the mean of the population but to the mean of your respective families. Due to sortition, populations (which are collections of families) tend to regress to the mean of the collection of families. https://jaymans.wordpress.com/2015/10/21/regression-to-the-mean/
    May 23, 2018 11:45am
  • DON”T SPAM MY FEED WITH THEOLOGICAL AUTHORITARIANISM

    DON”T SPAM MY FEED WITH THEOLOGICAL AUTHORITARIANISM.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-05-23 20:32:57 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/999387733125664768

    Reply addressees: @MinimumSt8

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/999385186692452352


    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/999385186692452352

  • UM, UNDERCLASS REPRODUCTION IS OPPRESSION OF THE ENTIRE POLITY. —“The classes

    UM, UNDERCLASS REPRODUCTION IS OPPRESSION OF THE ENTIRE POLITY.

    —“The classes were not oppressed, but domesticated through the use of organized violence, manorialism, and religion to cull sufficient numbers from the population that only those not a drag on the rest of humanity remained.”—Curt Doolittle

    —“Um since when does this so-called “domestication” not count as oppression?”—Ian Heckman, PhD student in philosophy.

    I think most of us call it ‘the minimum eugenics necessary to insure the median agency of the population exceeds the median demands of competitive survival’.

    I mean, evidence is evidence: The single best investment people can make in developing a high trust polity with a standard of living above the malthusian limit is to cull the underclasses as aggressively as possible.

    So by any and every measure, underclass reproduction oppresses the entirety of the polity and keeps them in violence, low trust, poverty, and disease.

    It’s my job to state the truth. It’s up to other people what they do with it.

    —NOTE TO CLARIFY—

    —“the mean value the third generation of children are regressing to is the mean of their respective families”—Jayman

    You don’t regress to the mean of the population but to the mean of your respective families. Due to sortition, populations (which are collections of families) tend to regress to the mean of the collection of families.

    https://jaymans.wordpress.com/2015/10/21/regression-to-the-mean/


    Source date (UTC): 2018-05-23 11:45:00 UTC

  • I agree he’s doing both. But he’s governing the hell out of international and tr

    I agree he’s doing both. But he’s governing the hell out of international and trade, and I’d like him to gut the police state a little more thoroughly before we have to go there and do it for him.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-05-21 19:08:23 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/998641674095079424

    Reply addressees: @BillDiamond12 @RichardBSpencer

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/998641318795542529


    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    @BillDiamond12 @RichardBSpencer (I prefer to argue the argument rather than the person whenever they leave me the option….)

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/998641318795542529


    IN REPLY TO:

    @curtdoolittle

    @BillDiamond12 @RichardBSpencer (I prefer to argue the argument rather than the person whenever they leave me the option….)

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/998641318795542529

  • THERE IS NO NEUTRAL TERRITORY FOR GODS The strong do not start from the position

    THERE IS NO NEUTRAL TERRITORY FOR GODS

    The strong do not start from the position of equality, or of desire for cooperation, but from the presumption that either you and yours create value via a productive exchange, or one’s you and yours are better punished, enserfed, enslaved, imprisoned, or killed. We deprive enemies of boycott. Either trade productively or die. Otherwise you are consuming the world’s resources which could be put to better use.

    Once you undrestand that our presumption is between extermination, enslavement, or productive exchange, you understand the folly of leaving open the option for boycott, resistance, or parasitism.

    There is no neutral territory for gods.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-05-21 13:50:00 UTC

  • “I’m living this truth here in Brazil right now. They’ve managed to disarm the p

    —“I’m living this truth here in Brazil right now. They’ve managed to disarm the population 20 years ago. Now criminals are murdering everyone else to protect their right to bear arms. 60.000 people die per year in the process.”— Rodrigo Yoshima


    Source date (UTC): 2018-05-20 23:00:59 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/998337820174569473

  • “I’m living this truth here in Brazil right now. They’ve managed to disarm the p

    —“I’m living this truth here in Brazil right now. They’ve managed to disarm the population 20 years ago. Now criminals are murdering everyone else to protect their right to bear arms. 60.000 people die per year in the process.”— Rodrigo Yoshima


    Source date (UTC): 2018-05-20 19:00:00 UTC