[T]hough subject to normal human failings, the long time horizons of monarchy is one of its distinct advantages. As economist Mancur Olson pointed out that, the longer the time horizon of the ruler, the more their interests tended to converge with those of their subjects. One tends to be somewhat more careful and accommodating the longer you and your children are going to be living with the consequences of your decisions. Of the three major Axis powers, the two monarchies (the Kingdom of Italy and the Empire of Japan) found it easier to exit from fighting precisely because they were monarchies; there was someone with sufficient authority to say enough. Nazi Germany had to wait until Hitler was dead (and assassination proved to be a less reliable alternative).
Theme: Governance
-
Michael Phillip On The Incentives of Monarchy
-
Michael Phillip On The Incentives of Monarchy
[T]hough subject to normal human failings, the long time horizons of monarchy is one of its distinct advantages. As economist Mancur Olson pointed out that, the longer the time horizon of the ruler, the more their interests tended to converge with those of their subjects. One tends to be somewhat more careful and accommodating the longer you and your children are going to be living with the consequences of your decisions. Of the three major Axis powers, the two monarchies (the Kingdom of Italy and the Empire of Japan) found it easier to exit from fighting precisely because they were monarchies; there was someone with sufficient authority to say enough. Nazi Germany had to wait until Hitler was dead (and assassination proved to be a less reliable alternative). -
Religion is still the most effective resistance movement ever created. It sets t
Religion is still the most effective resistance movement ever created. It sets the terms by which the population will agree to be governed. No way around it. Now, we could just as easily create truth and rule of law as a religious movement. But that would take some doing.
Source date (UTC): 2014-12-23 03:55:00 UTC
-
WHY ARE CONSERVATIVES MORE IMPORTANT THAN LIBERTINES? Because given moral justif
WHY ARE CONSERVATIVES MORE IMPORTANT THAN LIBERTINES?
Because given moral justification to correct violations of purity and sanctity a sufficient number of conservatives will use violence to restore order. Only conservatives act for social good alone. Libertines and progressives act only in their self interest. Why? Because libertinism is purely a status seeking effort, and progressivism is both status seeking and dysgenic.
Source date (UTC): 2014-12-21 04:06:00 UTC
-
WHY ARE LIBERTARIANS POLITICALLY IRRELEVANT? Because political systems are const
WHY ARE LIBERTARIANS POLITICALLY IRRELEVANT?
Because political systems are constructed by violence. And conservatives are willing to create an order that suppresses consumption in order to construct commons, and progressives are willing to use violence to destruct an order so that they can increase consumption. But libertarians are both small in number and unwilling to use violence.
Violence raises the costs of non-cooperative action, so that cooperation is preferable to non-cooperative action.
Libertines always look for discounts (freebies). There aren’t any. Order is expensive.
For these reasons libertarians will only exist in absurdly wealthy periods of history, made possible by conservatives. Otherwise they will exist only as another rejection-cult, criticizing the fact that they are required to pay costs for norms that do not improve their status – but constrain it.
Source date (UTC): 2014-12-21 04:03:00 UTC
-
FOREIGN POLICY UNDER ARISTOCRATIC EGALITARIANISM – IT’S NOT COMPLICATED. Y-AXIS
FOREIGN POLICY UNDER ARISTOCRATIC EGALITARIANISM – IT’S NOT COMPLICATED.
Y-AXIS : Aristocratic Egalitarian Morality – Meaning an increase in the suppression of free riding in order to obtain higher trust, higher economic velocity, and greater liberty, in exchange for reciprocal warranty of the same.
X-AXIS: Strategic Interest – meaning a decrease in economic, military and moral risk, and an increase in current costs.
Source date (UTC): 2014-12-20 03:29:00 UTC
-
MICHAEL PHILLIP ON THE INCENTIVES OF MONARCHY Though subject to normal human fai
MICHAEL PHILLIP ON THE INCENTIVES OF MONARCHY
Though subject to normal human failings, the long time horizons of monarchy is one of its distinct advantages. As economist Mancur Olson pointed out that, the longer the time horizon of the ruler, the more their interests tended to converge with those of their subjects. One tends to be somewhat more careful and accommodating the longer you and your children are going to be living with the consequences of your decisions. Of the three major Axis powers, the two monarchies (the Kingdom of Italy and the Empire of Japan) found it easier to exit from fighting precisely because they were monarchies; there was someone with sufficient authority to say enough. Nazi Germany had to wait until Hitler was dead (and assassination proved to be a less reliable alternative).
Source date (UTC): 2014-12-18 02:04:00 UTC
-
WAS THE REVOLUTION COOPTED BY NAZIS? (OMG – Americans are stupid.) –“Taking you
WAS THE REVOLUTION COOPTED BY NAZIS? (OMG – Americans are stupid.)
–“Taking you at your word that you are living in Kiev, let me take this opportunity to ask: What do say to the charges that the revolution was instigated by the U.S.? Could it have happened without U. S. support? Was it in fact co-opted by nazis, neo or otherwise?”—
From Curt Doolittle:
Well, you can search for me on Google or Facebook, I’m pretty prolific, and I’m readily visible here in Kiev. 🙂
The people here BEGGED for support from the states and got almost NOTHING. A few of us hammered the news media. But we got nothing. You can’t say that schoolgirls spending lunch money on bandages and trucking in in the cold to tend the young men on the front lines, or housewives and clerical workers showing up by the millions is somehow a CIA plot. (Which if you knew anything about the intelligence community would seem absurd.)
And it’s absolutely insulting to locals to insinuate that they’re ignorant pawns of some global intrigue rather than artificially and desperately poor for no reason other than leftover Russian (soviet) bureaucrats in one of the most politically corrupt nations on earth. There is no rule of law here. None. Courts and police are bought. Last may I think I paid something on the order of 3K in bribes just to get people to do their jobs – not for any special treatment.
Most people here look across the border into Poland and see what they COULD have. Most people look to Russia and see murderers who came in the middle of the night to kill relatives and families after Stalin killed millions of Ukrainians in the Holodomor: the Ukrainian Holocaust.
The only difference between Canadians and Ukrainians’ which neighbor they have. Similar sizes and populations and similar (gentle) temperaments.
I love these people and there is nothing on earth that justifies letting people who wish to be free come under Russian corruption ever again.
Americans are ignorant, stupid and benevolent sheriffs yes. They fail to grasp what it means to live in a low trust society. The do not grasp that the lower the trust in a society the more necessary authoritarian rule is. That only generations of commercialism will change a low trust polity in to a moderate trust polity – even so corrupt and politically volatile as the Italians and the Romanians. Just as Russians fail to grasp that Americans actually believe they are acting in the moral interest of less advanced peoples. Americans foolishly believe that they yearn for liberty and prosperity, and merely need to be given the opportunity for self government. And look at the damage we have done. Russians cannot believe we do this with american idealism rather than russian pragamatism. That is because our idealism is as foreign to them as it would be to space aliens.
Yet here in Ukraine we have a white, christian people (many of whom go to church, and yes, that’s important at this stage of development), who have very similar ethics, work habits, history, education, literature and mythology.
And they want to be free.
Yet in the coal mines of the east, in the decaying factories of the soviet era, in the desperate partly Russified slums, the idea of getting checks however small from the government from oil revenues is worth living under the rule of gangsters.
Most of Ukraine would have been happy to divorce and set them free. But Ukrainian’s are unified now, and their view is ‘if we do not stop the enemy in Donbas, then he will be first in kiev and then in L’viv and we will be under the boots of gangsters and tyrants and murderers yet again.
Curt Doolittle
The Propertarian Institute
Kiev Ukraine.
Source date (UTC): 2014-12-17 14:36:00 UTC
-
RIGHT IN FRANCE: DEPORT EN MASSE
http://www.npr.org/2014/11/05/361790018/a-french-best-sellers-radical-argument-vichy-regime-wasnt-all-badNEW RIGHT IN FRANCE: DEPORT EN MASSE
Source date (UTC): 2014-12-16 15:28:00 UTC
-
ON RUSSIA AND UKRAINE (MUST READ) George’s Observations from Meeting with their
http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/viewing-russia-inside#axzz3M40hvzjmSTRATFOR ON RUSSIA AND UKRAINE (MUST READ)
George’s Observations from Meeting with their Intelligence Community:
– (a) Sanctions will not affect Russia significantly Why? See (b).
– (b) Russians have an extremely high pain tolerance – the highest on earth, and pressures that will topple western governments will not affect Russian government.
– (c) Russians cannot conceptualize american idealism. They are a brutal and pragmatic people that cannot even comprehend that we have longer term ideological interests, and they interpret everything through their practical short and medium term lens. no on in Russia has good intentions, and they can’t imagine that American’s do either. In fact, most of the world cannot imagine how ideological we are. It has taken me two years living in eastern europe just to begin to see it.
– (d) George agrees that the USA is fearful of a merger of german technology and Russian resources which would result in russian hegemony.
My ARGUMENT on (d)
I have been traditionally in favor of a unified Russo-german people and a withdrawal of american forces from eurasia to a more isolationist and northern american, or perhaps anglo-sphere alliance, with england functioning as switzerland, and america as germany. So I sit opposite of George on this position.
MY ARGUMENT on (c)
Russians’ don’t understand american ideology and I question whether George does either – He speaks in state deparatment language which reflects an implementation of the American ideology, not the source of it. Instead:
Americans have been pursuing a postwar policy of:
(i) borders are inviolable rigid corporate property rights and abridgment of them threatens both US domestic central authority, threatens the wealth of developed countries that depend on a fluid international economy, and threatens another global war which everyone seeks to avoid. The USA is a benevolently intentioned paranoid sheriff that tends to break things when he’s around – and fear of having him around is enough to keep the peace.
(ii) states, meaning governments, are accountable for human rights
(iii) People have a right to self rule, and democracy is the optimum form of rule.
BUT….
(iv) The USA will punish self rulers that perform badly regarding either i, or ii.
(v) The USA foolishly advocates democracy which is a luxury good for high trust western societies and which other societies are incapable of using. Government must reflect the trust levels of the constituencies with more authoritarian for more tribal and familial and more distributed for more outbred and commercial. The question is only whether governments violate human rights and borders, not how they accomplish doing so. Democracy is equally destructive at home as it has been in the rest of the world.
Curt Doolittle
The Propertarian Institute
Kiev,
#ukraine #tlot #tcot
Source date (UTC): 2014-12-16 07:58:00 UTC