PATERNAL REBUKE OF THE INFANTILIZED (worth repeating) (rebuke) We are not equal. We can engage in reciprocity. In doing so we can engage in reciprocal loyalty and insurance. But the weak are not equal to the strong, the woman to the man, the child to the adult. That is why we must have reciprocity to cooperate despite our differences. The purpose of what you [theology, philosophy, ideology] and those like you desire is to use saturation in falsehood to socially construct emotional cognitive political and military arrested development. And to drag mankind down to your level of infantile primitivism. Where the aristocracy took the opposite position: can we drag mankind kicking and screaming from easily manipulable female infantilism to maintain her ability to cheaply manipulate, into young adulthood to question her with philosophy, to agency with which we can rule with evidence and action, over the infants, infantile, young, limited, and those of arrested development. And yes I realize that indoctrination, choice, and truth constitute of spectrum of child, young adult, mature adult. And I recognize that there is value in theology for children, reason for young adults, and truth for adults – because mirrors the possible intellectual development of the mind. I also know that I am working in the language of adults, not young adults and women, or child. If you can calculate it’s science, if you can’t it’s philosophy. I do operational law. It’s calculable. Just as mathematics is the formal logic of the physical, operational law is the formal logic of sentient life. The only reason I use the framework of philosophy is, by design, to destroy philosophy with operationalism, as our ancestors destroyed theology empiricism. The only thing for philosophy now is choice within the limits of truth. The only thing left for theology is indoctrination into mindfulness within the group strategy independent of choice or truth. As far as I know philosophy is done. What remains as philosophy is but the history of the development of secular theology. If you understand that paragraph you will understand what I have done. Are these statements arrogant as if between equals, or truth from parent to youth, or teacher to student? One is only arrogant if he both errs and is equal. One is merely disciplining if one is parent and unequal. -Quod Erat Demonstrandum
Theme: Cooperation
-
THE PROPERTARIAN COMMUNITY HAS BECOME ITS OWN COMMONS by JWarren Prescott The pr
THE PROPERTARIAN COMMUNITY HAS BECOME ITS OWN COMMONS
by JWarren Prescott
The propertarian circle is a eclectic collection of great people who share a common interest in preserving the elements of civilization that precisely maintain that civilization. Namely, western civilization.
The propertarian community has become its own commons that is revered by all – even if they either don’t fully understand all the elements, logic or constructs or even if they might disagree – it is still respected. This is our commons – some are hard at work plowing new areas for our commons and some are happy basking in the grass for the time being. It doesn’t matter, at some point, all of us will be needed to defend it – not just this intellectual commons, but the very civilization in which we talk about saving.
So if you have come to the commons to find relief from the soul-destroying, lying pilpul-laden post-modernist hellscape, rest up and find the ongoing conversation restorative. If you are already on the frontlines of the battlefield, you will find allies here, and if you are the curious intellectual, it will be the most stimulating as your core premises are challenged and exercised in both pleasurable and uncomfortable ways.
Source date (UTC): 2020-04-22 12:40:00 UTC
-
END THE FALSE DICHOTOMY: RULE OF LAW PRODUCES ALL The optimum balance between ma
END THE FALSE DICHOTOMY: RULE OF LAW PRODUCES ALL
The optimum balance between market economy and non-market economy is calculated by tests of reciprocity. In other words, good capitalism is the result of rule of law of reciprocity and bad capitalism is the result of failing at rule of law of reciprocity. Just as good combination of market economy(liberty), mixed economy (freedom), state provision (serfdom), and military service (indentured servitude) is calculated by rule of law of reciprocity. The ((())) lie of the left was another monopoly, another idealism, that one way is somehow superior to tri-functionalism and rule of law producing markets in everything INCLUDING consumption (markets for goods, services, and information) and markets for commons (mixed economy), state production (serfdom) and state military servitude (indentured servitude)
Source date (UTC): 2020-04-22 12:06:00 UTC
-
The problem is getting the rest of the world into middle class manners, ethics,
The problem is getting the rest of the world into middle class manners, ethics, morals, and values. We can only do that if the self, the family, and the commons are equally valued and defended regardless of class. The minute you give up on your other classes you give up on the commons. The same is true for heterogeneity. Create conflict between groups and we give up on the commons, and devolve to self and family.
—“There are more books published in Spanish in any one year than there have been in the entire history of Arab publishing.”—
Feminine, present, experiential civilization.
There are very few arab intellectuals. Those few, say some version of the same thing “we live in our emotions not in our reason, we can read but we are still illiterate, we have freedom but no discipline.”
This is the problem with ritual-cultures. it’s extremely successful at solving the problem of social insecurity (mindfulness). It only solves part of the problem and amplifies the rest by making agency impossible.
Same for fundamentalism in christianity: it makes wonderful citizens and families – perhaps the best in the world – and prepares people for commercial society – but at the cost of needing a parental martial empirical aristocracy to defend, rule, and govern them.
One of the reasons the french lost to the english was the combination of their effeminacy and excessive faith – the same excessive effeminacy and faith that they demonstrate today. (although you have to read letters from the period prior to agincourt to see how faith-insane they were.)
The hindus remain caste-and-family, on the effeminate side, and socially lazy and irresponsible – so they are wonderful people lacking the hostility of the muslims, but can’t end familial corruption endemic in the society, nor do they have the military like the west and china to enforce policy so that a non-corrupt bureaucracy can evolve.
I don’t complain about the chinese and koreans other than their women are as spoiled and hyper-consumptive and civilization destroying as western women and their males are further gone than western men because they were further gone in the first place.
The upper middle and lower upper classes around the world are all the same. This is because we are not lacking in competitive ability, or dependent upon equally ignorant or uncompetitive peers for information and opinion.
Without the militia men WILL NOT OWN THE COMMONS.
From there, everything falls apart.
Source date (UTC): 2020-04-21 07:40:00 UTC
-
No I think we are compatible. Men and Women evolved to specialize in the reprodu
No I think we are compatible. Men and Women evolved to specialize in the reproductive and temporal division of sense, perception, memory, advocacy, negotiation, and cooperation in a division of cognitive and physical labor.
We are either reciprocal – over time – or not.
Source date (UTC): 2020-04-18 17:11:32 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1251558998890946560
Reply addressees: @buldursgait @DeguTanya @BepDelta @Dark_TossEX @MarfamSilva @paxchristus0 @ReadLinkola
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1251557191959613441
-
PATERNAL REBUKE OF THE INFANTILIZED (worth repeating) (rebuke) We are not equal.
PATERNAL REBUKE OF THE INFANTILIZED
(worth repeating) (rebuke)
We are not equal. We can engage in reciprocity. In doing so we can engage in reciprocal loyalty and insurance. But the weak are not equal to the strong, the woman to the man, the child to the adult. That is why we must have reciprocity to cooperate despite our differences.
The purpose of what you [theology, philosophy, ideology] and those like you desire is to use saturation in falsehood to socially construct emotional cognitive political and military arrested development. And to drag mankind down to your level of infantile primitivism.
Where the aristocracy took the opposite position: can we drag mankind kicking and screaming from easily manipulable female infantilism to maintain her ability to cheaply manipulate, into young adulthood to question her with philosophy, to agency with which we can rule with evidence and action, over the infants, infantile, young, limited, and those of arrested development.
And yes I realize that indoctrination, choice, and truth constitute of spectrum of child, young adult, mature adult. And I recognize that there is value in theology for children, reason for young adults, and truth for adults – because mirrors the possible intellectual development of the mind. I also know that I am working in the language of adults, not young adults and women, or child.
If you can calculate it’s science, if you can’t it’s philosophy. I do operational law. It’s calculable. Just as mathematics is the formal logic of the physical, operational law is the formal logic of sentient life.
The only reason I use the framework of philosophy is, by design, to destroy philosophy with operationalism, as our ancestors destroyed theology empiricism. The only thing for philosophy now is choice within the limits of truth. The only thing left for theology is indoctrination into mindfulness within the group strategy independent of choice or truth. As far as I know philosophy is done. What remains as philosophy is but the history of the development of secular theology. If you understand that paragraph you will understand what I have done.
Are these statements arrogant as if between equals, or truth from parent to youth, or teacher to student? One is only arrogant if he both errs and is equal. One is merely disciplining if one is parent and unequal.
-Quod Erat Demonstrandum
Source date (UTC): 2020-04-17 11:01:00 UTC
-
“The minority rule will show us how it all it takes is a small number of intoler
—“The minority rule will show us how it all it takes is a small number of intolerant virtuous people with skin in the game, in the form of courage, for society to function properly.”— Taleb
A monument is a claim of investment in a territory. A church or temple is a claim on the norms, traditions, and laws used in a territory. There is no coexistence possible between conflicts. THE MOST INTOLERANT AND BOTTOM WILL WIN.
—“The solution is for us to stop being reasonable. Stop compromising and start being intolerant and objective. The most intolerant win, and that needs to be us. Propertarianism gives us the tools to be totally intolerant and objective in our demands. This is the reason we are the Winning Right.”–Noah J Revoy
—“Transcendence by Truth is the most intolerant religion of all. … The Most Intolerant Wins.”—
—“Natural Law Fundamentalism”–
Well, don’t be an idiot.
Of COURSE that’s what I’m doing.
The most intolerant wins.
And Truth is the most intolerant of all.
TRUTH IS A MERCILESS, ZERO-TOLERANCE, WEAPON.
The Most Intolerant Wins. We have been subject to form of intolerance – intolerance for the truth. But Truth is merciless. Truth is the scientific, legal, political, educational, and religious means of defeating the abrahamisms. But Truth is not a selective weapon. It is indiscriminate – a weapon of zero tolerance. It will destroy your Christianity along with the first generation abrahamic religions: judaism, christianity, and islam, and second generation abrahamic religions: marxism (Judaism), feminism (denialism), and postmodernism (Christianity), and fundamentalist islam, and their dependence upon false promises justified by the sophisms of pilpul(via positiva) and critique(via negativa).
—“The only way to defeat intolerance of civilisation, meritocracy, commons is by being even more intolerant of deceit and non-reciprocal costs.”—CD
Truth is enough.
Absolute intolerance.
Source date (UTC): 2020-04-16 15:24:00 UTC
-
SCHMACHTENBERGER —“Curt I do agree you and Daniel Schmachtenberger are coming
SCHMACHTENBERGER
—“Curt I do agree you and Daniel Schmachtenberger are coming at things from different angles but I think if you two sat down for a weekend you would see existential gains for both of your goals, he’s the yin to your yang and an absolute genius. Also the number of unwitting Red Pills Weinstein drops is an added bonus.”— George from Youtube.
I don’t disagree with Daniel Schmachtenberger on much of anything. Just the opposite. He uses more of the inspirational new age west coast language, and I use prosecutorial scientific economic and legal language. He’s a great example of the via positiva just as I am of the via-negativa.
I re-recorded podcast #0002 as Episode #0005 and removed his name from it, and added more on math and physics.
But my criticism in the podcast stands. Every (((leftist))) intellectual whines and complains and undermines because they are cognitively female, and demonstrate female cognition with undermining seeking, GSRRM, Magical Thinking, lack of creativity in solution provision, demand for consensus building and monopoly authority as a substitute for system-thinking and incentives, and demanding ‘real men do something’, as if they would do a better job when in charge when exactly the opposite happens when they are in charge – which is why the Jewish and Muslim leaderships always fail to crate stable high trust societies no matter what they do, and produce decline and collapse wherever they go.
If you can’t write a body of policy changes, a project plan, contracts, shareholder agreements, a body of law, and a constitution to make a society function you’re just talking smack – because that is the hierarchy of algorithms that produce not a simulation but the operating system of the real world that we live in.
You must program a computer via positiva, because it cannot imagine, or predict, and so cannot choose without those instructions. But you must program humanity via negativa because it can imagine, predict, and choose – which is why humans can adapt and computers can’t.
And while both a computer and a human are amoral, the computer cannot choose between morality and immorality. The human can. And the purpose of our manners, ethics morals, norms, traditions, institutions and laws is to rase the cost of the immoral choices so that only moral choices remain.
But we all test that limit at every opportunity.
Source date (UTC): 2020-04-15 12:49:00 UTC
-

AND IF TOO MANY DEFECT
AND IF TOO MANY DEFECT….. https://t.co/I6n7MFjPAI

Source date (UTC): 2020-04-14 20:05:21 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1250153190491914240
-
Yes. You need three bodies in any competition to maintain an equilibrium. This a
Yes. You need three bodies in any competition to maintain an equilibrium. This allows defectors to shift alliances so that the equilibrium is maintained. Otherwise a monopoly would ensue and one would eliminate the other. So: two sexes are the optimum, three strategies are too.
Source date (UTC): 2020-04-14 15:32:08 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1250084431261556739
Reply addressees: @jim_rutt @LLaddon
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1250083651288694786