Theme: Demonstrated Interests

  • Immorality = Irreciprocity. Irreciprocity means violating the requirements for:

    Immorality = Irreciprocity.
    Irreciprocity means violating the requirements for:
    productive, fully informed, warrantied, voluntary transfer of demonstrated interests (of all kinds) free of imposition of costs on the demonstrated interests of others including by externality.
    This is universal.
    It’s instinct
    It has to be.
    It’s physics.
    But it’s the negative.

    Amorality as a system of measurement, and a set of actions consists of what actions we take that are not immoral, but have no positive effect on the demonstrated interests of others (capital)

    Morality as a system of measurement, and as a set of actions, consists of what positive actions we take that are not irreciprocal AND produce a net increase in capital in the widest most abstract sense, even if that capital is just an increase in the likelihood of future safety, cooperation or insurance (investment).

    So the actions that are immoral, a moral, and moral evolve with the capital possessed by individuals and in particular the capital held in common by the population.

    The preservation of capital from imposition of cost (immorality) directy or indirectly (by externality) requires bearing the costs of NOT imposing costs (immorality) upon the demonstrated interests of others, whether private or common, directly or indirectly.

    The scale of the accumulated behavioral capital in this practice of ( habit, norm, tradition, rule, law) non-aggression against others’ demonstrated interests directly or indirectly whether private or common determines what is called and measured by the capital asset we call trust.

    To create this trust we engage in policing it by subtle means: altruistic investment, altruistic repayment, and altruistic punishment.

    Additionally, we vary in our terms of cooperation and investment. So we vary in moral DEMANDS, even if if moral DECIDABILITY is universal, moral demands differ between sexes, individuals, classes, groups, and populations.

    And additionally the degree of development, the degree of trust, the degree of personal, social, and institutional defesnse of capital and especially the capital of Trust, varies between groups like all technologies and institutions vary between groups.

    However, There are no moral norms traditions values or institutions that cannot be described and decided by the terms I have listed here by defining what is immoral, and defining what amoral and moral actions prevent immorality.

    Additionally, human individuals, human groups, and human organizations make errors, and will wrongly attribute moralioty to something that is in fact immoral.

    That does not mean that despite there error we cannot universally decide by universal decidabilty stated above whether an action or inaction is immoral.

    Because immoral, amoral, and moral actions are not an opinion. They aren’t relative. It’s a science. Whether we like it or not.


    Source date (UTC): 2024-01-29 03:06:40 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1751804024205012992

  • I don’t need to know you to observe the quality of your thought so far demonstra

    I don’t need to know you to observe the quality of your thought so far demonstrated. It’s enough. We can, believe it or not, tell almost everything about a person in as few as two hundred words. If that individual makes glaring cognitive errors – far fewer are required.


    Source date (UTC): 2024-01-19 14:32:58 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1748352856560631857

    Reply addressees: @CBrown28646 @NoahBookbinder

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1748351074715443425

  • It wasn’t spineless. I wasn’t afraid I was enjoying the entire time. I was armed

    It wasn’t spineless. I wasn’t afraid I was enjoying the entire time. I was armed and surrounded by armed men.

    I knew what I was doing. I didn’t take the bait. It was the demonstration of how to disempower the left, because they always and everywhere have but one tactic, which y’all always fall for: baiting into hazard so that the state can act on their behalf. Yet you fall for this every, single, time.

    I just didn’t expect y’all wouldn’t understand. We held a rally with no negative consequences. It was y’all who undermined us – not the enemy.

    As such, as always, because you always take the bait, you never learned from Ghandi, you keep failing.

    This is why we gave up on you. We gave up on converting the lost boys into political movement. Because you cannot self regulate your impuse to take the bait and resort to posturing and force that the enemy can use the state to crush you.

    Our feelings and our instincts are not helpful when they are the tool that the enemy uses to bait you into the state’s tiger trap.

    The truth is the left isn’ worong that they suffer. They are wrong in what to do about it. The right isn’t wrong that they suffer. They are also wrong in what to do about it.

    We demonstrated how to win against the enemy only to find out that our own were the enemy.

    You cannot win until you understand your feelings and your instincts are the enemy of our goals, beause they are what the enemy uses to manipulate you into failure.

    The enemy is cognitively and emotionally female. They bait you into hazards.

    Meanwhile my organization and I keep working with the people that are quiet and matter, and not the people who are noisy and don’t.

    Cheers

    Reply addressees: @RitlerHespecter @aldafa_ir @ElijahSchaffer @NatLawInstitute @ThruTheHayes @LukeWeinhagen


    Source date (UTC): 2024-01-10 16:28:24 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1745120415041601536

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1745117626601279895

  • “The rights failure to accomplish anything has the appearance to me to be part o

    –“The rights failure to accomplish anything has the appearance to me to be part of a plan.”–

    Lets talk about what the right fails.

    This statement implying inentionality, demonstrates that while feminine minds who don’t understand the rational incentives at play see either irrational instinct or oppression in everything, the opposite is also true in masculine minds who find intentional conspiracy when mere rational incentives or mere instincts are at play.

    So the failure of the right to accomplish anything isn’t a plan. Instead, there are at least the following reasons:

    (a) Christianity is hopeful and tolerant, and christian conservatives had confidence (faith?) that progressives and leftists (mostly women) wouldd ‘learn’ as they gained experience. But this didn’t happen.

    Instead that christian dominance of conservatism became self destructive once the left ended meritocratic participation in government by people with real world experience managing the spectrum of humans – especially by the military and industry – and replaced them with ‘credentialists’ without experience managing real people at any scale, led to ‘the managerial state’ by inexperienced credentialists operating on philosophy and ideology and not evidence and experience.

    (b) elections are decided by women, and the increasing numbrer of young, unmarried, unmarried with children, has led to the attempt to make the state responsible for that which must be the resonsibiilty of famiilies – and vote emotionally and intuitionistically accordingly. Combine that with the fact that colleges and universities are teaching a secular theological religion on the marxist spectrum that (as women do) blames everyone else for conditions, so they undermine and self congradulate.

    (c) Most of all, conservatism it’s a masculine trait. Conservatism is as much a masculine trait as systematizing responsibility and capital seeking and disagreeableness. So the right (masculine) tends to fracture into highly devoted, systematic (religion(social), philosophy(personal), practicality-class (economic), ideology(political)) where they can develop leaders and competency. This is what produces the libertarian to authoritarian spectrum. (packs)

    The left doesn’t require systematic anything other than emotional convergence in the moment seizing every opportunity for icremental gain (herds).

    So the conservatives work by cliff events, under leaders and causes that are hyper activiated to act during that cliff event (warfare) – enough to overcome their cognitive siloing.

    Where the progressive (feminine, left) works as do women, by seeking to exploit all incremental opportunities at all times (undermining) because there is no cognitive siloing to overcome.

    (d) First, y’all don’t donate money to any cause that would advance your interests. Second, when you do give attention or money you do so with outliers (losers) with no chance of victory. Third, becaues of your secarianism you ask for ends that are not a compromise position but an extreme, guarranteeing you’ll fail. Fourth, yall don’t think in terms of delivering solutions – because the right (except for a very small number of us) is anti-intellectual and impulsive. Fifth, and most importatly, you sit at home watching in large numbers as some minority of better men pay the cost and risk of showing up.

    So my ‘paternal’ advice is look in the mirror. Unless you do the following you’re the rieason teh right loses:
    1. donate to what has a chance
    2. learn from and promote those who have a chance
    3. seek compromise positions that all ‘sects’ of the masculine spectrum can tolerate (priority of thefamily) – and don’t try to solve everything at once – choose to move the needlee and keep at it like the left.
    4. Seek actionable solutions that produce incentives to act responsibiliy rather than that others agree with your values and your ideas.
    5. Show up. Y’all never show up. We need 2M men, in DC, for a minimu of three weeks to win. Y’all wiath for other men to do the work for you, pay the cost for you, and take the risk for you. … And that mean’s you’re boys not men.

    Love you all anyway
    Cheers

    Reply addressees: @betterbuiltpool @NoahRevoy


    Source date (UTC): 2024-01-02 23:19:11 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1742324688729108480

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1742310322508116133

  • Start with the beginning: After this it’s demonstrated interest, self determinat

    Start with the beginning: After this it’s demonstrated interest, self determinat

    Start with the beginning:
    After this it’s demonstrated interest, self determination, sovereignty, reciprocity, truth and duty. https://t.co/nOLwh65Vr4


    Source date (UTC): 2024-01-02 03:37:15 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1742027247836348561

    Reply addressees: @romanstatue_ @SydSteyerhart

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1742025121882087607

  • And evidence of your (a) competency (b) judgment (c) achievement is what again?

    And evidence of your (a) competency (b) judgment (c) achievement is what again? In other words you lack political influence because you lack political value.


    Source date (UTC): 2023-12-30 04:18:02 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1740950347815043373

    Reply addressees: @wreckag3342296 @Ben_Jammin1889 @VDAREJamesK

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1740948884741124374

  • I am correct. And the numbers that gave rise to the study you are citing confuse

    I am correct.
    And the numbers that gave rise to the study you are citing confuse sample sizes.
    Here is the simple bit: training can improve a DEMONSTRATED intelligence. However, all boats float the same. Meaning the differences between groups remain constant.


    Source date (UTC): 2023-12-23 04:39:24 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1738419007433171331

    Reply addressees: @AhkNunu @palmetto_eth

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1738418195831107973

  • That’s a good take. Except that we need to define how to determine competency wh

    That’s a good take. Except that we need to define how to determine competency where taht competency is demonstrated not politically produced.

    That said, I think you’re asking to much of a monarchy.


    Source date (UTC): 2023-12-20 18:53:28 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1737546775962038411

    Reply addressees: @teodoriancu14

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1737546522449842621

  • Superior not super. They are superior in every single dimension of demonstrated

    Superior not super. They are superior in every single dimension of demonstrated human behavior. They practice high investment parenting and devotion to education. So, despite the Ashenazi 20 point advantage, the Jewish genetic admixture in Israel averages down to at least a 12 point IQ advantage over the neighboring Arabic populations, meaning they will always produce superiority in all demonstrated human behavior. This is why Israel is a threat to the arab world – just as the arab world is a threat to the european and east asian world. The two groups are so genetically different in ability to learn increasingly abstract concepts that they cannot cohabitate in the same polity because the status difference in outcome will always be to the disadvantage of the majority of Arabs – relegating them to a permanent underclass who demands mediation of differences at the cost of their betters.

    Reply addressees: @shasha2711 @RzAz_Yemen @Yampeleg


    Source date (UTC): 2023-12-20 16:20:05 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1737508178391117824

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1737504636263604670

  • RT @rorysutherland: This is fascinating. I think it’s fair to say that many camp

    RT @rorysutherland: This is fascinating. I think it’s fair to say that many campaign groups are not chiefly motivated by the causes they ar…


    Source date (UTC): 2023-12-19 07:01:36 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1737005242112208957