I feign stupidity all the time. How else do I bait people into ‘educating me’ and thereby exposing themselves to study?
Source date (UTC): 2017-02-19 09:25:00 UTC
I feign stupidity all the time. How else do I bait people into ‘educating me’ and thereby exposing themselves to study?
Source date (UTC): 2017-02-19 09:25:00 UTC
FIRST TO GET THIS OFF THE TABLE
—“I wish I could assume that you are acting in good faith”—
Well I will tell you how I DO NOT act in good faith:
I dont have a classroom to experiment on students. I don’t have a research budget, and I dont have graduate students (indentured labor) to conduct experiments for me. What I do have is access to a very inexpensive medium for experimenting with arguments.
In my process of inquiry, I work very hard to construct conditions under which I can obtain what I consider honest or truthful information, vs reported information.
I work very had to understand how and why people hold positions, and to test my theories against those positions. So all my arguments are tests. I iterate these tests about ten times before they seem to be fairly good, and then over the next few years refine them until I can state them as aphorisms or series, or something incredibly dense – effectively as verbal proofs. I construct proofs.
This work requires that I ‘get inside the heads’ of the people who hold these positions, and then reduce those positions to a series of testable criteria (incentives) regardless of position.
And since I am a philosopher of science, and a falsificationist, I do this by attacking ideas until I see if and how they survive – or not. So I investigated sovereign monarchism, classical liberalism, libertarianism, anarcho capitalism, neoreaction, and now the ‘nazis’ with sympathy to understand them then I attack those ideas to falsify them. And what remains is a set of ‘goods and bads’ from each model.
In other words, in some ways, because I treat everyone I interact with in business and intellectual life, as a participant in an experiment, I am continually operating under conditions that you might consider disingenuous in the moment but profoundly moral in the end result.
I learned most of this technique negotiating (i have bought a lot of companies, closed a lot of deals, and done deals that were meritous and some I regret today as immoral. But I see my chief problem in negotiation, simply living in a world full of relative upper class scoundrels, educated imbeciles and underclass zombies, and a middle and working class that appears to consist of the only moral people extant in western society, and they are the ones that least benefit from the current order – because they are being exterminated by it.)
Now, there are a good number of people who follow me that know exactly what I am doing. And I think it is this form of cunning they appreciate almost as much as the output of my work. But in my world I am literally nothing more than a scientist using verbal experiments to investigate the human mind so that I can construct a body of law that will reverse the beneficiaries of the western order, and restore tehm to the middle and working classes, and save my people and our priceless civilization in doing so.
So if that ‘disenginuity’ makes me immoral somehow in your world because I am ‘using’ people, when they are voluntarily engaging in these discussions, and I have to do nothing more than stand on the top of the hill and say I’m the king in order to get them to play this very elaborate verbal game, then I think you practice a woman’s morality, rather than a man’s. I take responsibiilty for not only myself, but for my people and for mankind, and I do so by asking people to play a game with me that they wilingly play, are entertained by, and learn from.
Frankly, if I didn’t have so much respect for you I wouldn’t say this but I know you are a moral man. What actually bothers me is that in my view the cost of dealing with all these shitty selfish people in all these ridiculous niches of political masturbation tires the hell out of me. But just as we must go live among the animals to understand them, and bear the costs and risks of doing so, I must do the same with every shitty immoral, selfish, justificationary, eddy of the human political tidal pool.
That is the truth as I am most capable at the moment of speaking it.
Curt Doolittle
The Philosophy of Aristocracy
The Propertarian Institute
Source date (UTC): 2017-02-19 09:24:00 UTC
—–It is fun that Zuckerberg has finally realized how much power Facebook truly has to shape people’s understanding of current events, while he continues to keep initial investor, Trump adviser, and Gawker lawsuit funder Peter Thiel on the board. Zuckerberg’s manifesto is a nice idea (and a so-so piece of writing). But Facebook has made many claims to care about its users in the past, and then acted to the contrary or not acted at all.—–
Source date (UTC): 2017-02-18 20:12:00 UTC
Americans are simply tired of choosing between the cowardly and stupid republican party, and the evil and lying democratic party.
Source date (UTC): 2017-02-18 19:29:00 UTC
REPORTER’S PRIMARY TRICK
Force someone to reduce a complex set of ideas to a sound bite, then develop a straw man criticism of the sound bit that will attract attention by violating the moral intuitions of as many people as possible.
Remember, the press is always lying. They are all the product of the Culture of Critique and Critical Theory, not the product of western Natural Law and truthful testimony. They are gossips for profit, not jurors.
THE TRUMP / NEGOTIATOR TRICK
Give moral answers, general ‘goals’, and sew uncertainty as to details, so that the other side comes to the table having prepared for a multitude of eventualities, that make it costly and time consuming to obtain agreement upon.
Feign preference for any of a set of ideas, meanwhile simply listing a priority of available terms that you are willing to accept.
Bring an ultimate decider into the room, and then leave the other side scrambling to develop consensus, as you wear them down.
Strike a deal, and when they come back to the table for more accuse them of bad faith, unethical conduct, incompetence, and disorganization.
State your position as take it or leave it because the other side is not serious. Meanwhile keep leaking to the imbecilic press and whomever else is engaged in gossip for a living, that the other side is incompetent and dishonest.
Walk away, say what you left on the table, and do what you left on the table that is in your interest.
Curt Doolittle
Source date (UTC): 2017-02-18 14:54:00 UTC
YES WE CAN RESTORE WESTERN CIVILIZATION – EASILY
—“It appears that a golden bullet would be to reduce the value of [false] advertising, and this ineffectiveness would lead to the media industry being starved of revenue. Any suggestions on how this could be achieved?”—- Julian le Roux
GREAT QUESTION!!!! YES!
EASILY:
(a) require testimonial truth in all public speech.
(b) rescind copyright protection, replacing it with creative commons protection. (you may not profit from it at civic expense, and then neither may anyone else.). This reduces copyright to a trademark and therefore fraud issue rather than a license for unnecessary and perversive rents.
Honestly, it’s that simple. We would crush the entertainment, advertising, media, propaganda, public intellectual, political in 120 days. That is all the cash flow that they have to survive with. Even the threat of it would wipe out the industry.
As we have seen with book authorship, artistic authorship, and even independent cinema, the creative works would continue to be produced no matter what. There is no reason to subsidize them if by doing so we subsidize the production of critique (propaganda).
The impact on civilization – reversing the economic incentives and economic possibility of engaging in the industrialization of lying, would vanish.
If intellectuals professors, advertisers and marketers, industry and politicians, media and artists must warranty their works as truthful, then the size, scale, and composition of the information system will return to that which is possible and rewarding: truthful.
We have built a civilization funded by lying just as much as we built the internet funded by pornography.
WE MADE IT POSSIBLE BY A GRATUITOUS VIOLATION OF NATURAL LAW. WE CAN UNMAKE THE POSSIBILITY BUT RESTORING NATURAL LAW.
Curt Doolittle
The Philosophy of Aristocracy
The Propertarian Institute
Kiev, Ukraine
Source date (UTC): 2017-02-18 14:01:00 UTC
—“The British Empire and British Intelligence were the template for the American Empire and the CIA, which are pulling Western civilization and culture to the point of extinction.The Anglos should have never lost their German roots. That was the beginning of the end.”—Josh Jeppson
I have slowly come to understand that as an anglo-american, Englishman, norman on one side, and breton on the other, that my intuitions that demand my rights as an Englishman, are rights of an anglo saxon, are rights of Germania, and rights of Aryan Europeans: reciprocity – or what we more romantically call Natural Law.
And that America when founded was an anglo-saxon nation. A member of northern Europe and therefore of the civilization of greater Germania. And that sometime after the defeat of napoleon culminating with the parliament of Disraeli, the brits attempted to create a culture, a religion, of commercial greed at the expense of kin, culture. One that violated our ancient reciprocity.
And by doing that the British adopted the dual ethics of the jews.
And this caused a split between the individual responsibility and reciprocity of the germans as the means of spreading civilization. And the non-reciprocal ‘high mindedness’ of the jews was adopted by the british and still plagues the anglosphere today.
Just as the Jews and British were motivated to adopt polyethical, virtue-signaling, moralism as their method of justifying their predation, the greed of the americans motivated them to acquire the british empire which they had so feared.
British Aristocracy and what is left of us in American lesser aristocracy – those who follow our ancient ‘religion’ of incrementally expanding reciprocity – still practice the aristocratic ethos.
But we are the minority – since we have let pandora out of the box: irreciprocity of the jews adopted by the british, inherited by the americans.
There is no shortcut to natural law. And those who attempt it will be hated by all.
Source date (UTC): 2017-02-18 08:49:00 UTC
NEWS IS JUST INDUSTRIALIZED GOSSIP AND NOTHING MORE
Remember, the news media makes a profit from telling you outright lies that get your attention, so that they can sell advertising to commercial organizations, that profit from telling you half truths so that they can profit by getting your attention.
If you hear gossip do you believe it? Or do you reserve judgement until you’ve heard both sides of the story? As human beings we believe gossip we want to be true and we disbelieve gossip that we don’t want to be true.
This is the CHEAPEST and EASIEST way to confirm our biases. Because investigating the source and discovering what was actually said or done, is costly. We did not evolve to investigate what is true and false. We evolved to rally each other to our preferred ends by reinforcing one another’s cognitive biases, by gossiping to one another. Truth is not useful in rallying unless it is in your favor.
All ‘news’ is just ‘gossip’. All reporters are just ‘gossips’.
That’s all they are. Just as the gossips you know profit by getting attention that they seek from others. The media, the public intellectuals, the academy, the politicians, and the advertisers and marketers are just gossips.
We are governed by gossip.
Curt Doolittle
The Propertarian Institute
Kiev, Ukraine
Source date (UTC): 2017-02-17 08:38:00 UTC
—“You may do all the virtue signaling you can afford to pay for yourself.”—Eli Harman
Source date (UTC): 2017-02-14 10:21:00 UTC
CAN WE OUTLAW VIRTUE SIGNALING UNDER NATURAL LAW?
by James Augustus Berens
(flawless)(perfect argument)
Can we outlaw virtue signaling?
Yes, it would be limited by default under symmetrical exchange (natural law).
Virtue Signalling (modern): advocacy for asymmetric transfers of property without warranty, voluntary contract and/or full-accounting.
If we suppress asymmetric transfers of property-en-toto, then we limit individuals to compete for signals in the market for goods and services, the market for norms, the market for producing and maintaining commons, and the market for defense and rule.
We suppressed profiteering through interpersonal (in-group) violence (masculine), but we haven’t suppressed asymmetric profiteering from the production of gossip & [mis]information and by advocacy of involuntary transfers (feminine).
So the problem isn’t so much that humans signal virtue, status and rank, but that we have yet to sufficiently limit the market for signals to warrantied, productive, fully-informed exchanges
consisting of positive externalities.
And we can either have an institutional solution (high trust/cooperative/centralized cost) by extending the purview of natural law to include the production of information, or we can re-introduce interpersonal violence (low trust/competitive/distributed cost) as means of re-masculinizing our dominance hierarchies; thereby shifting signals from the feminine, consumptive and dysgenic to the masculine, accumulative and eugenic—and by consequence restoring western aristocratic civilization.
Source date (UTC): 2017-02-14 03:35:00 UTC