Theme: Governance

Feb 5, 2020, 11:44 AM

—“all these [european] institutions arose out of the progressive rationalization of fear and terror — the true bases of the liberalistic *reciprocol state (which actually has no right of resistance, as herr Schmitt knew well)”— (((Gamhard McCoy)))

THE INSTITUTIONS: Sovereignty, Duel, Court, Government, Monarchy.

1. Constrain one another’s words with the duel.
2. Constrain one another’s action with the court, having failed to constrain them with threat of the duel.
3. Constrain a group, or industry with the court of commons for having failed to constrain one another with the court.
4. Constrain a government with an election for having failed to constrain individuals, groups, or industries.
5. Constrain a monarchy with a revolution for having failed to constrain the government.

They did? Conquerors thought in terms of fear and terror when their gods and mythos put them equal to gods, and they conquered everything from Spain to the edge of china? Those institutions arose out of the necessity of a small number of professional warriors dependent upon expensive technology (horse, bronze, chariot) that could not pay for a standing army and were dependent upon raising voluntary militia due to the inability of western peoples (horses, cattle, grasslands) to concentrate capital as was possible in the flood river valley civilizations (grains) and pastoralist early neolithic farmers (sheep, grain). I don’t make errors. Because I don’t read literature (lies). I study Archaeology, Technology, Economics, Military and Legal records are evidence – literature is fiction and deceit. 😉 You can’t do that because it would falsify your entire mythology, network of lies, and method of excuses making by lies. I know. It’s OK. You can’t help it. It’s genetic. ON SCHMITT(GERMANY) IN CONTEXT Schimtt btw was following the natural human bias expressed in intellectual tradition of trying to solve the problem of a stable state in a period of necessity of rapid adaptation, when the deliberative (adversarial) model of political (middle class) compromise was insufficiently responsive, and required extraordinary impositions on the investments of stakeholders. As is usual for continentals, who cannot manage to escape the dependence upon obedience as a means of avoiding interpersonal conflict, competition, and compromise, it never occurred to Schmidt that the anglo-saxon pre-napoleonic method of political decidability, or it’s roman and it’s greek predecessors, nor its proto-germanic predecessors, nor its western indo-european predecessors placed decisions with the family, the jury/thang, the warriors/nobles, or the chieftain/king depending upon the category of the question at hand. In times of war we give unto generals (dictators), in times of peace we give over to the middle class (republics) in times of windfall we give over to the people (democracy). So that the problem is that the pursuit of power by people, middle, nobility, and monarchy were unable to discover (as had the anglos) the means of transferring power dependent upon the condition – and that as warfare transitioned from purely territorial agrarian to trade and industrial economic and ideological warfare, that having failed to articulate their customs as formal law prohibited them from discovering rules for the distribution and concentration of power as context required. Schmidtt like all continentals since the french revolution, was another idiot trying to restore the hierarchy of church(political judiciary), judiciary(material judiciary), monarchy(military) burgher(middle class) and labor, without realizing that they were still trying to escape the church and restore traditional rule – but instead were still stuck on countering anglo empiricism and its continuous competition and trying to recreate secular theological harmony. The continent is a catastrophe with the french trying to recreate latin church authoritarianism, the germans lost in trying to work away guilt that they should not have for resisting russian jews and french authority with wishful thinking instead of monarchical and traditional restoration, with the slavs understanding completely, and the Russians waiting for revenge.

Feb 5, 2020, 11:44 AM

—“all these [european] institutions arose out of the progressive rationalization of fear and terror — the true bases of the liberalistic *reciprocol state (which actually has no right of resistance, as herr Schmitt knew well)”— (((Gamhard McCoy)))

THE INSTITUTIONS: Sovereignty, Duel, Court, Government, Monarchy.

1. Constrain one another’s words with the duel.
2. Constrain one another’s action with the court, having failed to constrain them with threat of the duel.
3. Constrain a group, or industry with the court of commons for having failed to constrain one another with the court.
4. Constrain a government with an election for having failed to constrain individuals, groups, or industries.
5. Constrain a monarchy with a revolution for having failed to constrain the government.

They did? Conquerors thought in terms of fear and terror when their gods and mythos put them equal to gods, and they conquered everything from Spain to the edge of china? Those institutions arose out of the necessity of a small number of professional warriors dependent upon expensive technology (horse, bronze, chariot) that could not pay for a standing army and were dependent upon raising voluntary militia due to the inability of western peoples (horses, cattle, grasslands) to concentrate capital as was possible in the flood river valley civilizations (grains) and pastoralist early neolithic farmers (sheep, grain). I don’t make errors. Because I don’t read literature (lies). I study Archaeology, Technology, Economics, Military and Legal records are evidence – literature is fiction and deceit. 😉 You can’t do that because it would falsify your entire mythology, network of lies, and method of excuses making by lies. I know. It’s OK. You can’t help it. It’s genetic. ON SCHMITT(GERMANY) IN CONTEXT Schimtt btw was following the natural human bias expressed in intellectual tradition of trying to solve the problem of a stable state in a period of necessity of rapid adaptation, when the deliberative (adversarial) model of political (middle class) compromise was insufficiently responsive, and required extraordinary impositions on the investments of stakeholders. As is usual for continentals, who cannot manage to escape the dependence upon obedience as a means of avoiding interpersonal conflict, competition, and compromise, it never occurred to Schmidt that the anglo-saxon pre-napoleonic method of political decidability, or it’s roman and it’s greek predecessors, nor its proto-germanic predecessors, nor its western indo-european predecessors placed decisions with the family, the jury/thang, the warriors/nobles, or the chieftain/king depending upon the category of the question at hand. In times of war we give unto generals (dictators), in times of peace we give over to the middle class (republics) in times of windfall we give over to the people (democracy). So that the problem is that the pursuit of power by people, middle, nobility, and monarchy were unable to discover (as had the anglos) the means of transferring power dependent upon the condition – and that as warfare transitioned from purely territorial agrarian to trade and industrial economic and ideological warfare, that having failed to articulate their customs as formal law prohibited them from discovering rules for the distribution and concentration of power as context required. Schmidtt like all continentals since the french revolution, was another idiot trying to restore the hierarchy of church(political judiciary), judiciary(material judiciary), monarchy(military) burgher(middle class) and labor, without realizing that they were still trying to escape the church and restore traditional rule – but instead were still stuck on countering anglo empiricism and its continuous competition and trying to recreate secular theological harmony. The continent is a catastrophe with the french trying to recreate latin church authoritarianism, the germans lost in trying to work away guilt that they should not have for resisting russian jews and french authority with wishful thinking instead of monarchical and traditional restoration, with the slavs understanding completely, and the Russians waiting for revenge.