Theme: Governance

  • Launch an investigation into Israel’s interference in the election. What about G

    Launch an investigation into Israel’s interference in the election. What about George Soros’ interference in the election? Launch a treason investigation against hillary clinton. If we cannot make positive progress then break it all to pieces.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-18 17:53:00 UTC

  • THE TEST OF ‘DIVINE RIGHT’ (MARKET FOR RULE) Ely Harman The problem is that rule

    THE TEST OF ‘DIVINE RIGHT’ (MARKET FOR RULE)

    Ely Harman

    The problem is that rule by divine right is a DESCRIPTIVE theory and not a PRESCRIPTIVE theory.

    So yeah, if the sovereign can at once awe and inspire loyalty, then don’t challenge him. But if not, there is no reason not to.

    You cannot know whether or not he has the divine mandate unless you put it to the test. The gods will show their mind if they are offered a choice.

    Even a bad king may be a punishment for worse subjects, rather than merely a usurper whose fall shows the emptiness of his pretensions. But only the test can reveal the difference.

    (Curt: King of the Hill is a market process.)


    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-18 16:49:00 UTC

  • THE MONARCHY AS A TRADE By Lorenz Fiorenza Monarchies are a family. Family is th

    THE MONARCHY AS A TRADE

    By Lorenz Fiorenza

    Monarchies are a family. Family is the foundation of social organization.

    As a rule, one has more investment in their direct family than their extended kin. Combine state with family and the monarch should be very, very invested in the well-being of the state.

    Families -usually- practice consistent trades. A working class family teaches their sons to be mechanics*, bougie family focuses on their jeweler business*, a monarchical family focuses on the administration and decorum of the nation*. ***or they cease to be a family and are erased from history.

    You make a profitable trade out of rule and rulers are very likely to make a multi-generational business out of it.

    If you fail, you get the Romanov solution.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-18 15:58:00 UTC

  • THERE IS ONLY ONE METHOD OF OPTING-IN by Lorenz Fiorenza —“We only opt-in thro

    THERE IS ONLY ONE METHOD OF OPTING-IN

    by Lorenz Fiorenza

    —“We only opt-in through participation in the militia and the revolution. The system can’t be reformed. If the militia is a sword that forges itself, then it is up to the discretion of the militia to choose what leader they give their sword to. It is a gamble and there is no 100% likelihood of benevolence- Washington could have contracted syphilis and gone mad despite pure intent. The question is, will a world of monarchies be inevitable due to the long-term institutions needed for managing the domestication and transcendence of man?”—


    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-18 15:03:00 UTC

  • The ukrainians assume that if they give up the territory the russians will keep

    The ukrainians assume that if they give up the territory the russians will keep pushing to cut them off from the black sea (probably true) and unite russia with Transnistria. The russians have already taken ukrainian oil deposits in the black sea. They’ve already taken Crimea. They’ve already taken the donbas. They are just waiting for a period of geopolitical opportunity under which they can solidify their gains.

    By this act of aggression russia has broken the postwar consensus and ended the prohibition on involuntary changes in borders – which was the whole reason for the world wars.

    Putin repeatedly threatened all of eastern europe with reoccupation during 2014, and caused nato to re-pivot toward russia, after having nearly denuded nato in europe. There were only 60k total US personnel in all of europe. So this ‘surrounding russia’ stuff from the west’s perspective was ‘russia will unite with germany and we will achieve our long term goals if we can get russia to modernize her government and economy.’ (whch was Gorbachev’s position.)

    The western perspective is that the sanctions against russia were serious enough and threat threat of being cut off from the world financial system enough of a death sentence, that this contained russian reassertion.

    Now, this does not eliminate the fact that russia was right against the chechens. And that russia was right about serbia. and that russia was right about all the islamic countries. Or that the west is constantly wrong.

    This does not eliminate the fact that NATO did not add russia immediately to is membership when putin asked – or that westerners are too fucking stupid to understand russians well enough to just fucking do it. (americans are just too fucking stupid for words).

    This does not eliminate the fact that putin’s attack on populism (democracy) is an attack on hedonism in an effort do defend the family and the nation from regression. And that he is right and the west is wrong and suicidal.

    The problem is the international principle that “no agreement with russia is worth the paper it’s printed on” holds. And so 2014 fucked up the entire world order.

    In other words, putin fucked up. he could have done what was needed and he fucked up. He was the strongest most powerful man in the world and he ‘flinched’.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-17 19:47:00 UTC

  • Makes me so mad. Roman is out training guys in the woods to fight for their coun

    Makes me so mad. Roman is out training guys in the woods to fight for their country. They pay money to be trained. They buy their own equipment. They pack together in trains and cars to drive to the front. They creep around in dirt in a war zone and kill invaders with knives in the night. They hold the airport in brutal close combat. They fight and die for their country. Because they want to be free of corruption. And some stupid shit anglo attributes his behavior to global politics….


    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-17 10:34:00 UTC

  • RUSSIA AND THE FAMILY OVER THE INDIVIDUAL —“Is “utopia” to be found in somethi

    RUSSIA AND THE FAMILY OVER THE INDIVIDUAL

    —“Is “utopia” to be found in something close to the Russian model but with a developed middle class, meaning combining the Russian model with European. And does Eastern-Europe (Poland, Ukraine, etc.) fit those criteria?”—

    Russia has preserved the family, and the west has heralded the individual. Russia has restored the military to the top of the order. The west has the academy (church) at the top of the order. Russia has high corruption for money, America has high corruption for (church) virtue signaling and money.

    How do you fix both? Well, you simply stop playing dishonest games and institute in your constitution that which is important: familiy, and you institutionalize the commons in the service of the family and individuals can benefit only so long as they do not diminish the sacredness of the family. And that’s pretty easy to do. You just have to write it into the law. I can do that.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-17 10:16:00 UTC

  • THE ALT-RIGHT PRIMER (I had to create a new post) THE ALT-RIGHT, NEW RIGHT, THE

    THE ALT-RIGHT PRIMER

    (I had to create a new post)

    THE ALT-RIGHT, NEW RIGHT, THE “RESIGNED” RIGHT.

    CLASS STRUCTURE;

    The evolving new right consists of a series of class related discourses among which are the academics (genetics, law, intellectual history, history), the conservative libertarians (economics), the middle class ‘alt-light’, the working class ‘alt-right’, and the underclass “national-socialist-wanna-be’s”. The new right is not a class but cross class movement, that makes arguments and media for consumption for each class.

    STRATEGY:

    The new right has adopted the left’s use of ridicule, rallying, shaming, and identity politics, but not the left’s use of (a) pseudoscience: Boaz, Marx, Freud, Cantor/Keynes, (b) or the postmodern use of ‘reality by chanting’ of outright falsehoods: IQ, equality of genetics (class and race), diversity, underclass reproduction; And they have combined this with hyperbolic reciprocity: Masculinity, Cultural Superiority, Racial Superiority, Separatism, and exclusivity of the family instead of the individual as the object of policy.

    All of these tactics make use of techniques invented by the left (socialism: feminine reproductive strategy) as a means of rallying political control against western civilizations use of meritocracy (aristocracy: masculine reproductive strategy.)

    So what you see, is the use of ridicule, and threat, in the form of hyperbolic reciprocity (doing the same but more exaggeratedly ) just as, say, Marxist radicalized the underclasses, and Alinsky radicalized the lower, working, and lower middle class. And just as the Marxists, socialists, and postmodernists promoted a means for women and males who could not otherwise climb the dominance hierarchy through merit, a method of using chanting, propaganda, pseudoscience, and pseudo-rationalism, and outright lying in order to obtain the political power necessary to overthrow the west’s Aristocratic civilization. (just as jews had, christians had, and muslims had done before the left.)

    The hole in the right’s argument has always been it’s reliance upon christianity. And the right is abandoning christianity and the christian ethics and returning to aristocratic ethics, and thereby removing the left’s ability to criticize the right by suggestion that the left’s selective use of pseudoscience and empirical science was superior to the right’s use of history, science, pseudoscience and religion.

    This is why the right will succeed: they are rapidly abandoning Abrahamism (the art of collective lying) and the christian ethic (tolerance) and returning to their martial aristocratic ethic (zero tolerance, truth, property, family), faster than any social change has occurred in western history -ever.

    The west has always been led by a small minority of men willing to use aristocratic ethics and zero tolerance to domesticate and reduce the size of the underclasses by the use of sovereignty over life, body, action, kin, and property: reciprocity, the common law of reciprocity, the superiority of the sovereignty common law of reciprocity over all all discretionary rule, and the consequential development of ‘markets in everything’ meaning: association, cooperation, marriage, production of goods, services, and information , production of commons (houses of commons), and the production of polities (many small independent kin-states.

    THE FAILED CENTURY:

    The world wars and the defeat of the last aristocratic families led to the possibility of defeating Maxwell, Darwin, Pareto, Durkheim, Weber, Spencer, and Nietzsche’s restoration of the west, and the evolution of the second ‘re-crhistianization’ and therefore re-conquest of the west in the forms of marx’s restatement of christianity in pseudoscientific secular prose, and the introduction of psychological shaming by Freud, and the introduction of cultural shaming by the frankfurt school, the Right, lacking an articulated set of arguments for their aristocratic civilization other than the combination of the common law, natural law, the works of the enlightenment, doubled-down on their previous methods leaving open the door for the sale of pseudoscience to the newly economically mobile middle, lower and underclasses, by public intellectuals, the academy, and the state.

    During the early half of the century, western philosophers and scientists tried to counter the left’s pseudoscience and propaganda, but were unsuccessful in completing what in retrospect was the Operationalist Revolution that would have completed the enlightenment. This failure, and the state’s use of fiat currency, and national debt, plus the circumstances of the depression, the wars, and the need for postwar recovery, were insufficient to counter the vast change in movement of the people from the farm and urban peasantry to the factory and home ownership, and a first generation’s access to higher education.

    But throughout the 50’s, 60’s, and 70’s, the western aristocracy remained hopeful that the newly enfranchised would ‘grow up’. This never happened. And by the late seventies, when both Johnson’s great society program’s attempt to import russian relocation methods had failed, and the oil crisis had ended, conservatives understood that they had to create ‘think tanks’ to counter left’s pseudoscience, and that either the left would bankrupt the private sector and leave no choice but socialism, or the right could bankrupt the state and leave no choice but the private sector.

    Unfortunately, at the time, the right did not understand that the left’s success at importing underclasses was to be so successful as to accomplish with underclass immigration to the six major immigrant cities, what could not be accomplished through advocacy of their ideas. Rather than abandon their ideas as having been successful at enfranchisement into rule of law, the left sought to destroy western aristocratic civilization, rule of law by reciprocity, markets, and then the white race in general. Nor did the right understand how successful the left’s attack on the family as the central institution of aristocratic civilization, and to replace the family with the state, and the social consequences and poverty that would result from it, reversing the success at previous integration of immigrants into rule of law by reciprocity, meritocracy, the absolute nuclear family, and the intergenerationally independent household, and the community of small businesses.

    ABANDONMENT OF TRADITIONAL LIMITS

    So the new right has abandoned its traditional limits so central to aristocratic civilization:

    a) HONOR: The duel was practiced for all our history until the liberation of women the home by the industrial revolution. And honor was practiced because the west relied so heavily on the militia and military codes of conduct. Using ridicule or insult could be met with death. And until the 1970’s it was possible to find one’s self in a fistfight, if not a fight for one’s life if one spoke disrespectfully. However the left was successful at ‘decriminalizing dishonourable speech’ including the near removal of libel and slander. So as a consequence the working, middle, classes are actively making use of the same underclass strategies developed and mastered by the left. The difference is that it is not possible to control the internet as the left controlled centralized media, and as the monarchies controlled the press and speech. So just as the left mastered the industrialization of propaganda under mass media, the right is mastering the mass production of propaganda by individual actors over the internet by the same means. Just as the islamists have been doing. Just as the marxists did with telegraphs, telephones,world postal services, mimeographs, loudspeakers, radio, television, and the academy.

    It is no longer dishonorable to use ridicule, shaming and rallying, which were previously considered ‘unmanly’ and ‘Women’s Talk’.

    b) TOLERANCE AND c) NON-AGGRESSION:

    While christianity, like the other abrahamic religions of judaism from which it is an heretical offshoot, and like islam, which is an heretical offshoot of christianity, relies upon the central tenet of extending kinship love to non kin – effectively ‘hyper tolerance’ so that primitive people’s can exhaust tit-for-tat tests and develop into people with whom we do not conflict over petty matters, and with whom,we can hopefully develop association, cooperation, customers, and mates across otherwise high friction clans, tribes, and nations.

    This exaggeration of the optimum game theory strategy can be abused once the scale of cooperation becomes large enough (non kin) such that the investment in future cooperation can be exploited continuously as a form of parasitism.

    So what is occurring is that the new right has abandoned christianity’s high tolerance in games of tit for tat, and has returned to nationalism as the limit of political tolerance, and returned to ZERO TOLERANCE within that political order, and to AGGRESSION outside of that political order.

    This abandonment of ‘hopeful altruism’ even to their own kin, and especially to their ‘undesirable’ (read ‘undesirable liberal’) women, has, rapidly caused the end of christian influence and the restoration of aristocratic martial ethics – although the expression of it as such is evidently different for each class in the hierarchy.

    c) VIOLENCE

    At present the right is (a) expecting, planning a civil war during which they expect any one of a range of solutions, the majority of which will be met by the localization of normative (cultural) law and the limit of the federal government to its original charters of conflicts over interstate trade (narrowly defined) and conflicts beyond the borders (war). (b) developing an identity or set of identities in response to identity warfare conducted by the left in their search for power. (c) increasing their numbers; developing alliances; creating portfolios of arguments, and in general, spreading the word that this movement will be successful. The reason being that the Government, the economy, and the society has never been as fragile as this, even prior to the civil war. And that as we have learned from the muslims a very small number of men can bring down an entire country in just two weeks by nothing other than impeding the transport of goods, information, power, and water. And that demonstrations in the streets in the model of the french revolution are now immaterial. The usa is larger, but it can easily be brought down by overtaxing its internal and external institutions. Not the least of which is becuase the country has so many enemies both within and without, that all that needs to happen is for one to start (we thought black lives matter would do it. We thought Antifa might do it. ) But once one starts the others will. And while it is possible to kill one idea, it is impossible to kill that many factions.

    CLOSING

    All political revolutions seem impossible in prospect but obvious in retrospect. All social revolutions seem impossible in prospect but obvious in retrospect. All entrepreneurial revolutions seem impossible in prospect, but obvious in retrospect. All technological revolutions seem impossible in prospect but obvious in retrospect.

    Every dark age has been preceded by a migration of inferior peoples due to their adoption of some of the technologies of superior peoples. The only means of preventing dark ages, is to domesticate and rule inferior people, rather than being invaded and destroyed by them.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine


    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-17 07:38:00 UTC

  • Untitled

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/democracy-post/wp/2017/06/15/ukraines-ultra-right-militias-are-challenging-the-government-to-a-showdown/

    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-16 23:49:00 UTC

  • HOW TO SEPARATE NONSENSE TALK FROM ADULT TALK Puerto Rico’s debt is 70b. That’s

    HOW TO SEPARATE NONSENSE TALK FROM ADULT TALK

    Puerto Rico’s debt is 70b. That’s more than NYS current debt of 63b. And california’s … unimaginable 1.2-1.5T debt.

    NY will become insolvent with five years – the next cycle will force it. California is already deterministically bankrupt, but has enough cash flow to survive.

    The western world went bankrupt somewhere in about 1992 when the experiment with keynesian fiat debt was exhausted. We just had the post-cold-war windfall, followed by the tech windfall, followed by redirecting trillions in to consumer credit – principally because the west has lost its economic and institutional advantages, and is surviving entirely by selling off assets (including culture and norms and institutions) to immigrants. (really).

    You know why theologians don’t inclue costs in their philosophy?

    You know why the greeks didn’t include costs in philosophy?

    You know why the academy doesn’t include costs in philosophy?

    You know what separates nonsense philosophy from not-nonsense philosophy? COSTS.

    You know how to separate a child from an adult? Calculation of Costs.

    You know how to determine evolutionary possibility? Costs.

    I don’t know how to ‘cherry pick’ in philosophy.

    I never learned how to lie.

    I leave that for the priesthood, public intellectuals, and the politicians.

    ( lol )


    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-15 14:35:00 UTC