IT’S NOT COMPLICATED:
Law(Science)…………….. = Testimony (Measurements)
Philosophy(Rationalism) = Excuse (Justifications)
Theology(Fictionalism).. = Fiction ( Deception)
The Grammar Used Tells You Everything About The Argument Used.
Source date (UTC): 2018-10-30 10:07:00 UTC
October 29th, 2018 9:55 AM THE POSITION OF “LIBERTARIAN” LITERATURE IN INTELLECTUAL HISTORY [A]s in most enlightenment literature, [Insert libertarian book name here] presumes an environmental condition that does not exist. The enlightenment has failed. The 20th century was the end of the experiment. Man was not oppressed. He was domesticated, until he could produce a sufficient pareto distribution that made a middle class possible given the technology available. we aren’t every going to ‘…. all just get along…”, only find the safest ways of evolutionary competition. [they are] good books. But [they are] just plagued by the usual problems of the postwar ‘end of history’ movement between the anglo, french, and jewish versions of a middle class utopia. My criticism of Rawls, Nozick, Barnett (et al), is that like many in the 20th, they too readily accepted the jewish libertine separatist literature – when that tradition never created liberty because the producers could never hold territory, because they were insufficiently martial – instead of the european tripartite (aristocratic) model of earning a condition of liberty through governance of animal man – by holding the territory and creating the institutions and capital necessary to domesticate him. So the Libertines “libertarians” produced works advocating Roving Preacher ‘liberty’ and the ‘Bazaar ethics of travelling merchants’ instead of the entics of the territorial military, independent jurist, the domestication from slavery to serfdom to freemen to citizen to peer, and the production of metal and capital rather than rent seeking and privatization of the commons.) Just as we fought hard to survive the french german, and russian counter-empirical revolutions (enlightenments), and their ‘centuries’, the “jewish century” is over (having done more than all previous counter-revolutions combined). Marxism, Socialism, “Libertinism”, Neo-conservatism, “Jewish Austrianism”, Freudian and Boazian Pseudoscience, Frankfurt “critique” (undermining), french-jewish postmodernism (outright lying by reality by chanting), Propaganda by Pilpul and Critique, Globalism, and all universalisms (monopolies) of authoritarians have failed, with the balance of powers, nationalism, truth, and science replacing the century of fraud. The question is whether we will regroup and defend ourselves against the restoration of the 1500 years of islamic conquest, as we have regrouped against the french, german, russian, and jewish revolts against modernity. It seems like the intellectual vanguard to undermine the west (the french and the jews), the political vanguard to undermine the west (the puritans and the french and the jews) and the islamic military and demographic masses to destroy, (restoration of the islamic conquest) is just repeating in the current world, the same process that occurred in the ancient – and gave us the Abrahamic Dark Ages of Ignorance. Without women voters we would never be here. Because like the ancient world, Judaism, Christianity, and Islam were spread to the women and the underclasses who are most susceptible to false promise (‘salvation’), pilpul (sophism), and critique (straw manning). But despite women voters it appears that the world is revolting against the jewish century false promises, pilpul (sophisms), critique (straw manning), and the industrialization of undermining through media (gossip and reputation destruction. Anglo 1600’s, French 1700’s, German middle 1800 to early 1900’s, Russian – Jewish Late 1800-early-1900’s – jewish postwar to present – Islamic late 1900s to present. one empirica and one scientific enlightenment, offset by french, german, russian-jewish-chinese, western-jewish, and now Islamic counter-enlightenments. in retrospect it’s amazing that (a) we fell for it a second time, and (b) still survived it.
(FB Timestamp) THE LIMIT OF COMMERCIAL SELF INTEREST RE: Facebook, Twitter, Google, Quora, Stack Overflow, Medium, and all the rest of the ‘censors’…. [T]he secret to the Success of the West in both the Ancient and Modern worlds, is the speaking of uncomfortable truths, no matter the cost, and regardless of impact on the competence, self image, status, and dominance hierarchies.
It is this ‘disregard’ for ‘face’ that produced all of western civilization’s excellences: truth, jury, rule of law, reason, empiricism, science, technology, medicine, markets, and the fastest adaptation of culture, economy, law, and polity to circumstance that is possible for mankind. By appealing to a world commercial market, where “Truth No Matter The Consequences” is not only unknown but anti social, and in many cases unethical, immoral, and highly offensive, we have let into our great civilization the antithesis of what made it great: Paying the price of offense to produce all that flows from telling the truth – from opinion, to testimony, to scientific fact. These companies, out of commercial self interest, are spending down the accumulated normative, cultural, traditional, intellectual, and institutional capital that we carefully accumulated over 3500 years of European evolution and development. The most intolerant wins. One can be tolerant of Truth and Opinion and create western civilization. Or one can be intolerant of Truth, and Opinion and reverse western civilization. What we are seeing is yet another invasion of intolerance, (first judaism and christianity), and now Judaism (Separatist Sophism), Postmodernism (Secular Christian Sophism), and Islam(Supernatural Conquest Sophism). Every single act of suppression of dissent against those who take offense is a THEFT of the capital of western civilization. In economic terms this is called: The Privatization of Public Capital – what we call ‘The Commons”. As I undrestand the situation, all of these companies are guilty of not only of (a) sedition, (b) conspiracy (c) massive privatization of the commons for commercial self interest, (d) use of proceeds and platform to coerce the state via the public to continue this privatization of the commons. This is theft. Period. Plan and simple. And sedition as well.
October 29th, 2018 9:55 AM THE POSITION OF “LIBERTARIAN” LITERATURE IN INTELLECTUAL HISTORY [A]s in most enlightenment literature, [Insert libertarian book name here] presumes an environmental condition that does not exist. The enlightenment has failed. The 20th century was the end of the experiment. Man was not oppressed. He was domesticated, until he could produce a sufficient pareto distribution that made a middle class possible given the technology available. we aren’t every going to ‘…. all just get along…”, only find the safest ways of evolutionary competition. [they are] good books. But [they are] just plagued by the usual problems of the postwar ‘end of history’ movement between the anglo, french, and jewish versions of a middle class utopia. My criticism of Rawls, Nozick, Barnett (et al), is that like many in the 20th, they too readily accepted the jewish libertine separatist literature – when that tradition never created liberty because the producers could never hold territory, because they were insufficiently martial – instead of the european tripartite (aristocratic) model of earning a condition of liberty through governance of animal man – by holding the territory and creating the institutions and capital necessary to domesticate him. So the Libertines “libertarians” produced works advocating Roving Preacher ‘liberty’ and the ‘Bazaar ethics of travelling merchants’ instead of the entics of the territorial military, independent jurist, the domestication from slavery to serfdom to freemen to citizen to peer, and the production of metal and capital rather than rent seeking and privatization of the commons.) Just as we fought hard to survive the french german, and russian counter-empirical revolutions (enlightenments), and their ‘centuries’, the “jewish century” is over (having done more than all previous counter-revolutions combined). Marxism, Socialism, “Libertinism”, Neo-conservatism, “Jewish Austrianism”, Freudian and Boazian Pseudoscience, Frankfurt “critique” (undermining), french-jewish postmodernism (outright lying by reality by chanting), Propaganda by Pilpul and Critique, Globalism, and all universalisms (monopolies) of authoritarians have failed, with the balance of powers, nationalism, truth, and science replacing the century of fraud. The question is whether we will regroup and defend ourselves against the restoration of the 1500 years of islamic conquest, as we have regrouped against the french, german, russian, and jewish revolts against modernity. It seems like the intellectual vanguard to undermine the west (the french and the jews), the political vanguard to undermine the west (the puritans and the french and the jews) and the islamic military and demographic masses to destroy, (restoration of the islamic conquest) is just repeating in the current world, the same process that occurred in the ancient – and gave us the Abrahamic Dark Ages of Ignorance. Without women voters we would never be here. Because like the ancient world, Judaism, Christianity, and Islam were spread to the women and the underclasses who are most susceptible to false promise (‘salvation’), pilpul (sophism), and critique (straw manning). But despite women voters it appears that the world is revolting against the jewish century false promises, pilpul (sophisms), critique (straw manning), and the industrialization of undermining through media (gossip and reputation destruction. Anglo 1600’s, French 1700’s, German middle 1800 to early 1900’s, Russian – Jewish Late 1800-early-1900’s – jewish postwar to present – Islamic late 1900s to present. one empirica and one scientific enlightenment, offset by french, german, russian-jewish-chinese, western-jewish, and now Islamic counter-enlightenments. in retrospect it’s amazing that (a) we fell for it a second time, and (b) still survived it.
I said this last night: Gab Just became the equivalent of Hillary’s Alt Right and Deplorables. The best advertising in the world.
Source date (UTC): 2018-10-29 16:13:03 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1056941996877725697
I said this last night: Gab Just became the equivalent of Hillary’s Alt Right and Deplorables. The best advertising in the world.
Source date (UTC): 2018-10-29 12:12:00 UTC
October 28th, 2018 2:27 PM WHY AND HOW PILPUL FUNCTIONS AS A MEANS OF DECEPTION.
—“(((They))) win by creating false dichotomies; the use of language is very important.”—Mirjana BiliÄ
[T]heir technique of Pilpul: They use an element of truth to create a false dichotomy and therefore frame the question by suggestion, and obscure the solution due to anchoring. We are always vulnerable to anchoring. Because we are vulnerable to anchoring we are vulnerable to framing. Because we are vulnerable to framing we are vulnerable to suggestion and obscurantism. Because we are vulnerable to suggestion and obscurantism we are vulnerable to influence. If we are provided for incentive to justify that influence we can be controlled – by BLOCKING our OPPORTUNITY and MOTIVATION for seeking truth. The three abrahamic religions (Judaism, Christianity, and Islam) all produce recursive ignorance cue to BLOCKING our search for truth. This is how PILPUL is used to deceive, and why math, logic, science, economics, law and testimonial truth are such an important defense. A lie (incentive), a half truth, a False dichotomy (choice). Low trust people simply dont’ go beyond the tangible. High trust people do. Our asset of high trust in constructing the commons which produce such outsized returns compared to other peoples. But our trust( suspension of disbelief), and vulnerability to anchoring, suggestion, and obscurantism make our ordinary folk easily deceived, manipulated, controlled, and preyed upon.
October 28th, 2018 1:31 PM NO. HERE IS THE FUTURE OF BTC (No more lies, means no more btc lies too) [T]his is of course an interesting thought experiment, but of course the difference is that such a metal does not exist, the precious metals are in demand for un-replicable reasons, and they are insufficient in volume, so their function of a monetary substitute (holding place of value) is actually oil. Fiat money consists of shares in the state, and is in demand because the state demands it for taxes, and demands it’s monopoly. Bitcoin consists of shares in the bitcoin network. There is trivial difference between electronic distribution of any existing currency, and the distribution of bitcoin OTHER than the FEES that can be extracted for use of those other currencies, in exchange for state insurance of those transactions, and that the INDIVIDUAL COIN HOLDER provides the function of clearances between different currencies (locales), at lower FEES (transaction costs) at slower rates (transaction rates), in the absence of insurance by the currency issuer (the state or the btc network). There is no known method of insuring the BTC network and it remains slow expensive and fragile. As I’ve written consistently since I think 2012, all we are doing with these currencies is performing research and development for the state, which will NOT use a distributed but CENTRALIZED transaction processor, on top of existing financial networks, using the encryption technology, and the state will destroy private networks because the state can INSURE those transactions as well as police the input and output of money into and out of such networks. There is absolutely zero chance of any other outcome. As far as I know the legacy of BTC and similar products will be as registries of title, thereby eliminating title companies. Registries of stocks and interests. And if someone is smart enough, to eliminate the check-cashing businesses which will then be able to provide cash distribution services in lieu of risk, for flat fees rather than interest.
October 28th, 2018 12:52 PM FIXING LIBERTARIANISM’S FRAUD BY CONFLATIONARY SOPHISM (PILPUL)||Investment(Action) > Possession (Possession) > Ownership (Property). Don’t confuse the Imaginary(self), with the Moral (goal) with the Real (truth).
—“You can’t own an idea once it has been communicated.”–Wyatt Storch
[Y]ou can however prohibit commercial benefit from that – we do it all the time. The question only whether an idea or anything else non physical can be used non-commercially
—“Yes you can threaten people and hurt them and take their stuff. But you can’t assign ownership status to that which cannot be owned without faking reality.”—Wyatt Storch
Well, no, that’s a conflation of terms. You are using ‘owned’ which means ‘insured by third party’, versus ‘possessed’ (fact), versus ‘demonstrated Investment,’ or ‘demonstrated property’ (moral, under natural law). You can possess and use information, without consuming it unless you are the exclusive possessor. You only possess ownership of property rather possession of asset if it is insured by a third party. Everything else is simply deception by conflation. So one can possess information, and one can exchange it, but whether one can sell that information in the market, where the market is ensured by the third party, is up to the third party not you.
October 28th, 2018 11:55 AM FALSE DICHOTOMIESViolence vs Pacifism like Socialism vs Captialism is (((another))) fraud by propaganda. The question is only between what end violence is put to, and what end markets are put to. One can use violence to create rule of law, markets and property, or use it to create rule by man, involuntary organization of production distribution and trade, by eliminating property.