“Naval strategists are struggling to find ways to counter a rising Chinese Navy. The easiest and most comfortable course is to ask for more ships and aircraft, but with a defense budget that may have reached its peak, that may not be a viable strategy. Privateering, authorized by letters of marque, could offer a low-cost tool to enhance deterrence in peacetime and gain advantage in wartime. It would attack an asymmetric vulnerability of China, which has a much larger merchant fleet than the United States. Indeed, an attack on Chinese global trade would undermine China’s entire economy and threaten the regime’s stability. Finally, despite pervasive myths to the contrary, U.S. privateering is not prohibited by U.S. or international law.” https://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/2020/april/unleash-privateers born too late to explore the high seas 🙁 born too early to explore the solar system 🙁 born just in time for the revival of piracy
Theme: Crisis
-
Military as Source of Our Strategy vs Being Undermined to Destroy Our Strategy
Military as Source of Our Strategy vs Being Undermined to Destroy Our Strategy https://propertarianism.com/2020/05/28/military-as-source-of-our-strategy-vs-being-undermined-to-destroy-our-strategy/
Source date (UTC): 2020-05-28 04:00:02 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1265855324134821889
-
Military as Source of Our Strategy vs Being Undermined to Destroy Our Strategy
May 5, 2020, 11:01 AM by Alex Hill 1.) 4GW makes support personnel primary targets. In fact, that’s the entire basis of it. Militias need to have as much self sufficiency and as little logistical needs as possible. The regular military is bogged down as soon as insurgents lay IEDs aimed at logistics convoys. 2.) a militia is not regular military. We can’t afford dedicated specialization in the same fashion as the regular military’s MOS system. Everyone has to be generally skilled much in the same was a Green Beret ODA team works with specific team roles. This also echoes the urban specialized labor versus the rural generalized labor divide. 3.) there is a direct correlation between the rise of feminism and the rise of women in the military, and the military has repeatedly been used as a social experiment because of its top-down nature. Then they’ll want to be able to exercise political suffrage because of service, which then jeopardizes the polity with the politics of Feels. That would be repeating the same mistakes we’ve made and I won’t have any of it.
-
How Did the Uk End up To Be a Multicultural Root-Less Anti White Mess
How Did the Uk End up To Be a Multicultural Root-Less Anti White Mess https://propertarianism.com/2020/05/28/how-did-the-uk-end-up-to-be-a-multicultural-root-less-anti-white-mess-2/
Source date (UTC): 2020-05-28 03:15:50 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1265844200903446529
-
The difference is agency.
May 21, 2020, 11:42 AM Can I say something politically incorrect that’s rather obvious in the political data, that’s made more obvious by the current crisis? Democrats and women are more unhappy and fearful. Conservaties and men are more disgust sensitive and paranoid but less fearful- and much happier. The difference is agency. Evaluate women’s opinions not as truth, or fact, or opinion, but as demand for men to do something to satisfy them. So is the underlying question teaching women how to express themselves in female terms of approval and disapproval, fear and want, rather than attempting to teach women to think in truth and fact? I mean, that’s what the postmodern program is about right?
-
The difference is agency.
May 21, 2020, 11:42 AM Can I say something politically incorrect that’s rather obvious in the political data, that’s made more obvious by the current crisis? Democrats and women are more unhappy and fearful. Conservaties and men are more disgust sensitive and paranoid but less fearful- and much happier. The difference is agency. Evaluate women’s opinions not as truth, or fact, or opinion, but as demand for men to do something to satisfy them. So is the underlying question teaching women how to express themselves in female terms of approval and disapproval, fear and want, rather than attempting to teach women to think in truth and fact? I mean, that’s what the postmodern program is about right?
-
Oct 5, 2019, 12:52 PM —“The Fed can do whatever it wants. It literally has a f
Oct 5, 2019, 12:52 PM
—“The Fed can do whatever it wants. It literally has a football field full of printing presses in the basement. If they want to re-steepen the yield curve, they can do it tomorrow. They just don’t want to change the paradigm. Don’t want to rock the boat. Change will creep in at the margin, probably among the scandis and Japanese, who has been dealing with these problems the longest.”— Michael Churchill
Michael is saying the same thing everyone says, and thats that the state can’t go bankrupt because debt is denominated in dollars that they can print and simultaneously inflate. That’s different from deflation, in which people simply refuse to spend no matter what, or hyperinflation, which means that people are so suspicious of the future value that contracts for complex production are impossible, and demand for cash increases rapidly and the unpredictability appears in temporary (daily, hourly) prices. Money must allow the organization of networks of intertemporal investment, production, distribution, and trade, without providing rents (allowing interest-only gains), or decreasing the tolerance for time differences. In other words, the longer and more complex the Hayekian triangles (networks of production) the more the need for a stable currency. This is why states prefer spending rather than direct inflation. On the other hand I recommend direct distribution rather than inflation or spending, because this is the most direct route to the population and the people tend to spend rather than pay down debts. NOTE: notice I how just talked about economics operationally in descriptive terms (actions) using only Hayekian Triangles, and even when I did, I only did so to teach you the term. conversely note how people use many terms of art in economics. The problem is the individual does not know the difference between an economic term and a financial term. Inflation of the money supply causes inflation of prices to absorb it, such that the purchasing power of TIME (time and other resources are still just time, time to get the resources), stays the same. Deflation generally means decline in prices due to decreasing demand, and both deflation and inflation (increases because of more money, deflation because of less spending, or shift in what’s being produced. Right now restaurant food prices are increasing because more people have jobs and restaurants are having to pay more for staff.)
-
Oct 5, 2019, 12:52 PM —“The Fed can do whatever it wants. It literally has a f
Oct 5, 2019, 12:52 PM
—“The Fed can do whatever it wants. It literally has a football field full of printing presses in the basement. If they want to re-steepen the yield curve, they can do it tomorrow. They just don’t want to change the paradigm. Don’t want to rock the boat. Change will creep in at the margin, probably among the scandis and Japanese, who has been dealing with these problems the longest.”— Michael Churchill
Michael is saying the same thing everyone says, and thats that the state can’t go bankrupt because debt is denominated in dollars that they can print and simultaneously inflate. That’s different from deflation, in which people simply refuse to spend no matter what, or hyperinflation, which means that people are so suspicious of the future value that contracts for complex production are impossible, and demand for cash increases rapidly and the unpredictability appears in temporary (daily, hourly) prices. Money must allow the organization of networks of intertemporal investment, production, distribution, and trade, without providing rents (allowing interest-only gains), or decreasing the tolerance for time differences. In other words, the longer and more complex the Hayekian triangles (networks of production) the more the need for a stable currency. This is why states prefer spending rather than direct inflation. On the other hand I recommend direct distribution rather than inflation or spending, because this is the most direct route to the population and the people tend to spend rather than pay down debts. NOTE: notice I how just talked about economics operationally in descriptive terms (actions) using only Hayekian Triangles, and even when I did, I only did so to teach you the term. conversely note how people use many terms of art in economics. The problem is the individual does not know the difference between an economic term and a financial term. Inflation of the money supply causes inflation of prices to absorb it, such that the purchasing power of TIME (time and other resources are still just time, time to get the resources), stays the same. Deflation generally means decline in prices due to decreasing demand, and both deflation and inflation (increases because of more money, deflation because of less spending, or shift in what’s being produced. Right now restaurant food prices are increasing because more people have jobs and restaurants are having to pay more for staff.)
-
Domestication of Warfare Is Over. the War of All Against All Has Returned
Domestication of Warfare Is Over. the War of All Against All Has Returned https://propertarianism.com/2020/05/27/domestication-of-warfare-is-over-the-war-of-all-against-all-has-returned/
Source date (UTC): 2020-05-27 18:53:17 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1265717728792510467
-
Domestication of Warfare Is Over. the War of All Against All Has Returned
Oct 6, 2019, 9:55 AM When William Wallace defeated the english at Sterling Bridge, it was because the english assumed the Scotts would wait until they crossed and stood formation – as was custom – before the fight. Instead, Wallace waited until a defeatable number of the english crossed the bridge and then massacred them. They did not conform to the ritualization of warfare between aristocratic families and clans fighting over territories to tax at the minimum losses to the people and assets. Nor did they want to disincentive the common people from fighting. Western peoples have practiced ritualized warfare in order to domesticate our wars, pretty much forever – with the Westphalian peace that limited war to actions between states our most dominant present influence, and the false heroism of our European Civil Wars, and our current heroism by economic warfare, only slightly influencing our tradition. The supermajority of our people and our statesmen maintain a current obsession with the presumption of the continued domestication of warfare, both abroad and in the coming second American civil war. They presume we have not, by the restoration of Marxist Terrorism, and their imitators using Islamic Terrorism, observed that the Westphalian peace has ended; and our heroism in dragging mankind out of ignorance, poverty, hard labor, suffering, and disease is ignored because of slavery practiced by every civilization back into eternity, with the muslims the most avid practitioners. This coming civil war will be more like Lebanon and Syria than the American civil war, and less disorganized than the second world war. It will be region by region, neighborhood by neighborhood, house to house, in spontaneously escalating, unorganized destruction of individual lives, leaving dense urban areas favelas, the near complete loss of industrial capacity, communications, and power. Russians can lose a third of their economy and resort to farming. If Americans lose a third of their economy we will lose a third of our people. And we will certainly lose more. If it lasts six months we will never recover. I work tirelessly to provide a constitution that will resolve this civil war by peaceful means, and incrementally escalate only upon failure to resolve it by peaceful means. But one thing is certain – the left will not survive as a movement. Ever. And this country will return to rule of law, or it will be reduced to a wasteland if we fail. Edit