Theme: Crisis

  • AN BRIEF EXPLANATION OF THE INTELLECTUAL HISTORY OF THE 19TH AND 20TH CENTURIES

    AN BRIEF EXPLANATION OF THE INTELLECTUAL HISTORY OF THE 19TH AND 20TH CENTURIES UNTIL PRESENT

    I consider each wave of conservatism (somewhere between around one generation (25) years between iterations to have been a failure.

    Starting with the war interrupting Poincare, Maxwell, Darwin, Menger, Spencer, Nietzche, and the Romanticists and the second german scientific enlightenment, continuing with the failure of Mises, Hayek, Popper, Brouwer, Bridgman, and all their peers. (failing with science), moving to literature in the next generation (Kirk and contemporaries), moving to intellectual research in the late 70’s (the investment in the think tanks), to the conservative shift in the sciences due to the development of computers, magnetic imaging systems, and research in genetics, and the economic and historical evidence of a century of modernity in the late 1990’s.

    So my perspective is that we are now in the hard science era picking up where the war disrupted the center of the completion of the enlightenment in Germany, and as a consequence throughout europe, and less so in america, where Poincare,Brouwer/Bridgman failed, (maxwell succeeded), Darwin failed to extend into social science and politics, Spencer failed to explain operationalism in social science, Hayek only partially succeeded in Cognition, Economics, Politics, and Law, and Popper only partially succeeded wth Critical rationalism (philosophy of science).

    We are now completing (without understanding what we are doing) the 19th century (lost) german second half of the enlightenment (social science).

    But this is why we must read and understand:

    1 – Marx (jewish),

    2 – Durant (french catholic)

    3 – Toynbee (Anglo Tory), and

    4 – Spengler(German ‘lutheran’), and Hobbes (‘aryan’),

    Just as we must understand:

    1 – marx/freud/boaz(jewish athoritarian pseudoscience),

    2 – rousseu(catholic utopian moral literatue),

    3 – kant(german duty and rationalism),

    4 – locke/smith/hume/jefferson(english utopian empiricism).

    To understand the different enlightenment strategies.

    Everyone writes in their group evolutionary strategy under the assumption that it is ‘good’. But the only testable good independent of context (group evolutionary strategy) is ‘reciprocity’ (natural law).

    Of those historians, and philosophers, who provides us with the closest approximation of natural law?

    And what is the consequence if everyone practices natural law, but constructs the myth, institutions, law, norms, and commons most suitable to their people in truthful (scientific reciprocity) terms?

    Criticisms of the past motivations are available for every single group that evolved under literacy (the enlightenment).

    The question is, regardless of intentions, regardless of motivations, regardless of previous actions, what actions must we take today to create a future where the benefits of knowledge and understanding can continue to persist,and expand?

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine


    Source date (UTC): 2017-03-22 14:12:00 UTC

  • ADAM VOIGHT: USA IN FIRST STAGES OF HYBRID WARFARE (had to repeat this) Adam Voi

    ADAM VOIGHT: USA IN FIRST STAGES OF HYBRID WARFARE

    (had to repeat this)

    Adam Voight

    So is the USA in the early stages of “hybrid war”. Right?

    Curt Doolittle

    my implied suggestion …. yes

    Adam Voight

    Just as the printing press created the modern nation-state, so now we are seeing a similar media-driven change in how politic is done.

    Curt Doolittle

    Exactly … and a return to war as usual: factions that the state can no longer and no longer has an interest in controlling.

    BTW: Iran was the first actor. Russia the second. We ignored iran because they are ‘them’. But russians are ‘us’ and that we see as a proble.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-03-22 11:18:00 UTC

  • IT – THE END OF THE PEACE OF WESTPHALIA AND THE RETURN TO ALL-OUT-WAR (I don’t m

    http://foreignpolicy.com/2017/03/21/ukrainian-elder-statesman-how-russian-hybrid-war-is-changing-the-world-order/READ IT – THE END OF THE PEACE OF WESTPHALIA AND THE RETURN TO ALL-OUT-WAR (I don’t mean this as anti-russian per se, but merely the acknowledgment that the peace of westphalia is ended. and that war in the present belongs to FACTIONS like “US”, not states.)

    Europe cannot fight the immigration problem becuase in fact THE STATE CANNOT.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-03-22 01:01:00 UTC

  • THE FAILURE OF LIBERALISM WAS FAILING TO UNDERSTAND IT. Empirically speaking, wo

    THE FAILURE OF LIBERALISM WAS FAILING TO UNDERSTAND IT.

    Empirically speaking, women voting without separate houses for men and women, has been the failing of liberalism.

    The monarchy (state), nobility (regions), commons (businessmen), could have been expanded to the proletarian( working classes ) and the homemaker(women), and we could have continued the anglo saxon tradition of using houses to form a market between the classes. Democracy has failed worldwide because women have narrower interests and vote more consistently in blocks, and by destroying the family women have destroyed western civilization: our central unit of production of generations, production of norms and traditions, production of commons, and production of goods and services.

    It’s just empirical. Look at the voting history. There would never have been anything ‘left’ in this country nor its decline had women had their own house.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-03-19 19:33:00 UTC

  • 1/3 of our budget is for social security, medicare, and medicaid. 1/3 of the bud

    1/3 of our budget is for social security, medicare, and medicaid.

    1/3 of the budget goes to the military.

    1/3 of our budget is called ‘discretionary’ and that means ‘everything else’.

    We don’t pay for our military of the budget, we inflate it away through the world’s dependence on the dollar as a reserve currency. (really. I know it’s hard to imagine but it is what it is).

    The majority of the military costs go to wages and retirement. It is actually our largest means of redistribution in the economy, absorbing millions. So much so that in Washington it is sometimes referred to as a middle and lower middle class welfare program.

    While we might want to think we can save money on the military, we can only save it by transferring costs to other Nato countries. Without the military and the demand for the dollar for oil and reserve functions worldwide, americans would lose the marginal difference in consumption. If you understand world oil markets you will understand why Iran and Russia act as they do. If Iran can create a bourse and dominate the region, it can replace the USA as an oil backed reserve currency. This would destroy the US ability to fund the military, and cause somewhere between a 30-50% decrease in the american household’s standard of living. Oil is to the current world as tin and copper were to the bronze age, and silver and copper were to the ancient mediterranean.

    Since the military costs us nothing (really), and we can’t really see social security, medicare, and medicaid decreasing, then the only alterable cost are discretionary costs.

    Since it is the interference in the traditional european (admittedly eugenic) social order, that conservatives and the middle class object to (but the six major immigrant cities that have the high populations depend upon) then it is going to be (sort of has to be) the discretionary spending that declines.

    The general theory is that we can break violently into regions and lose our economic and strategic position in the world, or we can devolve the high-conflict properties of the federal government to the states and regions and maintain our economic advantages.

    That’s the thinking anyway.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine


    Source date (UTC): 2017-03-18 17:18:00 UTC

  • What Happened to the Right?

    WHAT HAPPENED TO THE RIGHT? —“What *happened* to the right? Despite the fact that I lean right I often find myself embarrassed by the state of modern conservative thought and its aggressively anti-intellectual tendencies. Today’s conservatives can’t seem to accept evolution or articulate a coherent vision of right-wing principles and theory, yet they descend from De Maistre, Evola, Burke, Mises, Rand, and similar thinkers. Other than you, Moldbug, and a handful of libertarians like Tom Woods and Bob Murphy there is almost nothing interesting happening. What went wrong?”— A Friend They couldn’t find an answer to social darwinism and the fact that western civilization is in fact, darwinian – and that this Darwinianism is the reason for our success. What do you do when you tell the lie of democracy and at the same time have to tell the truth of darwinian evolution? You talk nonsense That’s what —“Ah. So if we don’t want to squander the promise of the Western Aristocratic tradition there’s no avoiding social Darwinism?”— Bingo. We have to TELL THE TRUTH.

  • What Happened to the Right?

    WHAT HAPPENED TO THE RIGHT? —“What *happened* to the right? Despite the fact that I lean right I often find myself embarrassed by the state of modern conservative thought and its aggressively anti-intellectual tendencies. Today’s conservatives can’t seem to accept evolution or articulate a coherent vision of right-wing principles and theory, yet they descend from De Maistre, Evola, Burke, Mises, Rand, and similar thinkers. Other than you, Moldbug, and a handful of libertarians like Tom Woods and Bob Murphy there is almost nothing interesting happening. What went wrong?”— A Friend They couldn’t find an answer to social darwinism and the fact that western civilization is in fact, darwinian – and that this Darwinianism is the reason for our success. What do you do when you tell the lie of democracy and at the same time have to tell the truth of darwinian evolution? You talk nonsense That’s what —“Ah. So if we don’t want to squander the promise of the Western Aristocratic tradition there’s no avoiding social Darwinism?”— Bingo. We have to TELL THE TRUTH.

  • Peterson New War’s Problem, Last War’s Strategy

    CRITICISM: PETERSON: FIGHTING THE LAST WAR, WITH A WEAPON THAT HARMS US AS MUCH AS IT HELPS. (NET/NET (TL;DR): The narrative requires intention, authority, and indoctrination in an effort to create behavioral goods, but natural law, like the good of markets, requires only dispute resolution, caused by self interests, from which all ‘goods’ emerge – even the unimagined. Narratives explain values. Laws create them. ) THE ENLIGHTENMENT, THE INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION, AND THE PROBLEMS OF CHOICE UNDER POST-HUMAN-SCALE I’m still going to criticize Dr Peterson’s conflation of the true(decidable), the good(preferable), and the beautiful(best/excellent) the similarity between men’s judgements provides us with a ‘unit of measure’: man’s abilities. It is this unit of measure that assists us in determining candidate opportunity, objective judgement, and successful action. When we encountered the industrial age, we changed from group norms as the unit of measure (test), to the limits of man’s perception(test) as the unit of measure in methods of decidability. Everything grew in scale:, information, markets, awareness of differences, necessity of understanding that which was beyond personal limits to perception, individual limits to ability and action, and group limits to organization and understanding. It was this intellectual transition from small, homogenous, and local to large, heterogeneous and remote, that both created great opportunity for mankind, and created all our personal, cultural, institutional, and international conflict. We changed from ‘markets’ where we interacted with and cooperated with, and disputed with people in familiar and consensus context, to markets of all kinds where we interacted with, cooperated with, and disputed with peoples and groups, and nations on unfamiliar and very different consensual contexts. And our normative means of decision failed to scale. So we required methods of decidability not born then of consensus within a context, but of decidability regardless of context (and preference). This is the story of the anglo scientific enlightenment, the failed social scientific and political enlightenment that followed (French, German, Russian, Jewish, in europe), and the consequential and failed german scientific, social, and political enligthenment of the 19th and 20th centuries – cut short by the (Immoral and Destructive ) world wars. And it was the failure of 20th century philosophy and 20th century social science, only recently rescued by late 20th and early 21st century physical sciences, that has allowed an opportunity for the second conquest of the west by a ‘Second Great Deceit” – this time by pseudoscience, pseudorationalism, and propaganda, mass media, and the academy selling utopia to women and the underclasses, just as the the first conquest of the West by the First Great Deceit was achieved by Supernaturalism, pseudo-reasonableness, writing, the pulpit and the state sponsorship of monotheistic religion as a cheap means by which the wealthy east, could rule the independent but poorer west. The only central claim to ‘Darwinian’ thought is that it provides us with knowledge of long term consequence (outside of experience, outside of perception, outside of human scale), and that as such we possess decidability between what were previously either only preferential goods, or what were both preferential, normative, and institutionalized assumed goods that are in fact ‘bads’ (Islam’s (a) unearned respect, and (b) fixed scope of knowledge, or Judaism’s dual ethics and its parasitism upon the host’s commons, or Christianity’s superstition and submission to authoritarian falsehood as a means of creating docile agrarian labor forces and limiting the conflict of families, tribes, clans, chieftains, and states). With this long term tool we can understand the unintended consequences of comforting falsehoods. That is what ‘Darwinian’ thought provides us with: an understanding of consequences of scale. THE WANT OF DISCOUNTS – TO PRESERVE HUMAN SCALE I’m sympathetic. I’m human as well. Humans want an intuitionistic means of decidability to save them the labor of investigation and calculation. And the economics of time, energy, and ignorance prevent us from investigation and calculation. So our multitude of decisions must be reduced to simple general rules in the context of each era. We all want the Elephant to DRIVE, and for our minds to merely RIDE upon his labors, and enjoy the view. But that is to be animal – not human – to lack agency not possess it. Of course we would all love to ride easily on a river of normative conditions that suited our interests. But that is not the fate of our struggle against the dark forces of time and ignorance – only possible in the pursuit of the cooperation with others at sufficient scale to win the struggle. So, while I agree with Jordan’s criticisms (as many of us do), his prescription is wrong. He’s wrong because he is playing to the reasons that religions fail modernity via conflation and deceit (his coherent truth) but literature, history, the common law of torts, and science achieve by non deceitful, non false, ends. He is against the current pseudoscientific religion of the state, but he’s regressing into fighting the last war, instead of continuing modernity by deflating the beautiful, the good, and the true, which is the source of western competitive success, and the reason the west dragged the rest out of poverty. We have struggled for millennia to tame the Elephant of evolutionary intuition with the Rider of reason, and we have obtained extraordinary benefits from doing so. THE SOLUTION TO THE PRESENT IS THE SAME AS THE SOLUTION TO THE PAST – RETURN TO TRUTH The solution to the present second attempt to ‘christianize the west’ – this time through cosmopolitan pseudoscience of Boaz, Marx, Freud, Cantor, and Adorno – is not to regress to the past, in order to admit failure to defeat the pseudoscientific cosmopolitan religion of the present, but to defeat the pseudoscientific cosmopolitan religion of the present, with literature(ideation of and decision between possible contexts), history(judgement within each extant context), and decidability (truth – decidability REGARDLESS of context: judgement regardless of preference or opinion. ). Literary analogy can assist us in the free association that is necessary to identify candidate opportunities (ideation), but once possessed of an idea, we cannot, without deceit, choose other than to rely upon the record of man’s actions in matters of conflict (including law, norm, culture, religion, immigration, invasion, war, conquest, and genocide), and deflationary truth (science). Where by ‘science’ we mean not the via-positiva of investigation, but the via-negativa discipline by which we perform due diligence against ignorance, bias, wishful thinking, suggestion, obscurantism, supernaturalism, pseudo-rationalism, pseudoscience, propaganda, and deceit. We may only be able to SHARE literary(and platonic) means of general rules in pursuit of remote common goods, but we must at least possess the knowledge of, and a caste of people who, specialize in Judgement in matters of conflict, tat relies upon deflationary truth(science) for the purpose of those judgements. No more lies. The west defeated the rest and dragged man kicking and screaming out of ignorance, superstition, poverty, labor, starvation, disease, deceit and tyranny, by the the construction of one commons above all other: deflationary, testimonial, correspondent truth. Despite internal and external resistance at all times. We did it. And no retreat into eastern mysticism, jewish superstition, greek platonism, continental rationalism, or retention any of the enlightenment fallacies of the nature of man, will resurrect our civilization. THE TRUTH OF THE FOUNDING INDUSTRIES OF THE WEST: DOMESTICATION OF MAN FOR NECESSITY AND PROFIT The unwritten, unstated, impolitic history of the west is quite simple: a small number of independent, voluntary, warriors using advanced technology and advanced tactics of maneuver, where tactics were highly dependent upon adherence to oath (contract), sought to preserve their sovereignty( their independence and spoils of war) through continuing a contract of peerage. This retention of sovereignty, and their demonstrated, existential, superiority in action (conflict), leaves only one method of dispute resolution available: markets in everything. War constitutes the most intolerant market we know of, and martial epistemology is the most scientific. And the martial ‘reporting’ that we incorporated into our society as ‘testimony’, has permeated our civilization so much so that we cannot (unfortunately) understand that it is our uniqueness. That the bond of warriors – the oath – is of higher import than the bond of blood in matters of the commons. And it is the multitude of consequences of this bond of testimony – oath- using the epistemology of war (minimalist, deflationary, correspondence), that the aristocracy by practice, the middle class by aspiration, the craftsman class by necessity, and the working class by utility have created The Truthful Civilization and the most expensive commons that man has produced. Meanwhile, the outcast underclasses, the practitioners of gossip: politicians, priests, academics, and public intellectuals have fought against at every opportunity. The western aristocracy, having domesticated plants, animals, (and in large part, women), ever needing to increase the numbers of fellows possessing AGENCY IN FACT (both intellectual, physical, and existential), created a profitable industry: the domestication of the beast man from dysgenic, ignorant, superstitious, violent, parasitic, predatory, opponent, to eugenically produced human: rational, knowledgable, productive, competitive, through the process of slave, serf, freeman, citizen, and peerage. Humans were not oppressed. The beast man was domesticated through the organized use of violence to prevent his survival except through productivity in a market, and contribution to the informational, normative, institutional, and material commons. Just as the West evolved by the use of advanced technology, contractualism, truth, and markets in everything to evolve not first, but FASTER than the rest (and earlier) civilizations, the Cosmopolitans have used the advanced technology of mass communication, and the specialization in mass communication by politicians priests, academics, and public intellectuals, and their ‘soldiers’ in the school system, the media, and the underclasses, to rally against, and fight the people who use TRUTH, by the INDUSTRIALIZATION OF LYING. The product they sell is the hope of salvation in the present from Socialism ( discretionary rule over discretionary production, and discretionary allocation of production to individuals, families, and commons) that is the organizing model of the totalitarian flood-plain civilizations of antiquity that profit from the retention and expansion of the underclasses using religion (lying). And the cosmopolitan strategy is nothing other than a reformation of the promise of salvation (utopia) after death that is the source of Egyptian, abrahamic, judaic, christian, and muslim religions of the underclasses and the tellers of comforting lies that organize them. OUR CHOICES: THE POVERTY OF COMFORT OR THE PROSPERITY OF EFFORT We can choose between the imperial, dysgenic caste system of large scale underclasses taught by supernatural literature, and conflationary argument, that doctor Peterson seems enamored of, OR we can choose the eugenic production of sovereignty, agency, and equality of norther european warriors and universal militia taught by adherence to the oath, the common law, the decidability of the science (due diligence in testimony), testimonial (deflationary) truth, and producing a smaller and objectively superior majority middle class society in which we are all possessed of agency in institutions, and agency in mind, and agency in the face of a universe yet waiting to be domesticated by our will. The balanced argument (the market solution that is the product of western civilization) is that we need multiple forms of argument, education, economy, and a market (government) for exchanges of commons between the classes, to suit the needs of people who possess a range of abilities, from those who can but imitate to those who can most radically innovate. But we can only achieve that diversity (market) of available models for our people, if the means of decidability between them is parsimonious, deflationary, correspondent, Truth that is produced by the due diligence against ignorance, error, bias, and deceit that we call ‘science’. RETURNING TO HUMAN SCALE Its quite simple. Let a thousand nations bloom. End the empires and let loose the creativity of mankind. Its between empires that we make our rapid evolutions from one condition to another. we can all live in a diverse set of Denmarks (small homogenous egalitarian kin groups with commonality of interest and redistribution) or we can live in large empires (Brazil, India, China, Islam, and the United States) where we evolve once again into castes with high concentrations of wealth, vast underclasses, and stagnation – and the myths, superstitions, and comforting lies we tell ourselves to justify our condition. What has to change? Bring knowledge, capital, institutions, and norms to people – and expand ‘the good’, not people to knowledge, capital, institutions and norms – and degrade and consume ‘the good’. There is nothing in western civilization that cannot be copied by moral peoples.. There is nothing in western civlization that cannot be destroyed by large numbers of immoral peoples. Curt Doolittle The Natural Law of Sovereign Men The Philosophy of Western Civilization The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine.

  • Peterson New War’s Problem, Last War’s Strategy

    CRITICISM: PETERSON: FIGHTING THE LAST WAR, WITH A WEAPON THAT HARMS US AS MUCH AS IT HELPS. (NET/NET (TL;DR): The narrative requires intention, authority, and indoctrination in an effort to create behavioral goods, but natural law, like the good of markets, requires only dispute resolution, caused by self interests, from which all ‘goods’ emerge – even the unimagined. Narratives explain values. Laws create them. ) THE ENLIGHTENMENT, THE INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION, AND THE PROBLEMS OF CHOICE UNDER POST-HUMAN-SCALE I’m still going to criticize Dr Peterson’s conflation of the true(decidable), the good(preferable), and the beautiful(best/excellent) the similarity between men’s judgements provides us with a ‘unit of measure’: man’s abilities. It is this unit of measure that assists us in determining candidate opportunity, objective judgement, and successful action. When we encountered the industrial age, we changed from group norms as the unit of measure (test), to the limits of man’s perception(test) as the unit of measure in methods of decidability. Everything grew in scale:, information, markets, awareness of differences, necessity of understanding that which was beyond personal limits to perception, individual limits to ability and action, and group limits to organization and understanding. It was this intellectual transition from small, homogenous, and local to large, heterogeneous and remote, that both created great opportunity for mankind, and created all our personal, cultural, institutional, and international conflict. We changed from ‘markets’ where we interacted with and cooperated with, and disputed with people in familiar and consensus context, to markets of all kinds where we interacted with, cooperated with, and disputed with peoples and groups, and nations on unfamiliar and very different consensual contexts. And our normative means of decision failed to scale. So we required methods of decidability not born then of consensus within a context, but of decidability regardless of context (and preference). This is the story of the anglo scientific enlightenment, the failed social scientific and political enlightenment that followed (French, German, Russian, Jewish, in europe), and the consequential and failed german scientific, social, and political enligthenment of the 19th and 20th centuries – cut short by the (Immoral and Destructive ) world wars. And it was the failure of 20th century philosophy and 20th century social science, only recently rescued by late 20th and early 21st century physical sciences, that has allowed an opportunity for the second conquest of the west by a ‘Second Great Deceit” – this time by pseudoscience, pseudorationalism, and propaganda, mass media, and the academy selling utopia to women and the underclasses, just as the the first conquest of the West by the First Great Deceit was achieved by Supernaturalism, pseudo-reasonableness, writing, the pulpit and the state sponsorship of monotheistic religion as a cheap means by which the wealthy east, could rule the independent but poorer west. The only central claim to ‘Darwinian’ thought is that it provides us with knowledge of long term consequence (outside of experience, outside of perception, outside of human scale), and that as such we possess decidability between what were previously either only preferential goods, or what were both preferential, normative, and institutionalized assumed goods that are in fact ‘bads’ (Islam’s (a) unearned respect, and (b) fixed scope of knowledge, or Judaism’s dual ethics and its parasitism upon the host’s commons, or Christianity’s superstition and submission to authoritarian falsehood as a means of creating docile agrarian labor forces and limiting the conflict of families, tribes, clans, chieftains, and states). With this long term tool we can understand the unintended consequences of comforting falsehoods. That is what ‘Darwinian’ thought provides us with: an understanding of consequences of scale. THE WANT OF DISCOUNTS – TO PRESERVE HUMAN SCALE I’m sympathetic. I’m human as well. Humans want an intuitionistic means of decidability to save them the labor of investigation and calculation. And the economics of time, energy, and ignorance prevent us from investigation and calculation. So our multitude of decisions must be reduced to simple general rules in the context of each era. We all want the Elephant to DRIVE, and for our minds to merely RIDE upon his labors, and enjoy the view. But that is to be animal – not human – to lack agency not possess it. Of course we would all love to ride easily on a river of normative conditions that suited our interests. But that is not the fate of our struggle against the dark forces of time and ignorance – only possible in the pursuit of the cooperation with others at sufficient scale to win the struggle. So, while I agree with Jordan’s criticisms (as many of us do), his prescription is wrong. He’s wrong because he is playing to the reasons that religions fail modernity via conflation and deceit (his coherent truth) but literature, history, the common law of torts, and science achieve by non deceitful, non false, ends. He is against the current pseudoscientific religion of the state, but he’s regressing into fighting the last war, instead of continuing modernity by deflating the beautiful, the good, and the true, which is the source of western competitive success, and the reason the west dragged the rest out of poverty. We have struggled for millennia to tame the Elephant of evolutionary intuition with the Rider of reason, and we have obtained extraordinary benefits from doing so. THE SOLUTION TO THE PRESENT IS THE SAME AS THE SOLUTION TO THE PAST – RETURN TO TRUTH The solution to the present second attempt to ‘christianize the west’ – this time through cosmopolitan pseudoscience of Boaz, Marx, Freud, Cantor, and Adorno – is not to regress to the past, in order to admit failure to defeat the pseudoscientific cosmopolitan religion of the present, but to defeat the pseudoscientific cosmopolitan religion of the present, with literature(ideation of and decision between possible contexts), history(judgement within each extant context), and decidability (truth – decidability REGARDLESS of context: judgement regardless of preference or opinion. ). Literary analogy can assist us in the free association that is necessary to identify candidate opportunities (ideation), but once possessed of an idea, we cannot, without deceit, choose other than to rely upon the record of man’s actions in matters of conflict (including law, norm, culture, religion, immigration, invasion, war, conquest, and genocide), and deflationary truth (science). Where by ‘science’ we mean not the via-positiva of investigation, but the via-negativa discipline by which we perform due diligence against ignorance, bias, wishful thinking, suggestion, obscurantism, supernaturalism, pseudo-rationalism, pseudoscience, propaganda, and deceit. We may only be able to SHARE literary(and platonic) means of general rules in pursuit of remote common goods, but we must at least possess the knowledge of, and a caste of people who, specialize in Judgement in matters of conflict, tat relies upon deflationary truth(science) for the purpose of those judgements. No more lies. The west defeated the rest and dragged man kicking and screaming out of ignorance, superstition, poverty, labor, starvation, disease, deceit and tyranny, by the the construction of one commons above all other: deflationary, testimonial, correspondent truth. Despite internal and external resistance at all times. We did it. And no retreat into eastern mysticism, jewish superstition, greek platonism, continental rationalism, or retention any of the enlightenment fallacies of the nature of man, will resurrect our civilization. THE TRUTH OF THE FOUNDING INDUSTRIES OF THE WEST: DOMESTICATION OF MAN FOR NECESSITY AND PROFIT The unwritten, unstated, impolitic history of the west is quite simple: a small number of independent, voluntary, warriors using advanced technology and advanced tactics of maneuver, where tactics were highly dependent upon adherence to oath (contract), sought to preserve their sovereignty( their independence and spoils of war) through continuing a contract of peerage. This retention of sovereignty, and their demonstrated, existential, superiority in action (conflict), leaves only one method of dispute resolution available: markets in everything. War constitutes the most intolerant market we know of, and martial epistemology is the most scientific. And the martial ‘reporting’ that we incorporated into our society as ‘testimony’, has permeated our civilization so much so that we cannot (unfortunately) understand that it is our uniqueness. That the bond of warriors – the oath – is of higher import than the bond of blood in matters of the commons. And it is the multitude of consequences of this bond of testimony – oath- using the epistemology of war (minimalist, deflationary, correspondence), that the aristocracy by practice, the middle class by aspiration, the craftsman class by necessity, and the working class by utility have created The Truthful Civilization and the most expensive commons that man has produced. Meanwhile, the outcast underclasses, the practitioners of gossip: politicians, priests, academics, and public intellectuals have fought against at every opportunity. The western aristocracy, having domesticated plants, animals, (and in large part, women), ever needing to increase the numbers of fellows possessing AGENCY IN FACT (both intellectual, physical, and existential), created a profitable industry: the domestication of the beast man from dysgenic, ignorant, superstitious, violent, parasitic, predatory, opponent, to eugenically produced human: rational, knowledgable, productive, competitive, through the process of slave, serf, freeman, citizen, and peerage. Humans were not oppressed. The beast man was domesticated through the organized use of violence to prevent his survival except through productivity in a market, and contribution to the informational, normative, institutional, and material commons. Just as the West evolved by the use of advanced technology, contractualism, truth, and markets in everything to evolve not first, but FASTER than the rest (and earlier) civilizations, the Cosmopolitans have used the advanced technology of mass communication, and the specialization in mass communication by politicians priests, academics, and public intellectuals, and their ‘soldiers’ in the school system, the media, and the underclasses, to rally against, and fight the people who use TRUTH, by the INDUSTRIALIZATION OF LYING. The product they sell is the hope of salvation in the present from Socialism ( discretionary rule over discretionary production, and discretionary allocation of production to individuals, families, and commons) that is the organizing model of the totalitarian flood-plain civilizations of antiquity that profit from the retention and expansion of the underclasses using religion (lying). And the cosmopolitan strategy is nothing other than a reformation of the promise of salvation (utopia) after death that is the source of Egyptian, abrahamic, judaic, christian, and muslim religions of the underclasses and the tellers of comforting lies that organize them. OUR CHOICES: THE POVERTY OF COMFORT OR THE PROSPERITY OF EFFORT We can choose between the imperial, dysgenic caste system of large scale underclasses taught by supernatural literature, and conflationary argument, that doctor Peterson seems enamored of, OR we can choose the eugenic production of sovereignty, agency, and equality of norther european warriors and universal militia taught by adherence to the oath, the common law, the decidability of the science (due diligence in testimony), testimonial (deflationary) truth, and producing a smaller and objectively superior majority middle class society in which we are all possessed of agency in institutions, and agency in mind, and agency in the face of a universe yet waiting to be domesticated by our will. The balanced argument (the market solution that is the product of western civilization) is that we need multiple forms of argument, education, economy, and a market (government) for exchanges of commons between the classes, to suit the needs of people who possess a range of abilities, from those who can but imitate to those who can most radically innovate. But we can only achieve that diversity (market) of available models for our people, if the means of decidability between them is parsimonious, deflationary, correspondent, Truth that is produced by the due diligence against ignorance, error, bias, and deceit that we call ‘science’. RETURNING TO HUMAN SCALE Its quite simple. Let a thousand nations bloom. End the empires and let loose the creativity of mankind. Its between empires that we make our rapid evolutions from one condition to another. we can all live in a diverse set of Denmarks (small homogenous egalitarian kin groups with commonality of interest and redistribution) or we can live in large empires (Brazil, India, China, Islam, and the United States) where we evolve once again into castes with high concentrations of wealth, vast underclasses, and stagnation – and the myths, superstitions, and comforting lies we tell ourselves to justify our condition. What has to change? Bring knowledge, capital, institutions, and norms to people – and expand ‘the good’, not people to knowledge, capital, institutions and norms – and degrade and consume ‘the good’. There is nothing in western civilization that cannot be copied by moral peoples.. There is nothing in western civlization that cannot be destroyed by large numbers of immoral peoples. Curt Doolittle The Natural Law of Sovereign Men The Philosophy of Western Civilization The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine.

  • ( see. the right would go nowhere after the election, whereas we could have had

    ( see. the right would go nowhere after the election, whereas we could have had a revolution with her election. so the question is whether we are buying time, or losing momentum. the economy is looking very kindly at trump right now. )


    Source date (UTC): 2017-03-11 21:39:00 UTC