Theme: Institution

  • 22) Peoples who never developed agrarian norms, traditions, institutions and gen

    22) Peoples who never developed agrarian norms, traditions, institutions and genetics,and remained migratory thieves(gypsies) or shepherds(arabs) on one end, or traders(jews) on the other,never developed the bias for commons and the returns on commons, and hence despotic empires.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-01-16 14:57:29 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1217823192586301442

    Reply addressees: @HliosX @MurraySuggests

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1217822481110663168


    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    @HliosX @MurraySuggests 21) But that we do not abandon those who by accident of birth or circumstance requires extra market organization – not possible to organize in the production of commons under the pricing systems incentives. We merely limit their reproduction to one child – and time cures all.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1217822481110663168


    IN REPLY TO:

    @curtdoolittle

    @HliosX @MurraySuggests 21) But that we do not abandon those who by accident of birth or circumstance requires extra market organization – not possible to organize in the production of commons under the pricing systems incentives. We merely limit their reproduction to one child – and time cures all.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1217822481110663168

  • 5) So, false promise of possibility or survival by suggestion (freedom from conf

    5) So, false promise of possibility or survival by suggestion (freedom from conformity, integration, paying costs of normative, institutional, territorial commons), false promise of ethics by non-coercion (psychological and personally controlled), rather than non-imposition …


    Source date (UTC): 2020-01-16 14:21:16 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1217814076564410373

    Reply addressees: @HliosX @MurraySuggests

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1217813178459000834


    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    @HliosX @MurraySuggests 4) We then compare this to the Western test of Operational Construction: How can a thing be brought into being by a sequence of actions, and persist if it is? An example of idealism (sophism) vs realism (operationalism). The Greeks innovated in truth and the jews in lying.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1217813178459000834


    IN REPLY TO:

    @curtdoolittle

    @HliosX @MurraySuggests 4) We then compare this to the Western test of Operational Construction: How can a thing be brought into being by a sequence of actions, and persist if it is? An example of idealism (sophism) vs realism (operationalism). The Greeks innovated in truth and the jews in lying.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1217813178459000834

  • Not really. Happy to list the companies back into the 80’s and who acquired them

    Not really. Happy to list the companies back into the 80’s and who acquired them. The institute’s been active since 2012. And the movement has just about hit critical mass.

    You probably can’t understand the technical work in epistemology,scientific method, and law. Others do.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-01-15 23:55:51 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1217596285785706496

    Reply addressees: @FloMartinSec @Getastat @AB89622134 @TomKawczynski @JohnMarkSays

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1217590555477192704


    IN REPLY TO:

    Original post on X

    Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1217590555477192704

  • You keep imagining what ideally could, and I work on engineering what CAN. What

    You keep imagining what ideally could, and I work on engineering what CAN. What can survive competition over years, decades centuries.

    That’s why.

    Engineering means process, procedure, rules, institutions, means of measurement.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-01-15 21:47:09 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1217563901405138945

  • 2) reality is that ethics are MADE by necessity within a political context. They

    2) reality is that ethics are MADE by necessity within a political context. They aren’t ideals (imaginary). The scope of property is discovered and normalized. Rights are made by creating courts to adjudicate them. You have to produce a polity that can survive opposition.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-01-15 21:42:35 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1217562749338890240

    Reply addressees: @HliosX @Ozpin_88

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1217562446942081024


    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    @HliosX @Ozpin_88 1) So you’re avoiding the test right? Ethics exist only within what is possible in the context.Ethics of hunter gatherers, early farmers,subsistence farmers, agrarian revolution farmers, industrialists, and technologists are different for a reason. You are FIRST bound by reality.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1217562446942081024


    IN REPLY TO:

    @curtdoolittle

    @HliosX @Ozpin_88 1) So you’re avoiding the test right? Ethics exist only within what is possible in the context.Ethics of hunter gatherers, early farmers,subsistence farmers, agrarian revolution farmers, industrialists, and technologists are different for a reason. You are FIRST bound by reality.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1217562446942081024

  • we don’t get the government we wish, we get the goverment we can construct, and

    we don’t get the government we wish, we get the goverment we can construct, and one that will survive internal and internal competition.

    Jewish pilpul is for liars, young men, and women.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-01-15 21:24:08 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1217558108911874055

    Reply addressees: @Ozpin_88 @HliosX

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1217557864006455298


    IN REPLY TO:

    Original post on X

    Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1217557864006455298

  • ARE CONSUMERS SOVEREIGN? No. Because with large corporations we need via-negativ

    ARE CONSUMERS SOVEREIGN?

    No. Because with large corporations we need via-negativa in courts to be able to correct bad behavior. And the state (politicians) are too easily (and frequently) bought. Furthermore they are too economically illiterate to comprehend the choices, and left-economists too dominant as consultants. (Obama only asked left wing jewish economists: Krugman Stiglitz etc).

    P-Constitution restores the courts as a market for defense of the commons. P-economics restores the financial assets made possible by fiat currency to the state (people), while still permitting bankers, thereby splitting the consumer credit economy, the medium term economy, and the long term economy, to the consumer, business banks, and actors on behalf of the treasury, so that commissions are possible but profits more so, and vast sums can be put to work in the world. As such we WEAPONIZE THE AMERICAN ECONOMY.

    This is important. P-constitution weaponizes the economy for american (western) interests as have the Chinese at the cost of the major banks (JPM, GS, Citi, HSBC etc).

    If the People insure the investment then the people obtain the rewards of their risk.

    For big thinkers this means that we can drive the investment chain further into the future with heavier capital investment using the state, the financial sector can industrialize the application of whatever opportunities those technologies and benefits that can arise. The consumer sector can (interest free) seize the gains. And the proceeds can be directed to commons, so that the work week can be reduced and the working mother population reduced to produce more offspring. (one of the investments needs to be artificial wombs it seems.)


    Source date (UTC): 2020-01-15 15:06:00 UTC

  • WE CAN LEARN SOMETHING FROM THE SOVIETS – BUT NOT THE COMMUNISTS —” (with iron

    WE CAN LEARN SOMETHING FROM THE SOVIETS – BUT NOT THE COMMUNISTS

    —” (with irony) Today’s Youth explains that the economic failures of communism didn’t have much to do with the Soviet Union’s demise.”—Steve Sailer @Steve_Sailer

    The Soviets used the fact that Russians had been serfs only decades before – and most still lived like serfs – and migrated them to a militarized labor force – saving the cost of market prices for labor, redirecting that savings to the funding commons.

    Then the people adapted to incentives: black markets in all. They reverted to serf behavior: minimum production.

    But Soviet education, science,and commons production were far ahead of USA’s.The error is probably on both sides in that the market and private production are optimums for the middle and up,and non-market for physical commons better for working class and down: serving each other.

    We (economists) know perfectly well why the socialist and communist systems don’t and can’t ever work: (a) incentives produce declines in production in exchange for increases in corruption free riding and rent. (b) economic calculation of investment is impossible. ( c) “Humans”.

    We can end the monopoly(equality) presumption of the economy. Historically we used barbarian > “slave” > serf > freeman > citizen > sovereign, as progressions of market independence (not power). We don’t think of these as different economies, but they were. We need 3+ economies.

    We’ve tried to force too many people at the bottom into the middle class because that was the reason for european success – culling the lower classes. We’ve bred and imported vast underclasses undermining european market majoritarianism. And we’ve recreated demand for “serfdom”.

    There are plenty of people who would exchange voting rights for economic dependency and some sort of equality while maintaining access to the goods and services produced by market goods.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-01-15 08:51:00 UTC

  • RT @ClownBa73413423: @curtdoolittle @ellievhall She didn’t want the duties and r

    RT @ClownBa73413423: @curtdoolittle @ellievhall She didn’t want the duties and responsibilities of being a civil servant to the British Mon…


    Source date (UTC): 2020-01-14 21:28:55 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1217196921540042752

  • Kate is PERFECT for the monarchy. Absolutely perfect. Of course we’re going to t

    Kate is PERFECT for the monarchy. Absolutely perfect. Of course we’re going to treat an “actress” (prostitute) who rode the c–ck carousel of opportunities as she DESERVES TO BE TREATED. She’s Yoko Ono Version Two: “Divide and Monopolize”.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-01-14 21:15:57 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1217193660468662273

    Reply addressees: @ellievhall

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1216753803015401473


    IN REPLY TO:

    @ellievhall

    THREAD: I’ve been reading about / covering the royal family for years + I’ve been thinking about publishing a piece like this for a while now. I’m not exaggerating when I say that I’ve read thousands of headlines/stories about the royals, particularly about Kate, over the years.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1216753803015401473