I’ve been working on the problem since about ’92 and like many things, the curatorial function performed by the top handful of intellectuals alive at any given time is not able to keep pace with the volume of pseudoscience, sophistry, ideology, propaganda, and marketing over the past thirty or more years. This is not the first time there has been a rebellion against science and reason. It happened in the ancient world and resulted in the medieval dark ages. That the rebellion against science and reason is nothing more than a reflection of a rebellion against western evolutionary pressure is less obvious. If not for immigration it appears that we would have succeeded in falsifying the Jewish pseudoscientific counter-enlightenment just as we survived the German Rationalists (kant et all an the german secular theologists) and the French Moralists (Rousseau et al and the French Revolution). The difference being that the Jewish counter enlightenment (exemplified in Cantor-Bohr, Boas-Freud, Marx, Adorno-Fromm, Trotsky-Strauss-Kristol, Derrida, Friedan, and ongoing by Krugman-Stiglitz-DeLong et al ) is so broadly based, covers the entire scope of the disciplines, and is united in the past century, just as were Judaism, Christianity, and Islam in the ancient world, to resist Evolution. Or stated more simply, the current debate remains the same, which is dysgenic female equalitarian strategies, vs the eugenic, male, hierarchical strategies. In other words, both the ancient world religions and the modern world ‘cults’ of pseudoscience, sophistry, and denial, are united in a single purpose, and that is the suppression of evolution by competitive, hierarchical, market meritocracies, of any kind, whether genetic (hindu), bureaucratic (chinese), or technical (european). So in summary, (a) democracy combined with underclass or out-class immigration has created continued market demand for falsehoods. (b) resistance to the increase in market demand for falsehoods has created market demand for counter-arguments. (c) monopoly democracy (selection of priorities for the application of scarce resources) is incapable of suppression the increase in demand for falsehoods. (d) the Finance, State, Academy, Media, Entertainment, Advertising industries benefit from the the sale and distribution of these falsehoods. So yes, market demand for falsehood is increasing market demand for conflict, which cannot be resolved due to the cheap cost and incentives for the distribution of falsehoods, and suppressed the production and distribution of truths. And that is why yes, intelligence, education, the quality of information, and the curatorial function of intellectuals have all declined. Either you have a eugenic polity whose wealth is limited to productivity independent of increases in population, or you will have a dysgenic polity whose accumulated genetic, behavioral, cultural, institutional, territorial capital are consumed by a small number of generations. This isn’t a novel theory. The cycles of rise and decline have been studied by multiple historians for thousands of years. The chinese found a method of persistence through vicious prosecution of criminals, intolerant colonization and forcible integration, and perhaps most importantly agrarian and financial eugenics that over three generations continuously cull family after family from the reproductive pool. America was founded by eugenicists -they just didn’t use that terminology. They used ‘people of good character’. And we maintained the eugenic movement through the first world war. It was the intentional effort of the post war eastern european ashkenazi that worked full time every day to underming every single institution. Conspiracy? No It’s their way of life. Just like islam is the muslim way of life. Just like sovereignty and markets are the european way of life. Just like harmony, hierarchy and bureaucracy are the Chinese way of life.
Theme: Institution
-
“Is Public Epistemology In Decline?”
I’ve been working on the problem since about ’92 and like many things, the curatorial function performed by the top handful of intellectuals alive at any given time is not able to keep pace with the volume of pseudoscience, sophistry, ideology, propaganda, and marketing over the past thirty or more years. This is not the first time there has been a rebellion against science and reason. It happened in the ancient world and resulted in the medieval dark ages. That the rebellion against science and reason is nothing more than a reflection of a rebellion against western evolutionary pressure is less obvious. If not for immigration it appears that we would have succeeded in falsifying the Jewish pseudoscientific counter-enlightenment just as we survived the German Rationalists (kant et all an the german secular theologists) and the French Moralists (Rousseau et al and the French Revolution). The difference being that the Jewish counter enlightenment (exemplified in Cantor-Bohr, Boas-Freud, Marx, Adorno-Fromm, Trotsky-Strauss-Kristol, Derrida, Friedan, and ongoing by Krugman-Stiglitz-DeLong et al ) is so broadly based, covers the entire scope of the disciplines, and is united in the past century, just as were Judaism, Christianity, and Islam in the ancient world, to resist Evolution. Or stated more simply, the current debate remains the same, which is dysgenic female equalitarian strategies, vs the eugenic, male, hierarchical strategies. In other words, both the ancient world religions and the modern world ‘cults’ of pseudoscience, sophistry, and denial, are united in a single purpose, and that is the suppression of evolution by competitive, hierarchical, market meritocracies, of any kind, whether genetic (hindu), bureaucratic (chinese), or technical (european). So in summary, (a) democracy combined with underclass or out-class immigration has created continued market demand for falsehoods. (b) resistance to the increase in market demand for falsehoods has created market demand for counter-arguments. (c) monopoly democracy (selection of priorities for the application of scarce resources) is incapable of suppression the increase in demand for falsehoods. (d) the Finance, State, Academy, Media, Entertainment, Advertising industries benefit from the the sale and distribution of these falsehoods. So yes, market demand for falsehood is increasing market demand for conflict, which cannot be resolved due to the cheap cost and incentives for the distribution of falsehoods, and suppressed the production and distribution of truths. And that is why yes, intelligence, education, the quality of information, and the curatorial function of intellectuals have all declined. Either you have a eugenic polity whose wealth is limited to productivity independent of increases in population, or you will have a dysgenic polity whose accumulated genetic, behavioral, cultural, institutional, territorial capital are consumed by a small number of generations. This isn’t a novel theory. The cycles of rise and decline have been studied by multiple historians for thousands of years. The chinese found a method of persistence through vicious prosecution of criminals, intolerant colonization and forcible integration, and perhaps most importantly agrarian and financial eugenics that over three generations continuously cull family after family from the reproductive pool. America was founded by eugenicists -they just didn’t use that terminology. They used ‘people of good character’. And we maintained the eugenic movement through the first world war. It was the intentional effort of the post war eastern european ashkenazi that worked full time every day to underming every single institution. Conspiracy? No It’s their way of life. Just like islam is the muslim way of life. Just like sovereignty and markets are the european way of life. Just like harmony, hierarchy and bureaucracy are the Chinese way of life.
-
Evolution of Money
Evolution of Money https://propertarianism.com/2020/02/25/evolution-of-money/
Source date (UTC): 2020-02-25 16:16:32 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1232338600924262401
-
Evolution of Money
|Trade| Trade > Market > City, > Contract > Credit > Accounts > Unit of commodity money, Coinage > Notes > Currency > Fiat Currency Babylonians used the Shekel or a single unit of barley as commodity money, including rules of debt in 3000 bc. Metals were used as proto-money in egypt and babylon by the same period. Europeans are familiar with arm-bands of metal as stores of wealth. Coinage was invented in the Aegean, India, and China around the same time – the end of the bronze age dark age – in the 700-600s bc. The oldest coin I know of is from the Temple of Artemis at Ephesus. It is most likely that coinage was NOT developed in the fertile crescent because commodity money was sufficient for the density of land trade. It is most likely that it developed in the aegean because of the heterogeneity of production and sea trade. It is most likely that it developed in china because of the political, regulatory and tax structure, and the long distance of trade. There certainly is universal incentive to create coinage to pay for military service although plunder was enough of an incentive. I do not know enough about trade patterns in ancient india to speculate on the generation of demand for coinage – or why india was less successful than china in consolidation – I assume it is distance, geography and demographic distances.
-
Evolution of Money
|Trade| Trade > Market > City, > Contract > Credit > Accounts > Unit of commodity money, Coinage > Notes > Currency > Fiat Currency Babylonians used the Shekel or a single unit of barley as commodity money, including rules of debt in 3000 bc. Metals were used as proto-money in egypt and babylon by the same period. Europeans are familiar with arm-bands of metal as stores of wealth. Coinage was invented in the Aegean, India, and China around the same time – the end of the bronze age dark age – in the 700-600s bc. The oldest coin I know of is from the Temple of Artemis at Ephesus. It is most likely that coinage was NOT developed in the fertile crescent because commodity money was sufficient for the density of land trade. It is most likely that it developed in the aegean because of the heterogeneity of production and sea trade. It is most likely that it developed in china because of the political, regulatory and tax structure, and the long distance of trade. There certainly is universal incentive to create coinage to pay for military service although plunder was enough of an incentive. I do not know enough about trade patterns in ancient india to speculate on the generation of demand for coinage – or why india was less successful than china in consolidation – I assume it is distance, geography and demographic distances.
-
Closer to A Church than A System of Education
—“The sentiments about the education system you have shared lately, Curt, of said system being closer to a Church than a system of education, are similar to an analysis done by YouTuber Sargon of Akkad a few years ago. His analysis came during a major incursion of Progressivist ideology in the realm of Video Games (GamerGate), where he worked to identify the source of the incursion. While Sargon (Carl Benjamin) was not as concise as you, and hasn’t visited the subject for some time, your latest posts on the subject have rekindled a personal desire for him to grant you an interview. I’m not sure if you’re on his radar (or vise verse prior to my reply here), but his platform and politics would work in your favor and would give him some more content for his channel. Thoughts?”— A Follower
Thinking…. My analysis is that of Hilbert(1920s) Hayek (1970’s) and Thomas Sowell (1980’a) combined with Kevin Macdonald(1990’s) and Stephen Hicks (2010’s).
- Hicks explains the evolution of leftist (jewish) thought.
- Macdonald documents it in detail.
- I articulate the methodology of (abrahamic) leftist thought and how to expand our law to outlaw and suppress it. In doing so I was able to document western group strategy in precise economic and scientific terms.
I think were people differ is whether (a) it is possible to make abrahamism illegal, (b) whether it is possible to reform the academy using that law (c) or whether people must be ostracized from the polity because they are irredeemable. I think that fixing the universities is rather easy. It’s a money problem and ending the money problem will fix the problem. I don’t feel the need to have help with publicity but I would of course talk to the man and enjoy it.
-
Closer to A Church than A System of Education
—“The sentiments about the education system you have shared lately, Curt, of said system being closer to a Church than a system of education, are similar to an analysis done by YouTuber Sargon of Akkad a few years ago. His analysis came during a major incursion of Progressivist ideology in the realm of Video Games (GamerGate), where he worked to identify the source of the incursion. While Sargon (Carl Benjamin) was not as concise as you, and hasn’t visited the subject for some time, your latest posts on the subject have rekindled a personal desire for him to grant you an interview. I’m not sure if you’re on his radar (or vise verse prior to my reply here), but his platform and politics would work in your favor and would give him some more content for his channel. Thoughts?”— A Follower
Thinking…. My analysis is that of Hilbert(1920s) Hayek (1970’s) and Thomas Sowell (1980’a) combined with Kevin Macdonald(1990’s) and Stephen Hicks (2010’s).
- Hicks explains the evolution of leftist (jewish) thought.
- Macdonald documents it in detail.
- I articulate the methodology of (abrahamic) leftist thought and how to expand our law to outlaw and suppress it. In doing so I was able to document western group strategy in precise economic and scientific terms.
I think were people differ is whether (a) it is possible to make abrahamism illegal, (b) whether it is possible to reform the academy using that law (c) or whether people must be ostracized from the polity because they are irredeemable. I think that fixing the universities is rather easy. It’s a money problem and ending the money problem will fix the problem. I don’t feel the need to have help with publicity but I would of course talk to the man and enjoy it.
-
Organizing a Movement
—“We need Organization. There are people everywhere that will feel refreshed after learning this all and jump right on.”—Jeff Carlson
We will create a political party as the means of organizing The other ‘organizations’ will follow. If we have organic growth we create three wings: educational, political, and militial. If we have time we take the IRA strategy of two wings: political and militial. If we run out of time, we resort to Mao’s strategy of a single wing Political-Militial. In all cases we need a political organization since the world is currently organized to facilitate them and the publicity is free. But it’s time dependent.
-
Organizing a Movement
—“We need Organization. There are people everywhere that will feel refreshed after learning this all and jump right on.”—Jeff Carlson
We will create a political party as the means of organizing The other ‘organizations’ will follow. If we have organic growth we create three wings: educational, political, and militial. If we have time we take the IRA strategy of two wings: political and militial. If we run out of time, we resort to Mao’s strategy of a single wing Political-Militial. In all cases we need a political organization since the world is currently organized to facilitate them and the publicity is free. But it’s time dependent.
-
The shift from generating class conflict to undermining the civilization’s found
The shift from generating class conflict to undermining the civilization’s foundations – family, religion, institutions, and truth.
But again, the application of sophistry, ‘critique’, pseudoscience, and ‘making it up’, in order to undermine host civilizations.
Source date (UTC): 2020-02-25 01:52:49 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1232121237863792645
Reply addressees: @WinslowFrancke
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1232120471430320129
IN REPLY TO:
Unknown author
@WinslowFrancke Google cultural marxism. You can read Hicks’ book “Explaining Postmodernism” that covers the development from Rousseau to the present.
You can read Macdonald’s Chapter 5 “The Frankfurt School of Social Research and the Pathologization of Gentile Group Allegiances” for sources.Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1232120471430320129