Theme: Institution

  • QUOTES FROM GOOGLE ACHIPELAGO by Daniel Johns p71 – That is, the Google Archipel

    QUOTES FROM GOOGLE ACHIPELAGO

    by Daniel Johns

    p71 – That is, the Google Archipelago is a commercial assemblage that acts increasingly like a state.

    p 73 – …”dangerous” – that is anyone to the right of Joseph Stalin.

    p 89 – Much has been made of Google’s historical ties to the U.S. intelligence community (IC) and military research agencies.

    p 119 – The members of the nebulous socially dangerous elements also included “bourgeois specialists”, who served the Communist regime and accounted for a significant percentage of the 700,000 deaths at the hands of the new Stalinist bureaucracy during this two-year period alone.

    p 125 – Only Google Marxism is capable of creating it, albeit in corporate socialist form. Google Marxism is the first system with the sufficient flexibility, scalability, connectivity and, with the release of 5G, speed to enable the distance-defying, mass, and small-scale niche production and distribution possibilities to enable a truly globalized system.

    p 128 – Imagine two worlds, one with you and one without you. What’s the difference between the two worlds? Maximize that difference. That is the meaning of your life. – Kai-Fu Lee, Making a World of Difference (2011)

    p 131 – In other words, the city of Darwin (Australia) may have traded away its citizen’s privacy, self-determination, and even its intellectual capacities, for economic security.

    p 138 – Diversity, equity and inclusion: this is the new language of totalitarianism.

    p 143 – A minority dictatorship always finds its most powerful support in an obedient army… – The Black Book of Communism

    p 165 – The articles detailed how New Knowledge itself created fake Russian bots as supporters of former Chief Justice Roy S. Moore of Alabama in the 2017 election for the US Senate – in order to give the impression that the Kremlin was behind the candidacy of Roy Moore!

    p 167 – New knowledge must be countered, not only with real knowledge, but with a metaphysics of truth. By this I mean not merely a rejuvenated quest for the truth, but more fundamentally the re-establishment of a framework or frameworks for knowing and approaching the truth. Such projects have generally been confined to philosophers but must now extend to the entire populace.

    p 196 – The rightwing-leftwing axis means nothing to me. Are they totalitarians or not? Totalitarianism is my enemy.

    p 198 – Socialism is just an ideology used by monopolists to eliminate competition.

    p 199 – If I were a preacher, I might say to the catastrophist left: the heat you’re sending is not from global warming, it’s the encroachment of hell.

    p 199 – The U.S. university system has reached such a decrepit state that one cannot but have grave doubts about its worth and justification for existing.

    p 202 – Thus, shortly after a revolution undertaken putatively (supposedly) on behalf of the working class for their control of society, Lenin ordered the first post-revolutionary striking government workers shot dead, and the murders were committed without hesitation.

    *****

    Vocabulary:

    Archipelago – n. A group of many islands in a large body of water

    asymptotic – adj. Relating to or of the nature of an asymptote

    asymptote – n. A straight line that is the limiting value of a curve; can be considered as tangent at infinity

    ableism – n. Discrimination in favor of the able-bodied

    ontology – n. The metaphysical study of the nature of being and existence

    ethos – n. (anthropology) the distinctive spirit of a culture or an era

    pathos – n. A feeling of sympathy and sorrow for the misfortunes of others

    simulacrum – n. An insubstantial or vague semblance

    ideology – n. An orientation that characterizes the thinking of a group or nation 2) Imaginary or visionary theorization

    Luddite – n. One of the 19th century English workmen who destroyed laborsaving machinery that they thought would cause unemployment 2) Any opponent of technological progress

    libidinal – adj. Belonging to the libido

    libido – n. (psychoanalysis) a Freudian term for sexual urge or desire

    elide – v. Leave or strike out

    conterminous – adj. Connecting without a break; within a common boundary

    ubiquitous – adj. Being present everywhere at once

    panoptic – adj. Broad in scope or content 2) Including everything visible in one view

    panopticon – An area where everything is visible

    putatively – adv. Believed or reputed to be the case [purportedly, supposedly]

    cognoscente(i) – n. An expert able to appreciate a field; especially in the fine arts

    cis hetero – n. urban dictionary – A heterosexual person whose gender aligns with what they were assigned at birth.

    cis – adj. Of or relating to people whose gender identity is the same as their birth sex; not transgender

    cisgender – adj. Of or relating to people whose gender identity is the same as their birth sex; not transgender

    Governmentality, approach to the study of power that emphasizes the governing of people’s conduct through positive means rather than the sovereign power to formulate the law. In contrast to a disciplinarian form of power, governmentality is generally associated with the willing participation of the governed.

    plebeian – adj. (disparaging) of or associated with ordinary, common people

    utopian – n. An idealistic (but usually impractical) social reformer

    Marxist Digitalista – Christian Fuchs is Professor at the University of Westminster in London. He is editor of the open access journal triple C – Communication, Capitalism & Critique – http://www.triple-c.at/

    He publishes and speaks on the political economy of communications, digital media & society, media & society, information society theory, and critical theory. http://fuchs.uti.at/ Twitter @fuchschristian

    obstreperous (ob-strep′?r-?s, ?b-) – adj. Noisily and stubbornly defiant 2) Boisterously and noisily aggressive

    massifying – The act of making something massive for the sake of it. Usually in order to inflate one’s ego.

    probity – n. Complete and confirmed integrity; having strong moral principles

    perfervid (p?r-fûr′vid) – adj. Extremely or extravagantly eager; impassioned or zealous.

    nebulous – adj. Lacking definite form or limits

    bourgeois – adj. (according to Marxist thought) being of the property-owning class and exploitive of the working class

    bourgeois – n. A capitalist who engages in industrial commercial enterprise 2) A member of the middle class

    de facto – adj. Existing in fact whether with lawful authority or not

    raison d’être – Reason for being (French)

    collude – v. Act in unison or agreement, and in secret, towards a deceitful or illegal purpose

    niche (nich, nesh) – n. A position particularly well suited to the person who occupies it

    prelapsarian (pre′lap-sâr′e-?n) – adj. Theology Of or relating to the period before the fall of Adam and Eve.

    sentient – adj. Endowed with feeling and unstructured consciousness 2) Consciously perceiving

    epigones (ep′i-gon′) – n. A second-rate imitator or follower, especially of an artist or a philosopher.

    alacrity – n. Cheerful willingness; eagerness. 2) Speed or quickness; celerity.

    celerity – n. A rate that is rapid (archaic)

    jeremiad (jer′?-mi′?d) – A literary work or speech expressing a bitter lament or a righteous prophecy of doom.

    desideratus(a) (di-sid′?-ra′t?m, -rä′-) – Something considered necessary or highly desirable.

    totalitarianism – n. The principle of complete and unrestricted power in government

    digerati (dij′?-rä′te) – pl. n. People who are knowledgeable about digital technologies such as computer programming and design.

    sanguine – adj. Confidently optimistic and cheerful

    alliterative (?-lit′?-ra′tiv, -?r-?-) – adj. Having the same consonant at the beginning of each stressed syllable

    assonance – adj. The repetition of similar vowels in the stressed syllables of successive words

    peccadillos (pek′?-dil′o) – n. pl. A small sin or fault.

    anthropomorphic (an′thro·po·mor′phic) – adj. Suggesting human characteristics for animals or inanimate things

    ersatz (er′zäts′, er-zäts′) – adj. Artificial and inferior

    eugenics – n. The study of methods of improving genetic qualities by selective breeding (especially as applied to human mating)

    simulacrum (sim′y?-la′kr?m, -lak′r?m) – n. pl. An image or representation. 2) An unreal or vague semblance.

    nescience (nesh′?ns) – n. Ignorance (especially of orthodox beliefs)

    metaphysics – n. Philosophy – The branch of philosophy that examines the nature of reality, including the relationship between mind and matter, substance and attribute, possibility and actuality.

    prestidigitation (pres′ti-dij′i-ta′sh?n) – Skill or cleverness, especially in deceiving others.

    pusillanimous (pyo?o′s?-lan′?-m?s) – adj. Lacking in courage and manly strength and resolution; contemptibly fearful

    decrepit – adj. Worn and broken down by hard use

    obscurantism – n. A deliberate act intended to make something obscure

    obscure – adj. Not clearly understood or expressed


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-23 17:48:00 UTC

  • CIVIL LAW WAS COMMON ACROSS EUROPE —“Originally civil law was one common legal

    CIVIL LAW WAS COMMON ACROSS EUROPE

    —“Originally civil law was one common legal system in much of Europe, but with the rise of nationalism in the 17th century Nordic countries and around the time of the French Revolution, it became fractured into separate national systems. This change was brought about by the development of separate national codes, of which the French Napoleonic Code and the German and Swiss codes were the most influential. Around this time civil law incorporated many ideas associated with the Enlightenment.”—


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-23 17:28:00 UTC

  • ENGLISH COMMON LAW Common law developed after the Norman Conquest of England. In

    ENGLISH COMMON LAW

    Common law developed after the Norman Conquest of England. In 1066 England was peopled with Angles, Saxons, Vikings, Danes, Celts, Jutes, and other groups who were suddenly ruled by French-speaking Normans. Most law at the time was customary law that had been handed down orally from generation to generation.

    In addition there were the legal code of Alfred the Great, which was biblical in nature, and the Danelaw of the Vikings and Danes. Most of the courts were communal courts (folk-moot), the hundred and shire courts, and baronial, or manorial, courts administering justice in the interest of the local nobility.

    Immediately after the Norman Conquest the king would hear cases coram rege (before the king) that involved royal interests. However, the king with the royal court tended to be on the move in England or away in France. Consequently the legal work was soon delegated to an appointed tribunal, the Curia Regis. From it came the three royal common law courts that were used to unify the kingdom.

    The first of the royal common law courts was the Exchequer. Originally concerned with the collection of taxes and the administration of royal finances, by 1250 it had become a court exercising full judicial powers. The second royal common law court to develop was the Court of Common Pleas (or Common Bench), which was probably established during the reign of Henry II (1154–1189).

    This court heard cases that did not involve the king’s rights. It was firmly established at Westminster after King John was forced to sign the Magna Carta in 1215. The third royal common law court to evolve from the Curia Regis was the King’s Bench. Eventually this court heard cases involving the king’s interests, criminal matters, and cases affecting the high nobility. It also developed the practice of issuing writs of error for review of cases decided in Common Pleas.

    One factor promoting the development of the common law courts was their ability to settle land disputes. All of the land in England belonged to the king by right of conquest. He then awarded it to his vassals to hold and utilize in exchange for loyalty and for services. Because economic production was almost exclusively agricultural, title to the use of land was extremely valuable.

    Disputes over who was entitled to possess land created innumerable cases. As the justices in Eyre traveled their assigned circuits to hold court, they would decide cases using the Bible, canon law, and most especially reasoning applied to the customary law of that place. When the judges returned to London they would go to their places of permanent residence in taverns or cloisters.

    These residences of the judges, who were often monks or bachelors, eventually became the Inns of Court, where cases were heard and experts were trained in law. In the course of over 200 years the judges “discovered” the law common to all the people of England. The belief was that underlying the thicket of unwritten customary law was a common foundation that could be discovered by reason.

    In effect the judges were developing legal principles or laws as they made judicial rulings in particular cases. Among the principles of the common law are stare decisis (let the decision stand). Stare decisis means that a judge in deciding a case should look to similar cases from the past for guidance. The use of similar cases is itself a legal principle, namely, that like cases should be tried alike.

    However in the absence of a precedent setting rule the judge would in effect “legislate” and create a new rule. This meant that the common law was case law or judge-made law created by legal reasoning about legal problems. It was well established centuries before the rise of Parliament.

    The developing common law had the virtue of stability; however, it lacked flexibility. To bring a case into a common law court was often too costly for common people. The common law courts also moved slowly; that could mean that justice delayed was justice denied. To lodge a complaint in a common law court an appropriate writ had to be obtained.

    If the wrong kind of writ were used, of which there were eventually over 100 kinds, the case would be dismissed. In addition some of the rules of the common law were injurious to justice. For example before bringing a suit for an injury to a person or to property in a common law court real injury had to be sustained. The common law lacked a mechanism for preventing irreparable harms from happening.

    Since the king was believed to be the fountainhead of justice in England—that is, the person who ruled by divine right and though whom the justice of heaven flowed to the people—equity courts were established to restore fairness or equity to the legal system. People would appeal to the king for justice. In response the kings ordered the court chancellor to issue decrees of equity. Chancery courts developed to hear cases of equity and to correct the common law.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-23 17:06:00 UTC

  • ANGLO SAXON LAW (GERMANIC LAW) Anglo-Saxon law, the body of legal principles tha

    ANGLO SAXON LAW (GERMANIC LAW)

    Anglo-Saxon law, the body of legal principles that prevailed in England from the 6th century until the Norman Conquest (1066). In conjunction with Scandinavian law and the so-called barbarian laws (leges barbarorum) of continental Europe, it made up the body of law called Germanic law. Anglo-Saxon law was written in the vernacular and was relatively free of the Roman influence found in continental laws that were written in Latin. Roman influence on Anglo-Saxon law was indirect and exerted primarily through the church. There was a definite Scandinavian influence upon Anglo-Saxon law as a result of the Viking invasions of the 8th and 9th centuries. Only with the Norman Conquest did Roman law, as embodied in Frankish law, make its influence felt on the laws of England.

    Anglo-Saxon law was made up of three components: the laws and collections promulgated by the king, authoritative statements of custom such as those found in the Norman-instituted Domesday Book, and private compilations of legal rules and enactments. The primary emphasis was on criminal law rather than on private law, although certain material dealt with problems of public administration, public order, and ecclesiastical matters.

    Before the 10th century, the codes often merely presented lists of compositions—money paid to an injured party or his family—but by the 10th century a new penal system had evolved based on outlawry (declaring a criminal an outlaw), confiscation, and corporal and capital punishment. By this time there also had been an increased development of the law relating to administrative and police functions.

    The Anglo-Saxon legal system rested on the fundamental opposition between folkright and privilege. Folkright is the aggregate of rules, whether formulated or not, that can be appealed to as an expression of the juridical consciousness of the people at large or of the communities of which it is composed. It is tribal in origin and is differentiated on highly localized bases. Thus, there was a folkright of East and West Saxons, Mercians, Northumbrians, Danes, and Welshmen, and these main folkright divisions persisted even after the tribal kingdoms disappeared in the 8th and 9th centuries. The responsibility for the formulation and application of the folkright rested, in the 10th and 11th centuries, with the local shire moots (assemblies); the national council of the realm, or witan, only occasionally used folkright ideas. The older laws of real property, succession, contracts, and compositions were mainly regulated by folkright; the law had to be declared and applied by the people themselves in their communities.

    FOLKRIGHT

    Folkright could, however, be broken or modified by special enactment or grant, and the foundation of such privileges was royal power, especially once England became a single kingdom in the 10th century. In this manner a privileged land tenure was created; the rules pertaining to the succession of kinsmen were replaced by concessions of testamentary power and confirmations of grants and wills, and special privileges as to levying fines were conferred. In time, the rights originating in the royal grants of privilege came to outweigh folkright in many respects and were the starting point for the feudal system.

    Before the 10th century an individual’s actions were considered not as exertions of his own will but as acts of his kinship group. Personal protection and revenge, oaths, marriage, wardship, and succession were all regulated by the law of kinship. What began as a natural alliance later became a means of enforcing responsibility and keeping lawless individuals in order. As the associations proved insufficient, other collective bodies, such as guilds and townships, assumed these functions. In the period before the Norman Conquest, much regulation was formalized by the king’s legislation in order to protect the individual. In the area of property, for example, witnesses were required at cattle sales, not to validate the sale but as protection against later claims on the cattle. Some ordinances required the presence of witnesses for all sales outside the town gate, and others simply prohibited sales except in town, again for the buyer’s protection.

    The preservation of peace was an important feature of Anglo-Saxon law. Peace was thought of as the rule of an authority within a specific region. Because the ultimate authority was the king, there was a gradual evolution of stringent rules and regulations against violating the king’s peace.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-23 17:02:00 UTC

  • THE ORIGIN OF INSTITUTIONAL LAW —“Dear mr Doolittle, How to avoid bloodfeuds a

    THE ORIGIN OF INSTITUTIONAL LAW

    —“Dear mr Doolittle, How to avoid bloodfeuds and endless vengeance in a society based on rule of natural law(reciprocity)?”—Sietze Bosman @fryskefilosoof

    I don’t understand… wait… ok. Here…

    Reciprocity: productive, fully informed, warrantied, voluntary transfer of demonstrated interests, insured by, and settled by, the court and sheriffs, by forcible restitution, punishment, prevention, and prohibition on further retaliation by parties.

    It’s uncommon knowledge that the origin of all customary and political law is the resolution of disputes between families or clans, because of the excessive cost and consequence of retaliation cycles (feuds). As such, the polity insures peaceful settlement w/ law, court, jury.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-23 14:36:00 UTC

  • A bit. Combination of various strategies. A little like holy roman empire with ‘

    A bit. Combination of various strategies. A little like holy roman empire with ‘free cities’ given license for limited local rule. Probably what King George should have done to prevent the American Revolution.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-23 02:41:23 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1186834976714739713

    Reply addressees: @ironpatriot2016 @QuestionMThings

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1186827250076913664


    IN REPLY TO:

    @viralstrikeai

    @curtdoolittle @QuestionMThings This new constitution you have written reminds me of lot of the old British empire.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1186827250076913664

  • THE REASON FOR LAWS AGAINST CHILD ABUSE —“Raising a family is an act of patrio

    THE REASON FOR LAWS AGAINST CHILD ABUSE

    —“Raising a family is an act of patriotism and sacrifice. After all… Children are commons. They affect the entire polity. And they are the most… https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=490588904871338&id=100017606988153


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-22 22:23:17 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1186770023492272134

  • THE REASON FOR LAWS AGAINST CHILD ABUSE —“Raising a family is an act of patrio

    THE REASON FOR LAWS AGAINST CHILD ABUSE

    —“Raising a family is an act of patriotism and sacrifice. After all… Children are commons. They affect the entire polity. And they are the most feasible, concrete way for we mortals to transcend. So let’s give them a reason to be proud of us once we get to infinity.”—José Francisco Mayora

    —“Which is the reason why we we have any laws against child abuse. It’s not just family insuring the children and the polity from the children, but polity also insures children, even from their own families.”—Martin Štěpán


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-22 18:23:00 UTC

  • WHAT’S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A COMMUNITY AND A POLITY? Kin: People of common ge

    WHAT’S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A COMMUNITY AND A POLITY?

    Kin: People of common genetic interest.

    Community: Market between Kin of Common Interests.

    Polity: Market Between Communities of Common Interests

    Society: Norms shared by kin, and communities within a polity.

    People nearly always lie when they use community or society in order to conduct the fraud of claiming common interest where there is competitive interest.

    There is no involuntary ‘we’.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-22 14:49:00 UTC

  • THE MARKET DEMAND FOR SERVICES PROVIDED BY RELIGION 1. The market demand for per

    THE MARKET DEMAND FOR SERVICES PROVIDED BY RELIGION

    1. The market demand for personal mindfulness (Spiritualism) whether empathic-femining (theological), moral-masculine(rational), or analytic-masculine(scientific) exists, and all three demands exist for most of us. The question is, given how the various religions solved mindfulness (Stoicism-epicureanism, buddhism, hinduism, abrahamism) which produces agency (stoicism), which produces optimism (hinduism), which produces withdrawal from reality (buddhism) and which denies and escapes reality (abrahamism).

    2. Religions must provide interpersonal mindfulness by creating a standard dialog, set of signals, and manners that are costly to learn and practice, but that by practicing display to others you are worthy of honest cooperation on the same terms.

    3. Religions must also provide social mindfulness (limitation of fear and comfort in the ethical, and moral. These are moral rules that serve the group’s competitive strategy – and all reflect the environmental challenges of the age of transformation in which men invented religions.,

    4. Religions must also provide political mindfulness (limits on political action and on rulers actions). I won’t cover each of them here.

    5. Religions must also provide a group strategy – gypsy parasitism, jewish parasitism, muslim parasitism, predation and conquest, christian undermining of the truth, knowledge, reason, law, property, aristocracy by rallying the peasantry and women and slaves against all and being as expansionary as islam – to counter islam. Buddhist submission and obedience Hindu class duty and function in the ‘harmony’. Chinese hierarchical family (bureaucracy). Anglo aristocratic egalitarianism (entrepreneurship and corporation).

    So 1. personal mindfulness (peace of mind), 2. interpersonal, 3. social, 4. political, 5. strategic.

    All of these are served by training in stoicism and epicureanism(realism, naturalism, reciprocity, living within your means, surrounding yourself with family and friends, and insulation from competitive status signaling), training interpersonal reciprocity, social reciprocity, training in political reciprocity, and training in group strategic reciprocity.

    The fact that we train people in reading, writing, arithmetic, mathematics, and the sciences, and indoctrinate them into falsehoods of marxism (class undermining), feminism(male undermining), and postmodernism (group undermining), but DON”T train them in stoic mindfulness, epicurean happiness, basic money, household finance, and accounting, basic law of contract and reciprocity, the testimony, the grammars, logics, rhetoric, and produce holidays that celebrate our seasons and heroes, thinkers, and saints is just a choice.

    The only addiction christianity adds is the transformation of western paternalism of masculine aristocracy, to the feminine submission to a false god, the pretense of equality of all, and the one good thing: the feminine emulation of jesus in the extension of forgiveness instead of semitic hypersensitivity to insult and slight – we call this christian love. It’s just self virtue signaling in exchange for immunity from offense by petty people endemic among the desperate, poor and ignorant.

    The real reason people rely on abrahamic religion is to disintermediate themselves from others status signals so that they can preserve mindfulness and self image despite continuous rejection. The reason we want to live in the christian world is because we are not subject to continuous rejection but continuous tolerance and forgiveness (love).

    The program of the marxists, feminists, and postmodernists, is to UNDERMINE christian love from within. Undermine the faith. Undermine the ethics Generate envy and hatred between genders, classes, and identity groups, in order to sew discord that creates demand for an authoritarian state which can extract almost unlimited income from the population to resolve the conflicts that the government created.

    This is all you need to understand about (a) religion, (b) christianity in politics (c) how we can state christianity in legal terms, (d) how we can teach stoicism and epicureanism and history and truth rather than semitic lies, and (e) how we are undermined because christians will not fight the enemy.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-22 13:09:00 UTC