Nick Heywood on Via Negativa: Intolerance We don’t need tolerance in a culturally homogeneous, high trust, society bound by self evident (Common sense) principles. There’s nothing to tolerate! Therefore, “Western Tolerance” is a myth. Used by those seeking to acquire the power, the individual and sovereign once possessed. To surrender their principles, values, sovereignty and culture. This leads to decisional confusion. There are no limits with in which decisions can be made. Confusions reigns! And it worked! By Bob Moran on Via Negativa: Intolerance. Tolerance as a virtue is a deception. Everything we care for we build and protect with INTOLERANCE. If you want your company to succeed, you don’t tolerate incompetence. If you want a degree to be worth something, you don’t tolerate idiots. If you want your family to to be safe, you don’t tolerate a random hobo coming in your house. Intolerance is a tool against entropy; we separate the good from the bad. Remove it, and everything will immediately start to decay and turn to dust.
Theme: Ethnoculture
-
Sorry, but the queen is the head of my family, my tribe, my nation, and I do not
Sorry, but the queen is the head of my family, my tribe, my nation, and I do not distinguish between the royal family and my kin. Nor for that matter, any of the nobility and my kin. Not because this makes me somehow better, but because I desire to protect my betters, who, in exchange, I desire to protect our kin.
Source date (UTC): 2017-05-01 17:49:00 UTC
-
There is a very good reason that distance from the point of geographic origin pr
There is a very good reason that distance from the point of geographic origin provides an increase in median intelligence. In all of human history, exit is the only means of preventing regression toward the mean.
Source date (UTC): 2017-05-01 09:57:00 UTC
-
Let me help you. higher latitude, distance from water, and heterogeneity of peop
Let me help you. higher latitude, distance from water, and heterogeneity of peoples, work against your civilization. Europe was easier for warrior aristocracy to colonize. the levant worse. Diversity is your enemy. Cool climes, proximity to water and waterways, and a homogeneity of people improve your chances.
Source date (UTC): 2017-05-01 09:05:00 UTC
-
“Patriarchy is a giant conspiracy to ensure the long-term survival of one’s trib
—“Patriarchy is a giant conspiracy to ensure the long-term survival of one’s tribe.’— Steve Pender
Source date (UTC): 2017-04-30 11:54:00 UTC
-
THE NAMES OF ARYANISM : THE CAUSE OF WESTERN CIVILIZATION Aryanism: (19th Centur
THE NAMES OF ARYANISM : THE CAUSE OF WESTERN CIVILIZATION
Aryanism: (19th Century)
Associating the name of set of tribes with their strategy, telling us nothing about the constitution of their strategy.
The Faustian Spirit: (German Legend ~1400?)
A literary allusion to the western predilection for experiment, change, and achievement. Again, this tells us almost nothing about causality, only the description of a few values.
Aristocratic Egalitarianism: (Duchesne)
A descriptive title of a military and political strategy that states that distributed rule of peers can scale by opening the franchise for participation in rule, and its benefits (property and commissions/taxes) is open to all who will pay for it by demonstrating merit in family, industry, and war. (compare to the chinese method of entering the bureaucracy through examination and the consequences thereof)
Aryanism as Markets for Rule: (Duchesne)
A descriptive insight expanding upon Aristocratic Egalitarianism, by adding that aryanism spread through the construction of markets for polities.
Sovereignty. (Doolittle)
A causal description. Since by the demand for sovereignty one can only scale through aristocratic egalitarianism, and one is limited to the resolution of conflicts by natural law of reciprocity, meaning that all association, cooperation, reproduction, production, production of commons, and production of polities must be achieved through sovereign, productive, fully informed, warrantied, voluntary exchange, free of negative externality. And By the combination of sovereignty, natural law, markets in everything, the need to scale, the provision of scale through the selection for agency, and thereby the incremental domestication of man, transcends man through imitation of sovereignty, reward for agency and sovereignty, and the deprivation and diminution of those who lack agency, cannot act in sovereign fashion, and therefore cannot cooperate via markets, and therefore cannot participate in rule.
And that is the CAUSE of western civilization.
For a militia of voluntary warriors, desirous of preservation of their sovereignty, Sovereignty is the only political solution, leading to natural law and markets in everything.
Source date (UTC): 2017-04-29 13:02:00 UTC
-
CIMMERIANS, SCYTHIANS, AND SLAVS The Cimmerians (also Kimmerians, Greek Κιμμέριο
CIMMERIANS, SCYTHIANS, AND SLAVS
The Cimmerians (also Kimmerians, Greek Κιμμέριοι Kimmerioi) are an ancient people, first mentioned in the late 8th century BC in Assyrian records.
Likely originating in the Pontic steppe and invading by means of the Caucasus, they probably assaulted Urartu, a state in north eastern Anatolia subject to the Neo-Assyrian Empire, in c. 714 BC. They were defeated by Assyrian forces under Sargon II in 705 and turned towards Anatolia, conquering Phrygia in 696/5.
They reached the height of their power in 652 after taking Sardis, the capital of Lydia; however an invasion of Assyrian controlled Anshan (Persia) was thwarted by the Assyrians. Soon after 619, Alyattes of Lydia defeated them. There are no further mentions of them in historical sources, but it is likely that they settled in Cappadocia.
They may have been related to either Iranian or Thracian speaking groups which migrated under pressure of the Scythian expansion of the 9th to 8th century BC.
According to Herodotus, the Cimmerians inhabited the region north of the Caucasus and the Black Sea during the 8th and 7th centuries BC (i.e. what is now Ukraine and Southern Russia), although it isn’t possible to identify the Cimmerians as the bearers of any specific archaeological culture in the region.
The Scythians were among the earliest peoples to master mounted warfare.
In the 8th century BC they possibly raided Zhou China. Soon after they expanded westwards and dislodged the Cimmerians from power on the Pontic Steppe. At their peak, Scythians came to dominate the entire steppe zone, stretching from the Carpathian Mountains in the west to central China (Ordos culture) and the south Siberia (Tagar culture) in the east, creating what has been referred to as the first Central Asian nomadic empire.
They kept herds of horses, cattle, and sheep, lived in tent-covered wagons, and fought with bows and arrows on horseback. They developed a rich culture characterized by opulent tombs, fine metalwork, and a brilliant art style.
Based in what is modern-day Ukraine, Southern European Russia, and Crimea, the western Scythians were ruled by a wealthy class known as the Royal Scyths.
The Scythians established and controlled a vast trade network connecting Greece, Persia, India and China, perhaps contributing to the contemporary flourishing of those civilizations.[19] Settled metalworkers made portable decorative objects for the Scythians. These objects survive mainly in metal, forming a distinctive Scythian art.
In the 7th century BC the Scythians crossed the Caucasus and frequently raided the Middle East along with the Cimmerians, playing an important role in the political developments of the region. Around 650–630 BC, Scythians briefly dominated the Medes of the western Iranian Plateau, stretching their power all the way to the borders of Egypt.
After losing control over Media the Scythians continued intervening in Middle Eastern affairs, playing a leading role in the destruction of the Assyrian Empire in the Sack of Nineveh in 612 BC. The Scythians subsequently engaged in frequent conflicts with the Achaemenid Empire. The western Scythians suffered a major defeat against Macedonia in the 4th century BC, and were subsequently gradually conquered by the Sarmatians, a related Iranian people from Central Asia.
The Eastern Scythians of the Asian Steppe (Saka) were attacked by the Yuezhi, Wusun and Xiongnu in the 2nd century BC, prompting many of them to migrate into South Asia, where they became known as Indo-Scythians.
At some point, perhaps as late as the 3rd century AD after the demise of the Han dynasty and the Xiongnu, Eastern Scythians crossed the Pamir Mountains and settled in the western Tarim Basin, where the Scythian Khotanese and Tumshuqese languages are attested in Brahmi scripture from the 10th and 11th centuries AD.
In Eastern Europe, by the early Medieval Ages, the Scythians and their closely related Sarmatians were eventually assimilated and absorbed (e.g. Slavicisation) by the Proto-Slavic population of the region.
Source date (UTC): 2017-04-29 11:58:00 UTC
-
“If your people are organically organized, clannish, tribal, egalitarian and hav
—“If your people are organically organized, clannish, tribal, egalitarian and have a thing for “purity” then they will also have high trust. You can expand, but you can’t build an empire or you’ll destroy it. Empires require bureaucracy and hierarchy as well as the extension of kinship to others. People that can’t (and didn’t!) do extended families can’t do empires. I guess It should be obvious.”—
Very good. Markets for nations. Markets for regions. Markets for whatever we want – among our kin. We can build a civilization but we cannot build an empire.
An empire by definition crosses ethnic and cultural lines. a civilization by definition is defined but ethnic and cultural lines.
America is an empire and cannot therefore persist as a european civilization under common law.
Source date (UTC): 2017-04-28 20:16:00 UTC
-
The problem with spreading our social order is (a) demographic distribution and
The problem with spreading our social order is (a) demographic distribution and (b) degree of civilization.
In practice we should see Aryanism (markets for rule) expandable only into areas that did not have the ability to expand the underclass, and did not possess a large underclass, and face little tribal conflict.
Conversely we should see the worst behavior among peoples who have expansive underclasses, the agrarian or pastoral ability to expand those underclasses, and lots of territorial competition from other kin groups.
And that is what we see
Source date (UTC): 2017-04-28 08:24:00 UTC
-
WHY WERE WESTERNERS UNSUCCESSFUL AT EXPORTING ARYANISM (MARKETS) by Simon Ström
WHY WERE WESTERNERS UNSUCCESSFUL AT EXPORTING ARYANISM (MARKETS)
by Simon Ström
By merely establishing rule, a small minority of conquerors do not have the resources to alter the basic fabric of social organization in a region that is already populous, wealthy and has a rigid socio-political system that works for them and is adapted to the local natural incentives.
Like the Mongols in China or Iran, the conquerors are rather the ones who are subject to assimilation, although they might retain or even spread their language and symbolism as a function of its prestige.
In order to permeate all society, the imposed, foreign evolutionary strategy must be carried by greater numbers than that, or at least powerful enough mechanisms of overcoming the inertia of “immunological rejection” of non-self cultural impulses.
The lesser the primordial differences in genes, culture and natural incentives between conqueror and conquered, the lesser the need of great numbers in order to assimilate through elite dominance.
1. Small minority conquest: dynastic turnover, insignificant gene flow and socio-cultural regression to the median. Examples: Yuan dynasty, Hittites, Gothic Spain, British Raj.
(Early Indo-Aryans were close to 1, but gravitated somewhat toward 2)
2. Sizable minority conquest: significant gene flow (amalgamation), socio-cultural regression to the mean. Examples: Corded Ware horizon, Roman Gaul, Latin America.
3. Great majority conquest: displacement, insignificant or no gene flow, complete socio-cultural continuation of the conquerors. Examples: North America, Kosovo, West Bank (future).
So the obstacles of exporting our strategy are:
– They don’t want it. They can profit from modernization without Westernization.
– Military dominance won’t cut it. You need to dominate kinship and the social fabric.
– The cost of export is too great because we are too different. Rule might be profitable, but assimilation? Questionable. We have evolved to pursue our strategy for millennia, others have not.
– Simon Ström
From Curt:
The problem with spreading our social order is (a) demographic distribution and (b) degree of civilization. In practice we should see Aryanism (markets for rule) expandable only into areas that did not have the ability to expand the underclass, and did not possess a large underclass, and face little tribal conflict.
Conversely we should see the worst behavior among peoples who have expansive underclasses, the agrarian or pastoral ability to expand those underclasses, and lots of territorial competition from other kin groups.
And that is what we see
Source date (UTC): 2017-04-28 08:23:00 UTC