(FB 1548697940 Timestamp) –“WHAT ABOUT NEPOTISM IN THE MONARCHY?”– The evidence is that families guard their status jealously and that fratricide and patricide are the most common origins of regicide. Secondly, a monarchy has only to defend the very longest term interest and its income from the overall performance of the polity. Monarchies have exceptional records for almost all of human history with the fragility not one of nepotism (since a monarchy has management teams selected from across the realm, many of whom are the best shareholders), but monarchies fail because agrarian production was the only means of competition and therefore territorial expansion the only means of competition. And territorial expansion only achievable by the high risk and high cost of european warfare and consequent ransom. The monarchies simply DID NOT KNOW WHAT TO DO when the landed and military aristocracy was replaced by the commercial aristocracy, and after the french revolution, the church aristocracy replaced by the state bureaucracy. We know what to do: Increase participation to shift, then decrease participation once shifted. Increase participation by expanding the franchise for each additional class, or decrease the franchise for each additional class once the change has been implemented. During that era guns were far more effective at forcing political change than archers. So the state could no longer use professional warriors to deny the franchise. The only solution is to retain the franchise for those who have demonstrated interests in the preservation of rule of law and the discretion of the monarchy, the republic, or the democracy in the determination of the production of commons. THere no longer a force on earth that can occupy territory against men with small arms (battle rifles) and rpg’s (close proximity man-portable artillery). It cannot be done. Ergo the transition is complete and we have restored the symmetry of power between men. WE need only choose to impose our will on those who would deprive us of rule of law, and the reciprocity that rule of law both depends upon and enforces. It is very hard to read Hoppe, Michels, and Burnham (or machiavelli for that matter) and not understand this.
Theme: Governance
-
Curt Doolittle shared a link.
(FB 1548812685 Timestamp) CAN WE BRING FAR RIGHT INFLUENCE TO THE WEST? “It all begins with the militia” Two news items today, that are important only in so far as they show that the Far Right, once mobilized can have extraordinary influence on political systems, with a small number of willing men intolerant of the status quo. ⢠Divisions sharpen inside Ukraineâs far-right camp as it fails to unite around a single presidential candidate, with National Corps refusing to support Svoboda’s candidate Ruslan Koshulynskyi. https://www.kyivpost.com/ukraine-politics/divisions-between-ukraines-far-right-groups-sharpen-ahead-of-elections.html? ⢠The center of Kyiv rang to the sound of rifle and machine-gun fire on the night of Jan. 27, 2019 during a reenactment of the Battle for the Arsenal Factory organized by far-right and nationalist organizations. See our photo gallery. https://www.kyivpost.com/multimedia/photo/kyiv-echoes-to-sound-of-gunfire-as-battle-of-kruty-reenacted-photos?
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1548779453 Timestamp) —“I feel like some of the far right want to turn us into being like all the other nations – yes we’ll resist them and survive, but we’ll lose much of what made us great. Propertarianism is the answer.”—Solomon Volodymyr
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1548777714 Timestamp) THE PRESERVATION OF CHRISTIANITY AS A POLITICAL RELIGION, AND THE RESTORATION OF PAGAN AND HEATHEN CULTURAL RELIGION UNDER THE NATURAL LAW. (I don’t want to interfere in Maximus’ thread, because he certainly doesn’t need my help in arguing propertarian natural law, but I like the suggestion that I should do a video. I have already done the subject with our favorite Aussie, and I will do the video now that you bring it up. Let’s understand these facts. 1 – Christianity teaches natural law – just poorly. 2 – Christianity teaches (exhaustive tit-for-tat) optimum IN-GROUP strategy as an extension of natural law – but does do poorly, and because it does so poorly – does not limit to kin, (is universalist (outgroup)) and therefore a mixture of good and bad. 3 – Christianity made us, particularly our women, vulnerable to marxism, postmodernism, and feminism, because these three ‘replacement religions’ are communicated by the same false promise and sophomoric argument, but 4 – The evidence is that christianity produces prosperity wherever it goes, but is a higher demand than Islam, like judaism is a higher demand than christianity. But the fact remains that western people still retain both Legal (roman) intellectual (greek), familial (heathen european), and political(semitic) ‘cults’. And these cults are all reflections of our classes. And all of the classes make use of what set of cults is necessary for cooperation at their level of agency.(ability to act). 5 – The purpose of christianity, marxism, postmodernism, and feminism, was to destroy the empirical, rational, military, legal, and commercial order and replace it with Egyptian, south semitic, north semitic, and Persian means of ruling an underclass through false promises (life after death), false debt(‘for our sins”, “original sins”) using supernatural frauds in the ancient world, and using economic (marxist), social (postmodern), and political (feminism and multiculturalism) in the modern world. My understanding is that especially among those who will fight, christianity must be accommodated, and the law says that it can be accommodated because among religions it teaches natural law. Evidence is that churches are emptying. Particularly in mixed areas. and you haven’t seen the law on religion I’m proposing yet, so you don’t know that I’m suggesting restoring the economy to the church and restoring competition with the state – under certain conditions. And i’m also suggesting how any of our ‘natural religions’ can obtain this same cultural, economic, political centrality once again, by providing particularly powerful incentives, including restoring education and educational funding to ‘churches’ in the broadest sense (and ending centralized education). (in other words, prohibiting falsehood is different from demanding certain skills). Under these incentives I believe our religions will slowly (possibly rapidly) migrate away from falsehood to truthfulness due to incentives of (a) simple economics (b) increasing vastly their influence, (c) defending themselves from the state. In other words, ‘let nature take its course’, and keep the state out of christian faith, and keep christian faith out of TRUTH CLAIMS. This sets up a market for the three categories of religion, while providing mindfulness. A christian can say “i hold [xxxx] as a matter of faith, I do not claim it is true, because what is true must be open to testimony, and Faith itself is not open to testimony. As long as I do not try to use truth claims (arguments) in matters commercial, financial, economic, and political, then I have not broken the law.” One cannot claim something false is true for the purpose of induction (consequential argument). And in particular (islam/judaism/catholicism) because one may not claim there is any law other than the natural law (no competitor). And one may not advocate a religion that is duplicitous because of that (Judaism and Islam are duplicitous and poly-ethical.). With the prohibition on judaism and islam, the preservation of christianity due to its natural law, the universal education in stoicism (mindfulness), and the combination of christian and european (heathen) festivals, my understanding is that we will see our religion return to its natural condition where the poor are christian, the middle ancestral (heathen), an the upper-classes, as always, purely empirical and giving respect to the middle and lower through participation in oath, ritual and festival. So it is not so much that we need to end Christianity, as it is we need to create a range of churches (wholistic mindfulness, socialization, and education) that will serve the interest of the different classes In content, while the same underlying constraint on adherence to natural law. In other words, we must make a practical accommodation for faith in those who need faith because they have no alternative to faith for the purpose of obtaining that mindfulness necessary in a complex society in which many of us lack the familial, social, economic, political relations, as well as perhaps the genetics to provide value in social, economic, and political markets. So there is ‘something for everyone at a cost to everyone’ in my proposal. But it is hard to argue against the cllection of goods. we know this because while people will claim they are christian, go to church, celebrate festivals, take oaths, abide by rules, they will very rarely, under oath, claim such things are true. All humans follow interests. They follow interests becasue it is in their interests. And they use propaganda an arugment and belief to justify the pursuit of those interests. This is a small part of a very complex subject, and was the most complex subject I had to tackle with. Religion is the hard problem of social science, because it is, in the end, education in the ability of people to work in harmony with their intuitions as animals and in harmony with each other in groups, and therefore reach personal, familial, social, economic, political, and military benefits from one another.)
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1548706830 Timestamp) By Eli Harman I was just reminded of an old argument of Bryan Caplan’s. One argument he makes for open borders involves a hypothetical. Say one of us went to Haiti, on an aid mission or something. When they were done and ready to come back, we tell them “no, you can’t come back. You have to stay in Haiti.” That would be a dick thing to do to one of our own, argues Bryan Kaplan, and therefore it’s a dick thing to do to Haitians too. The difference, of course. Is that in the one case, we are inflicting the shittiness of Haiti on one of our own, by denying their request to return. While in the other case, we are PREVENTING Haitians (who are not our ingroup) from inflicting the shittiness of Haiti on ALL of our own, by denying their request to enter. So they are not in any way, shape, or form, equivalent cases. This is an example of casuistry (sometimes known as “pilpul”) improperly reasoning from a specific case to a general rule, in this case a bad rule that accomplishes parasitic and destructive ends desired by Bryan Caplan for malicious reasons (Bryan Caplan is by his own admission, scared of majorities and reflexively desires to undermine and attack them. He is a majorityphobe. But Bryan Caplan’s insecurities and ethnic fragility inpose no obligations on us to cater to them.) Casuistry (“Pilpul”) is the cornerstone of their arts of deception and their parasitic group evolutionary strategies.
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1548697940 Timestamp) –“WHAT ABOUT NEPOTISM IN THE MONARCHY?”– The evidence is that families guard their status jealously and that fratricide and patricide are the most common origins of regicide. Secondly, a monarchy has only to defend the very longest term interest and its income from the overall performance of the polity. Monarchies have exceptional records for almost all of human history with the fragility not one of nepotism (since a monarchy has management teams selected from across the realm, many of whom are the best shareholders), but monarchies fail because agrarian production was the only means of competition and therefore territorial expansion the only means of competition. And territorial expansion only achievable by the high risk and high cost of european warfare and consequent ransom. The monarchies simply DID NOT KNOW WHAT TO DO when the landed and military aristocracy was replaced by the commercial aristocracy, and after the french revolution, the church aristocracy replaced by the state bureaucracy. We know what to do: Increase participation to shift, then decrease participation once shifted. Increase participation by expanding the franchise for each additional class, or decrease the franchise for each additional class once the change has been implemented. During that era guns were far more effective at forcing political change than archers. So the state could no longer use professional warriors to deny the franchise. The only solution is to retain the franchise for those who have demonstrated interests in the preservation of rule of law and the discretion of the monarchy, the republic, or the democracy in the determination of the production of commons. THere no longer a force on earth that can occupy territory against men with small arms (battle rifles) and rpg’s (close proximity man-portable artillery). It cannot be done. Ergo the transition is complete and we have restored the symmetry of power between men. WE need only choose to impose our will on those who would deprive us of rule of law, and the reciprocity that rule of law both depends upon and enforces. It is very hard to read Hoppe, Michels, and Burnham (or machiavelli for that matter) and not understand this.
-
Curt Doolittle shared a link.
(FB 1548812685 Timestamp) CAN WE BRING FAR RIGHT INFLUENCE TO THE WEST? “It all begins with the militia” Two news items today, that are important only in so far as they show that the Far Right, once mobilized can have extraordinary influence on political systems, with a small number of willing men intolerant of the status quo. ⢠Divisions sharpen inside Ukraineâs far-right camp as it fails to unite around a single presidential candidate, with National Corps refusing to support Svoboda’s candidate Ruslan Koshulynskyi. https://www.kyivpost.com/ukraine-politics/divisions-between-ukraines-far-right-groups-sharpen-ahead-of-elections.html? ⢠The center of Kyiv rang to the sound of rifle and machine-gun fire on the night of Jan. 27, 2019 during a reenactment of the Battle for the Arsenal Factory organized by far-right and nationalist organizations. See our photo gallery. https://www.kyivpost.com/multimedia/photo/kyiv-echoes-to-sound-of-gunfire-as-battle-of-kruty-reenacted-photos?
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1548695061 Timestamp) BUT WHAT ABOUT NEPOTISM???? —“If you have the time can anyone explain to me how you deal/curtail with nepotism in your hierarchy ? A link to read perhaps? Worthy men aren’t always from the same family e.g. the son is not always the father by far. I’m curious.”–David England What ended nepotism in european peoples? In what industries did nepotism persist until today? Why did those instances of nepotism persist and why did the other instances not persist? What could be done to end the kind of nepotism that survives? What kind of nepotism can (should) continue to survive? (why is nepotism always a bad thing, or why is it indicative of a bad thing since it is hard to make the case that nepotism is a universal bad?) The answer will be obvious once you work thru it.
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1548779453 Timestamp) —“I feel like some of the far right want to turn us into being like all the other nations – yes we’ll resist them and survive, but we’ll lose much of what made us great. Propertarianism is the answer.”—Solomon Volodymyr
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1548777714 Timestamp) THE PRESERVATION OF CHRISTIANITY AS A POLITICAL RELIGION, AND THE RESTORATION OF PAGAN AND HEATHEN CULTURAL RELIGION UNDER THE NATURAL LAW. (I don’t want to interfere in Maximus’ thread, because he certainly doesn’t need my help in arguing propertarian natural law, but I like the suggestion that I should do a video. I have already done the subject with our favorite Aussie, and I will do the video now that you bring it up. Let’s understand these facts. 1 – Christianity teaches natural law – just poorly. 2 – Christianity teaches (exhaustive tit-for-tat) optimum IN-GROUP strategy as an extension of natural law – but does do poorly, and because it does so poorly – does not limit to kin, (is universalist (outgroup)) and therefore a mixture of good and bad. 3 – Christianity made us, particularly our women, vulnerable to marxism, postmodernism, and feminism, because these three ‘replacement religions’ are communicated by the same false promise and sophomoric argument, but 4 – The evidence is that christianity produces prosperity wherever it goes, but is a higher demand than Islam, like judaism is a higher demand than christianity. But the fact remains that western people still retain both Legal (roman) intellectual (greek), familial (heathen european), and political(semitic) ‘cults’. And these cults are all reflections of our classes. And all of the classes make use of what set of cults is necessary for cooperation at their level of agency.(ability to act). 5 – The purpose of christianity, marxism, postmodernism, and feminism, was to destroy the empirical, rational, military, legal, and commercial order and replace it with Egyptian, south semitic, north semitic, and Persian means of ruling an underclass through false promises (life after death), false debt(‘for our sins”, “original sins”) using supernatural frauds in the ancient world, and using economic (marxist), social (postmodern), and political (feminism and multiculturalism) in the modern world. My understanding is that especially among those who will fight, christianity must be accommodated, and the law says that it can be accommodated because among religions it teaches natural law. Evidence is that churches are emptying. Particularly in mixed areas. and you haven’t seen the law on religion I’m proposing yet, so you don’t know that I’m suggesting restoring the economy to the church and restoring competition with the state – under certain conditions. And i’m also suggesting how any of our ‘natural religions’ can obtain this same cultural, economic, political centrality once again, by providing particularly powerful incentives, including restoring education and educational funding to ‘churches’ in the broadest sense (and ending centralized education). (in other words, prohibiting falsehood is different from demanding certain skills). Under these incentives I believe our religions will slowly (possibly rapidly) migrate away from falsehood to truthfulness due to incentives of (a) simple economics (b) increasing vastly their influence, (c) defending themselves from the state. In other words, ‘let nature take its course’, and keep the state out of christian faith, and keep christian faith out of TRUTH CLAIMS. This sets up a market for the three categories of religion, while providing mindfulness. A christian can say “i hold [xxxx] as a matter of faith, I do not claim it is true, because what is true must be open to testimony, and Faith itself is not open to testimony. As long as I do not try to use truth claims (arguments) in matters commercial, financial, economic, and political, then I have not broken the law.” One cannot claim something false is true for the purpose of induction (consequential argument). And in particular (islam/judaism/catholicism) because one may not claim there is any law other than the natural law (no competitor). And one may not advocate a religion that is duplicitous because of that (Judaism and Islam are duplicitous and poly-ethical.). With the prohibition on judaism and islam, the preservation of christianity due to its natural law, the universal education in stoicism (mindfulness), and the combination of christian and european (heathen) festivals, my understanding is that we will see our religion return to its natural condition where the poor are christian, the middle ancestral (heathen), an the upper-classes, as always, purely empirical and giving respect to the middle and lower through participation in oath, ritual and festival. So it is not so much that we need to end Christianity, as it is we need to create a range of churches (wholistic mindfulness, socialization, and education) that will serve the interest of the different classes In content, while the same underlying constraint on adherence to natural law. In other words, we must make a practical accommodation for faith in those who need faith because they have no alternative to faith for the purpose of obtaining that mindfulness necessary in a complex society in which many of us lack the familial, social, economic, political relations, as well as perhaps the genetics to provide value in social, economic, and political markets. So there is ‘something for everyone at a cost to everyone’ in my proposal. But it is hard to argue against the cllection of goods. we know this because while people will claim they are christian, go to church, celebrate festivals, take oaths, abide by rules, they will very rarely, under oath, claim such things are true. All humans follow interests. They follow interests becasue it is in their interests. And they use propaganda an arugment and belief to justify the pursuit of those interests. This is a small part of a very complex subject, and was the most complex subject I had to tackle with. Religion is the hard problem of social science, because it is, in the end, education in the ability of people to work in harmony with their intuitions as animals and in harmony with each other in groups, and therefore reach personal, familial, social, economic, political, and military benefits from one another.)