—“….take heed how you impawn our person,
How you awake our sleeping sword of war.
We charge you in the name of God, take heed,
For never …. kingdoms did contend
Without much fall of blood, whose guiltless drops
Are every one a woe, a sore complaint
‘Gainst him whose wrong gives edge unto the swords
That make such waste in brief mortality.”—
Source date (UTC): 2016-06-28 04:29:00 UTC
—“This article argues that revolutionary leaders are more willing to commit mass killing than nonrevolutionary leaders. Revolutionary leaders are more ideologically committed to transforming society, more risk tolerant, and more likely to view the use of violence as appropriate and effective. Furthermore, such leaders tend to command highly disciplined and loyal organizations, built in the course of revolutionary struggles, that can perpetrate mass killing. This study uses time series cross-sectional data from 1955 to 2004 to demonstrate that revolutionary leaders are more likely to initiate genocide or politicide than nonrevolutionary leaders. The violent behaviors of revolutionary leaders are not limited to the immediate postrevolutionary years but also occur later in their tenure. This demonstrates that the association of revolutionary leaders and mass killing is not simply indicative of postrevolutionary instability. This article also provides evidence for the importance of exclusionary ideologies in motivating revolutionary leaders to inflict massive violence.”—
Source date (UTC): 2016-06-24 19:31:00 UTC
LETTER TO A PHILOSOPHICAL EXCUSE-MAKER You see, you can build whatever contraption you want for your own use. You can practice whatever hobby that you want in your own home. You can say anything you want in your own living room. You can satisfy anyone willing in your bedroom. But you cannot sell a product without responsibility for the consequences it may cause. You cannot sell a service without responsibility for the service you provide and consequences you cause.
LETTER TO A PHILOSOPHICAL EXCUSE-MAKER You see, you can build whatever contraption you want for your own use. You can practice whatever hobby that you want in your own home. You can say anything you want in your own living room. You can satisfy anyone willing in your bedroom. But you cannot sell a product without responsibility for the consequences it may cause. You cannot sell a service without responsibility for the service you provide and consequences you cause.
***Proles. We are supposed to conquer, disempower, civilise, and if necessary enslave these people. And for the good of humanity limit their ability to reproduce. Aren’t we? Why do we give them political power over us rather than place political power over them?***
Source date (UTC): 2016-06-23 05:33:00 UTC
LETTER TO A PHILOSOPHICAL EXCUSE-MAKER
You see, you can build whatever contraption you want for your own use. You can practice whatever hobby that you want in your own home. You can say anything you want in your own living room. You can satisfy anyone willing in your bedroom.
But you cannot sell a product without responsibility for the consequences it may cause. You cannot sell a service without responsibility for the service you provide and consequences you cause.
So why is it that you may speak without regard for the consequences of your speech? We already limit hazards. We already limit libel, slander, and the disclosure of information.
Free speech was included in our laws only because we did not know how to determine what was truthful speech in the constitutional era.
But that is because of greek folly – we did not understand the difference between exploratory public speech and critical public testimony.
Now we do. We know that truthful speech is not in fact an act of speaking the truth, but of warranty by due diligence that we do not speak falsehood, and do no harm.
Ergo, I know you do not speak the truth, and I know your words do harm. that does not mean that if you spoke in concrete recommendations that those recommendations would be immoral. It means that you do not speak in concrete recommendations, and instead that you are attempting to produce psychological rewards by expanding the number of those who speak the same fantasy story.
This is called the “social construction of reality”. a postmodern technique whereby speakers use experiential terminology of non-causal construction to obscure their intent to decieve. And that is what you are engaged in.
We cannot object to correspondent social construction of reality because truth by definition cannot produce a harm – only a correction.
But we can object to non-correspondent construction of reality because it harms others, and by consequence the commons.
Why you cannot pollute air, water, and land, is the same reason you cannot pollute information. They are commons. And your comforting lies do those commons harm
Curt Doolittle
The Propertarian Institute
Kiev, Ukraine
Source date (UTC): 2016-06-23 04:56:00 UTC
Every attempt at a eugenic state has failed for the same reason: insufficient violence to preserve it, and insufficient honesty in its constitution.
Source date (UTC): 2016-06-22 13:52:00 UTC
MEN, WOMEN, AND WHY MEN MUST FIGHT TO CONSTRAIN OUR WOMEN.
Group solidarity, membership, consensus, marginal indifference, empathic solipsism, and a fear of the opposites, constitute the herd mentality, or what’s fashionably called r-selection bias, because it is in the female interest to preserve reciprocal insurance from other women at all costs, prevent her and her offspring’s ostracization at all costs, and to preserve her incentive to invest heavily in her costly offspring regardless of their merit to the tribe – which in at least half of cases is a total lack of merit, and a persistent unnecessary cost to the tribe.
Men, on the other hand evolved domestication of animals for the simple reason that they’d been capturing and herding females for nearly their entire genetic existence, by systematically killing off the males of competing tribes and clans in order to obtain their territory and women. For men the preservation of their genes constitutes the preservation of their family, clan, and tribe – and his own offspring – event the concept of it, is a relatively new invention. Men women and children who are a cost to the tribe are merely tolerable or not given the current resources available. Moreover, just as women wish to be carried along by the redistribution of th tribe’s resources, many men wish their genes to be preserved from dilution by the contraint of female reproduction to ingroup members.
For this reason men tilt heavily conservative, empirical, tribal, just as women tilt heavily redistributive, experiential, and universal.
It’s in the reproductive interest of each. And marital family, clan, tribe and nation are the compromise that men and women make between their different strategies in order to maximize the interests of each in a NASH equilibrium.
So when we say ‘men’ and ‘women’ we are making universal statemetns about the RESULT of the behavior of the set of individuals we are talking about.
In other words, the trend in the tribe and nation continues because despite outliers, the majority behavior is existentially demonstrated. This empirical truth is what it is. But empirical truth is a masculine bias, because we can tolerate, and we must tolerate such truths in order to preserve our genetic interests.
There is a very good reason that Boaz, Marx and Freud created the revolt against Locke, Darwin and Spencer: because the jews, like women, need to be carried along by the host tribe upon whose commons they parasitically survive. Jewish socialism and feminiism and progressivism are predictable political movmeents, becauset they are predictable group evolutionary strategies.
SO we see in women the use of gossip rallying and shaming in order to obtain resources in exchange for sex, information sharing, and cooperation, and we see jews doing from priest, pulpit, book, newspaper, magazine, radio, television, theater and movie, the INDUSTRIALIZATION OF GOSSIP in order to create vast systems of outright lies, that like religion and gossip can be used to create political common interest among those with desires to parasitism on production, and the commons, while denying men the ability to persist their genes through the rapid increase in immigration of the lower classes.
This is genocide by conspiracy with the female cognitive bias, in the same way that religion was spread by jews to women and slaves using this cognitive bias.
Women lack agency because if they had men’s agency their offspring would never survive. Women lack agency because unless they stay members of groups they cannot survive. Women lack agency because truth is not a useful construct in the preservation of their genetics.
Whereas men possess agency so that their kin can survive. Men possess agency because they must constantly defend the group from killing, capture, parasitism, and invasion which would dilute their genes. Men possess agency because truth is a necessary tool in the ascertainment of threats which must be acted upon if their genes are to survive against competitors in the present and future.
For this reason we do not take men terribly seriously in their opinions about the care of the young (under 12), and we do not take women seriosly about the organizatino of a polity above the age of 12.
Truth and the scientific construction of reality was invented by men because military epistemology is unforgiving, and protection of the herd from capture, dilution, or loss was necessary for the preservation of their genes. Gossip and the ‘social construction of reality’ was invented by women but documented by weak men, for the benefit it gave them in obtaining access to women, and profiting by the sale of ideas to women, becasue ‘comforting lies that produce safe grounds for offspring’ is the group evolutionary strategy of women.
There is nothing challenging here other than that the success of the second era of great lies invented by the jews for sale to women and slaves, used the same technique as the first great ear of lies invented by the jews for sale to women and slaves – monotheistic Christianity.
Men possess agnecy because they must, and women lack agency because they must.
This is just how it is. And all the pseudoscientific lies of the Boazian, Marxist, and Freudians; and all the repeated gossip of the postmoderns, and the politically correct, do not change the truth.
The compromise of family and nation we built is the compromise we must keep if we are to persist our men’s genes, or be conquered by the genes of others due to the lack of agency of our women.
You cannot reason with cognitive biases caused by evolutionary necessity. We evovled these biases because of different reproductive strategies.
We do not reason we fight.
Fight for your people, your genes, or lose them to conquest. Women are taken and conquered and pressured into submission they willingly desire in exchange for the security of membership.
Men must fight for their abilty to reproduce.
Fight or die. We are not women. There is no free ride. The rest of the world’s men will give us none.
Curt Doolittle
The Propertarian Institute.
Source date (UTC): 2016-06-22 02:32:00 UTC
Group solidarity, membership, consensus, marginal indifference, empathic solipsism, and a fear of the opposites, constitute the herd mentality, or what’s fashionably called r-selection bias, because it is in the female interest to preserve reciprocal insurance from other women at all costs, prevent her and her offspring’s ostracization at all costs, and to preserve her incentive to invest heavily in her costly offspring regardless of their merit to the tribe – which in at least half of cases is a total lack of merit, and a persistent unnecessary cost to the tribe. Men, on the other hand evolved domestication of animals for the simple reason that they’d been capturing and herding females for nearly their entire genetic existence, by systematically killing off the males of competing tribes and clans in order to obtain their territory and women. For men the preservation of their genes constitutes the preservation of their family, clan, and tribe – and his own offspring – event the concept of it, is a relatively new invention. Men women and children who are a cost to the tribe are merely tolerable or not given the current resources available. Moreover, just as women wish to be carried along by the redistribution of th tribe’s resources, many men wish their genes to be preserved from dilution by the contraint of female reproduction to ingroup members. For this reason men tilt heavily conservative, empirical, tribal, just as women tilt heavily redistributive, experiential, and universal. It’s in the reproductive interest of each. And marital family, clan, tribe and nation are the compromise that men and women make between their different strategies in order to maximize the interests of each in a NASH equilibrium. So when we say ‘men’ and ‘women’ we are making universal statemetns about the RESULT of the behavior of the set of individuals we are talking about. In other words, the trend in the tribe and nation continues because despite outliers, the majority behavior is existentially demonstrated. This empirical truth is what it is. But empirical truth is a masculine bias, because we can tolerate, and we must tolerate such truths in order to preserve our genetic interests. There is a very good reason that Boaz, Marx and Freud created the revolt against Locke, Darwin and Spencer: because the jews, like women, need to be carried along by the host tribe upon whose commons they parasitically survive. Jewish socialism and feminiism and progressivism are predictable political movmeents, becauset they are predictable group evolutionary strategies. SO we see in women the use of gossip rallying and shaming in order to obtain resources in exchange for sex, information sharing, and cooperation, and we see jews doing from priest, pulpit, book, newspaper, magazine, radio, television, theater and movie, the INDUSTRIALIZATION OF GOSSIP in order to create vast systems of outright lies, that like religion and gossip can be used to create political common interest among those with desires to parasitism on production, and the commons, while denying men the ability to persist their genes through the rapid increase in immigration of the lower classes. This is genocide by conspiracy with the female cognitive bias, in the same way that religion was spread by jews to women and slaves using this cognitive bias. Women lack agency because if they had men’s agency their offspring would never survive. Women lack agency because unless they stay members of groups they cannot survive. Women lack agency because truth is not a useful construct in the preservation of their genetics. Whereas men possess agency so that their kin can survive. Men possess agency because they must constantly defend the group from killing, capture, parasitism, and invasion which would dilute their genes. Men possess agency because truth is a necessary tool in the ascertainment of threats which must be acted upon if their genes are to survive against competitors in the present and future. For this reason we do not take men terribly seriously in their opinions about the care of the young (under 12), and we do not take women seriosly about the organizatino of a polity above the age of 12. Truth and the scientific construction of reality was invented by men because military epistemology is unforgiving, and protection of the herd from capture, dilution, or loss was necessary for the preservation of their genes. Gossip and the ‘social construction of reality’ was invented by women but documented by weak men, for the benefit it gave them in obtaining access to women, and profiting by the sale of ideas to women, becasue ‘comforting lies that produce safe grounds for offspring’ is the group evolutionary strategy of women. There is nothing challenging here other than that the success of the second era of great lies invented by the jews for sale to women and slaves, used the same technique as the first great ear of lies invented by the jews for sale to women and slaves – monotheistic Christianity. Men possess agnecy because they must, and women lack agency because they must. This is just how it is. And all the pseudoscientific lies of the Boazian, Marxist, and Freudians; and all the repeated gossip of the postmoderns, and the politically correct, do not change the truth. The compromise of family and nation we built is the compromise we must keep if we are to persist our men’s genes, or be conquered by the genes of others due to the lack of agency of our women. You cannot reason with cognitive biases caused by evolutionary necessity. We evovled these biases because of different reproductive strategies. We do not reason we fight. Fight for your people, your genes, or lose them to conquest. Women are taken and conquered and pressured into submission they willingly desire in exchange for the security of membership. Men must fight for their abilty to reproduce. Fight or die. We are not women. There is no free ride. The rest of the world’s men will give us none. Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute. Comments
Women lean Democratic by 52%-36%; men are evenly divided (44% identify as Democrats or lean Democratic; 43% affiliate with or lean toward the GOP). Gender differences are evident in nearly all subgroups: For instance, Republicans lead among married men (51%-38%), while married women are evenly divided (44% Republican, 44% Democratic). Democrats hold a substantial advantage among all unmarried adults, but their lead in leaned partisan identification is greater among unmarried women (57%-29%) than among unmarried men (51%-34%).
Group solidarity, membership, consensus, marginal indifference, empathic solipsism, and a fear of the opposites, constitute the herd mentality, or what’s fashionably called r-selection bias, because it is in the female interest to preserve reciprocal insurance from other women at all costs, prevent her and her offspring’s ostracization at all costs, and to preserve her incentive to invest heavily in her costly offspring regardless of their merit to the tribe – which in at least half of cases is a total lack of merit, and a persistent unnecessary cost to the tribe. Men, on the other hand evolved domestication of animals for the simple reason that they’d been capturing and herding females for nearly their entire genetic existence, by systematically killing off the males of competing tribes and clans in order to obtain their territory and women. For men the preservation of their genes constitutes the preservation of their family, clan, and tribe – and his own offspring – event the concept of it, is a relatively new invention. Men women and children who are a cost to the tribe are merely tolerable or not given the current resources available. Moreover, just as women wish to be carried along by the redistribution of th tribe’s resources, many men wish their genes to be preserved from dilution by the contraint of female reproduction to ingroup members. For this reason men tilt heavily conservative, empirical, tribal, just as women tilt heavily redistributive, experiential, and universal. It’s in the reproductive interest of each. And marital family, clan, tribe and nation are the compromise that men and women make between their different strategies in order to maximize the interests of each in a NASH equilibrium. So when we say ‘men’ and ‘women’ we are making universal statemetns about the RESULT of the behavior of the set of individuals we are talking about. In other words, the trend in the tribe and nation continues because despite outliers, the majority behavior is existentially demonstrated. This empirical truth is what it is. But empirical truth is a masculine bias, because we can tolerate, and we must tolerate such truths in order to preserve our genetic interests. There is a very good reason that Boaz, Marx and Freud created the revolt against Locke, Darwin and Spencer: because the jews, like women, need to be carried along by the host tribe upon whose commons they parasitically survive. Jewish socialism and feminiism and progressivism are predictable political movmeents, becauset they are predictable group evolutionary strategies. SO we see in women the use of gossip rallying and shaming in order to obtain resources in exchange for sex, information sharing, and cooperation, and we see jews doing from priest, pulpit, book, newspaper, magazine, radio, television, theater and movie, the INDUSTRIALIZATION OF GOSSIP in order to create vast systems of outright lies, that like religion and gossip can be used to create political common interest among those with desires to parasitism on production, and the commons, while denying men the ability to persist their genes through the rapid increase in immigration of the lower classes. This is genocide by conspiracy with the female cognitive bias, in the same way that religion was spread by jews to women and slaves using this cognitive bias. Women lack agency because if they had men’s agency their offspring would never survive. Women lack agency because unless they stay members of groups they cannot survive. Women lack agency because truth is not a useful construct in the preservation of their genetics. Whereas men possess agency so that their kin can survive. Men possess agency because they must constantly defend the group from killing, capture, parasitism, and invasion which would dilute their genes. Men possess agency because truth is a necessary tool in the ascertainment of threats which must be acted upon if their genes are to survive against competitors in the present and future. For this reason we do not take men terribly seriously in their opinions about the care of the young (under 12), and we do not take women seriosly about the organizatino of a polity above the age of 12. Truth and the scientific construction of reality was invented by men because military epistemology is unforgiving, and protection of the herd from capture, dilution, or loss was necessary for the preservation of their genes. Gossip and the ‘social construction of reality’ was invented by women but documented by weak men, for the benefit it gave them in obtaining access to women, and profiting by the sale of ideas to women, becasue ‘comforting lies that produce safe grounds for offspring’ is the group evolutionary strategy of women. There is nothing challenging here other than that the success of the second era of great lies invented by the jews for sale to women and slaves, used the same technique as the first great ear of lies invented by the jews for sale to women and slaves – monotheistic Christianity. Men possess agnecy because they must, and women lack agency because they must. This is just how it is. And all the pseudoscientific lies of the Boazian, Marxist, and Freudians; and all the repeated gossip of the postmoderns, and the politically correct, do not change the truth. The compromise of family and nation we built is the compromise we must keep if we are to persist our men’s genes, or be conquered by the genes of others due to the lack of agency of our women. You cannot reason with cognitive biases caused by evolutionary necessity. We evovled these biases because of different reproductive strategies. We do not reason we fight. Fight for your people, your genes, or lose them to conquest. Women are taken and conquered and pressured into submission they willingly desire in exchange for the security of membership. Men must fight for their abilty to reproduce. Fight or die. We are not women. There is no free ride. The rest of the world’s men will give us none. Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute. Comments
Women lean Democratic by 52%-36%; men are evenly divided (44% identify as Democrats or lean Democratic; 43% affiliate with or lean toward the GOP). Gender differences are evident in nearly all subgroups: For instance, Republicans lead among married men (51%-38%), while married women are evenly divided (44% Republican, 44% Democratic). Democrats hold a substantial advantage among all unmarried adults, but their lead in leaned partisan identification is greater among unmarried women (57%-29%) than among unmarried men (51%-34%).