October 16th, 2018 5:07 PM ZERO TOLERANCE
—” …really let that sink in…. conflation… that’s all it took. A bit of ambiguity and a bit of repetition and the cult of non-submission became a slave society.”—Bill Joslin
Zero Tolerance is the only defense against incrementalism.
THE RISE OF THE POSTWAR ANTI-WHITE CULT
(and it’s parallel to Christianity)
—“The shroud dropped over our eyes circa 1945 from what I can tell.”—- A Friend
Yes. They used the postwar prosecution of the Nazis to create new a religion (Fictionalism) in order to oppose the Darwinian revolution, Cultural Marxism to destroy our Art, History, and Values – and to the 1965 immigration act to destroy our social order, and Postmodernism to lie about it, and take advantage of the conformist mind to run with the herd.
(from elsewhere)
Source date (UTC): 2018-10-16 18:10:00 UTC
DEHUMANIZE THEM? THE OTHER WAY AROUND.
By Eli Harman
Dehumanize them? The issue is that they don’t regard US as human, or our preferences or values as valid, or legitimate – and so, in exchange, regarding THEM as people and THEIR preferences and values as valid and legitimate is giving them something for nothing.
Treating them as people entails real and material costs. We have to tolerate them. We have to include them. We have to give them the vote. We have to do what they vote for and give them what they vote for (when they vote to plunder, destroy, and enslave.)
But they will NEVER give us the same considerations in return. When they win they go for the jugular. When they lose they cry foul and delay, obstruct, and use every underhanded stratagem to try and get their way ANYWAY. They moralize and try to dictate terms from a position of weakness. They slander, libel and defame to sow division amongst us and turn us against one another. They lie, cheat, and steal. They bully, intimidate, manipulate, censor, resort to street violence, and attempt assassinations. They incite lawless disorder amongst their lowlife supporters.
Sympathetic (Feminine) arguments virtually DEMAND that we try, at all costs, to cooperate or negotiate with them. But that is not a worthwhile demand to meet because THEY are not meeting it for us. If anyone is putting that demand to them, they are simply ignoring it.
As So shall WE, henceforth – until the present unpleasantness is concluded (however it is concluded.)
Which we expect will be violently.
Source date (UTC): 2018-10-16 17:34:00 UTC
ZERO TOLERANCE
—” …really let that sink in…. conflation… that’s all it took. A bit of ambiguity and a bit of repetition and the cult of non-submission became a slave society.”—Bill Joslin
Zero Tolerance is the only defense against incrementalism.
Source date (UTC): 2018-10-16 17:07:00 UTC
THE PROBLEM OF POLITICAL STABILITY
by Michael Churchill
The left cannot function once its means are revealed. Its leaders understand that, hence the cultivation of Antifa as shock troops.
Democracy may be in the process of phasing out as an optimal political solution, because it creates a monopoly, and one side cannot accept the other side’s victory if it’s a given that it is not one country but two enemy camps.
Even Bolsonaro is a manifestation of that.
So the interesting question is what will the political map look like in 20 years around the globe. A mix of right and left wing dictatorships?
The problem with dictatorship is that it is not really stable if it’s imposed on half the population against their will. Thus it would seem to me something else would be more likely to come about.
( CD: Ergo, Nationalism(Fascism) by Political Order. )
Source date (UTC): 2018-10-16 12:33:00 UTC
October 15th, 2018 10:52 AM THOSE WHO WOULD DEFEND THE SOPHISM OF POSTMODERNISM WITH THE SOPHISM OF CRITIQUE“The Sophism of Critique.” [I]t does not matter ‘what you intend’ or ‘what you mean’ it matters what changes in state occur (consequences) because of your display word and deed (actions and consequences). If I speak in poetry (loading/framing), or code (symbolism/parsimony), or science (existential description), I can say the same things in different terms and frames. If I act according to the instructions or consequences of deductions and inferences therein, my actions are what are caused by the prose. The Grammar of Postmodernism (semantic content and limits; its’ consistency, correspondence, non-operational prose; coherence; its rules of continuously recursive disambiguation) are simply a continuation of the evolution of the Sophisms of: Pilpul (justification), Critique (Straw Manning), Suggestion(appeal to cognitive bias), Overloading (of cognition), and Obscurantism (untestability); … used in: the Abrahamic (and other) religions > Platonism (Idealism/Obscuring one’s ignorance) > Rabbinical Judgement (Pilpul/Justification) > Christian Justificationism (theology) > Rousseauian (French) Moralism (Justification) > Kantian Rationalism (Pilpul/Justification) > Marxist/Freudian/Boasian/Frankfurt Pseudoscience, Justification, and Critique > and French Postmodernism (Critique). These Grammars are all forms of sophistry. What they are not is math(measurement), logic (internal consistency), empirical (externally correspondent), scientific(warranty of due diligence), economics(rationality), law (reciprocity), and history(evidence), that is commensurable and testable because it is consistent, correspondent, operationally stated (existentially possible), consisting of rational choice, limited to reciprocal actions, coherent, fully accounted (against cherry picking, and complete in scope (against cherry picking). Critique Consists in: disapproval, shaming, ridicule, gossiping, rallying, straw manning, reputation destruction, of enemies, and heaping of undue praise of allies, and a failure to address the truth or falsehood of the central arguments, and their outcomes, rather than proposing an alternative, superior, competitively superior, solution that is actionable, and produces superior outcomes and externalities. Peterson cannot say in his venues anything sufficiently complex that he would lose the relatively mainstream audience. I can. Because it’s my specialty to debunk sophism (psedorationalism: pilpul, critique, loading/framing/overloading/obscurantism), supernaturalism, pseudoscience, and deceit. Postmodernism is yet another sophism in the long line of deceits that evolved through history to compete with testimonial truth in law, and the evolution of the tools by which we limit one another to that which is testifiable, rational, and reciprocal, and therefore a truth candidate. In other words, Postmodernism is just another cult-of-lies. Like Marxism before it. Like Rationalism before it. Like Theology Before it. Like Occult before it: a means of coercing the simple to conform to the demands of the Herd. Whereas speech that is testifiable, rational, reciprocal, and stated in operational (existentially possible) prose, like all the grammars of testimony (math, logic, empiricism, science, economics, law, and history) is and always has been, and always will be the means of DECIDING between differences of argument and opinion. Thus Endeth the Lesson. Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=26fIBA7O5Ag
October 15th, 2018 9:21 AM IN SIMPLE TERMS, POSTMODERNISM CONSISTS OF THE SOPHISM OF CRITIQUE APPLIED TO MIND RATHER THAN HISTORY, ECONOMY, POLITICS AND NORMS. [T]he grammar of postmodernism is sophist overloading and straw manning, making constant relations impossible. It is the hollow verbalism of the solipsistic mind. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/postmodernism/
October 14th, 2018 4:17 PM
—“One of Trump’s great strengths is that he gets the Left to unmask.”— Jim Leis
(It works flawlessly. They can’t help themselves.)
October 15th, 2018 11:03 AM NPCs, AND THEIR METHOD OF RESISTANCE [O]ne of the NPCs traits is to rely on Euphemism when it suits them and Literalism when it suits them, but then attack the use of Euphemism or Literalism by opponents when it doesn’t. As always, an NPC simply withdraws consent to agree no matter what, by whatever excuse possible, as a means of avoiding continuous, recursive, cooperative pursuit of decidability (the truth) that would require that they change their prior bias and commitment. You do not have to be intelligent to engage in this form of non-cooperation-by -continuous-denial. You just have to find a way to disagree and prevent progress to decidability NPC’s merely transmit and imitate means of denying cooperation on the discovery of decidability (truth) and resist all attempts at discovery of decidability. It is by this method the Herd ‘sticks together’ and is not ‘divided’ by reason, truth, science, argument, morality, reciprocity or any other criteria. Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute
October 15th, 2018 10:52 AM THOSE WHO WOULD DEFEND THE SOPHISM OF POSTMODERNISM WITH THE SOPHISM OF CRITIQUE“The Sophism of Critique.” [I]t does not matter ‘what you intend’ or ‘what you mean’ it matters what changes in state occur (consequences) because of your display word and deed (actions and consequences). If I speak in poetry (loading/framing), or code (symbolism/parsimony), or science (existential description), I can say the same things in different terms and frames. If I act according to the instructions or consequences of deductions and inferences therein, my actions are what are caused by the prose. The Grammar of Postmodernism (semantic content and limits; its’ consistency, correspondence, non-operational prose; coherence; its rules of continuously recursive disambiguation) are simply a continuation of the evolution of the Sophisms of: Pilpul (justification), Critique (Straw Manning), Suggestion(appeal to cognitive bias), Overloading (of cognition), and Obscurantism (untestability); … used in: the Abrahamic (and other) religions > Platonism (Idealism/Obscuring one’s ignorance) > Rabbinical Judgement (Pilpul/Justification) > Christian Justificationism (theology) > Rousseauian (French) Moralism (Justification) > Kantian Rationalism (Pilpul/Justification) > Marxist/Freudian/Boasian/Frankfurt Pseudoscience, Justification, and Critique > and French Postmodernism (Critique). These Grammars are all forms of sophistry. What they are not is math(measurement), logic (internal consistency), empirical (externally correspondent), scientific(warranty of due diligence), economics(rationality), law (reciprocity), and history(evidence), that is commensurable and testable because it is consistent, correspondent, operationally stated (existentially possible), consisting of rational choice, limited to reciprocal actions, coherent, fully accounted (against cherry picking, and complete in scope (against cherry picking). Critique Consists in: disapproval, shaming, ridicule, gossiping, rallying, straw manning, reputation destruction, of enemies, and heaping of undue praise of allies, and a failure to address the truth or falsehood of the central arguments, and their outcomes, rather than proposing an alternative, superior, competitively superior, solution that is actionable, and produces superior outcomes and externalities. Peterson cannot say in his venues anything sufficiently complex that he would lose the relatively mainstream audience. I can. Because it’s my specialty to debunk sophism (psedorationalism: pilpul, critique, loading/framing/overloading/obscurantism), supernaturalism, pseudoscience, and deceit. Postmodernism is yet another sophism in the long line of deceits that evolved through history to compete with testimonial truth in law, and the evolution of the tools by which we limit one another to that which is testifiable, rational, and reciprocal, and therefore a truth candidate. In other words, Postmodernism is just another cult-of-lies. Like Marxism before it. Like Rationalism before it. Like Theology Before it. Like Occult before it: a means of coercing the simple to conform to the demands of the Herd. Whereas speech that is testifiable, rational, reciprocal, and stated in operational (existentially possible) prose, like all the grammars of testimony (math, logic, empiricism, science, economics, law, and history) is and always has been, and always will be the means of DECIDING between differences of argument and opinion. Thus Endeth the Lesson. Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=26fIBA7O5Ag