Irish and italian immigrants (catholics) had precisely the effect on the political order that protestants argued they would. In fact, the protestants have been correct every single time without fail, that the underclasses (catholics are largely the underclass and protestants largely the middle class) would destroy the experiment in ‘a third way’ government not by aristocracy or church but by the middle class and in the interests of the middle class. That’s why the constitution is so close to natural law (tort). Because the USA was conceived of as a middle class (propertied agrarian) alternative to the Old Order of Europe. And all the underclasses european and otherwise have sought to undermine this experiment under the insane illusion that the wealth generated by a middle class ‘third way’ will survive the existence of underclasses imported from around the world. It can’t. Europe excelled after 700 almost entirely because bipartite manorialism is brutally eugenic, and by the late middle ages all of europe above the Hajnal line was genetically middle class. That’s the truth. It’s not ideas. IT’S GENES.
Theme: Institution
-
Underclass Immigrants Have Had Precisely the Anticipated Negative Impact on Western Civilization
Irish and italian immigrants (catholics) had precisely the effect on the political order that protestants argued they would. In fact, the protestants have been correct every single time without fail, that the underclasses (catholics are largely the underclass and protestants largely the middle class) would destroy the experiment in ‘a third way’ government not by aristocracy or church but by the middle class and in the interests of the middle class. That’s why the constitution is so close to natural law (tort). Because the USA was conceived of as a middle class (propertied agrarian) alternative to the Old Order of Europe. And all the underclasses european and otherwise have sought to undermine this experiment under the insane illusion that the wealth generated by a middle class ‘third way’ will survive the existence of underclasses imported from around the world. It can’t. Europe excelled after 700 almost entirely because bipartite manorialism is brutally eugenic, and by the late middle ages all of europe above the Hajnal line was genetically middle class. That’s the truth. It’s not ideas. IT’S GENES.
-
You know, the fact that the modern church (a) tolerated pedophiles and worse, (b
You know, the fact that the modern church (a) tolerated pedophiles and worse, (b) refused to rectify(sic) the situation, (c) has not reformed to allow married priests, and (d) has now directly turned against european civilization – doubling down on supernaturalism and (e) selected an anti-european pope, means it is time to end that church and bring about another. Why is it that we persist this middle eastern savagery rather than transcend the abrahamic dark ages, and emerge a people of natural law, nature, and the transcendence of man?
Source date (UTC): 2018-05-02 16:29:00 UTC
-
LAUNCHING SUCCESSFUL TECH The problem is the same I have chastised microsoft man
LAUNCHING SUCCESSFUL TECH
The problem is the same I have chastised microsoft management about for most of my twenty years of involvement with them: technology is only ten percent as useful as the demo apps upon which applications are built. I was right then, and I’m right now. If you look at PHP for example, without the frameworks the language would be nearly dead. But because of the frameworks it lives. (its why I use it). I wrote the “Microsoft Access Solutions Pack” for Microsoft “back in the day” and it consisted of four fully functional applications, plus the utility library I developed for overcoming the weaknesses in the access architecture. It sold enough copies, but the interesting observation is that for a decade the basis of the better applications depended upon those demo apps and that library.
The tech is less valuable than the application framework (plug and play basic app) and the ‘full size’ demo apps are more valuable than the framework.
The reason is very simple, if you can’t produce a framework, and you can’t produce a suite of demo apps, you either aren’t ready to go to market, haven’t actually tested your tech, and have no idea whether it serves any material purpose.
Tech survives at the EDGES, not the CORE of technology, because it is the EDGES that are uncommon, not the cores.
Thus endeth the lesson that is always ignored.
Microsoft chose to improve tools rather than demo apps because they had sufficient network effect that people would invest anyway.
But once you understand microsoft tools were built on basic and vb3 to create that network you understand why they could do it.
Holochain needs an out of the box running framework, making use of well understood design patterns, to dominate the market. Otherwise the cost of entry is simply too high for rapid market expansion. If Demo apps were created on top of that framework, then it would be a done deal. But the instinct of programmers is to work with core tech that has no customers where they have to solve real world problems, so that they’re just masturbating, and so rather than falsify their labors by producing applications that prove the utility of their plumbing they preserve the illusions and preserve their ignorance of application of that tech as a means of preserving their illusions (fantasies). We get paid for application tech, not invention tech.
Source date (UTC): 2018-04-30 09:27:00 UTC
-
Promiscuity and Markets
PROMISCUITY AND MARKETS (important post) Promiscuity breaks the compromise between male and female reproductive strategies and undermines the necessity of the family as the first organization (production of generations), in the hierarchy of cooperative organizations. The French and Italians solve the problem through the sacredness of the family and ‘graceful philandering’ by both genders. Whether you adopt the zero tolerance of the anglos or the high tolerance of the french, is a choice of higher or lower stress. When we think of ourselves as equal rather than opposites that are compatible, and adopt individualism rather than compromise, we achieve in the intergenerational social order, what we achieve in the socialist economy: an inability to calculate and cooperate, and a destruction of the intergenerational means of production.
-
Promiscuity and Markets
PROMISCUITY AND MARKETS (important post) Promiscuity breaks the compromise between male and female reproductive strategies and undermines the necessity of the family as the first organization (production of generations), in the hierarchy of cooperative organizations. The French and Italians solve the problem through the sacredness of the family and ‘graceful philandering’ by both genders. Whether you adopt the zero tolerance of the anglos or the high tolerance of the french, is a choice of higher or lower stress. When we think of ourselves as equal rather than opposites that are compatible, and adopt individualism rather than compromise, we achieve in the intergenerational social order, what we achieve in the socialist economy: an inability to calculate and cooperate, and a destruction of the intergenerational means of production.
-
PROMISCUITY AND MARKETS (important post) Promiscuity breaks the compromise betwe
PROMISCUITY AND MARKETS
(important post)
Promiscuity breaks the compromise between male and female reproductive strategies and undermines the necessity of the family as the first organization (production of generations), in the hierarchy of cooperative organizations.
The French and Italians solve the problem through the sacredness of the family and ‘graceful philandering’ by both genders.
Whether you adopt the zero tolerance of the anglos or the high tolerance of the french, is a choice of higher or lower stress.
When we think of ourselves as equal rather than opposites that are compatible, and adopt individualism rather than compromise, we achieve in the intergenerational social order, what we achieve in the socialist economy: an inability to calculate and cooperate, and a destruction of the intergenerational means of production.
Source date (UTC): 2018-04-29 08:23:00 UTC
-
THE HISTORY OF PILPUL Pilpul is the Talmudic term used to describe a rhetorical
THE HISTORY OF PILPUL
Pilpul is the Talmudic term used to describe a rhetorical process that the Sages used to formulate their legal decisions. The word is used as a verb: one engages in the process of pilpul in order to formulate a legal point. It marks the process of understanding legal ideas, texts, and interpretations. It is a catch-all term that in English is translated as “Casuistry.”
(CD: Casuistry means “Sophistry” or more specifically “clever but unsound reasoning, especially in relation to moral questions”.)
In order to maintain the distinction between the Written Torah — the Hebrew Bible — and the Oral Law, the Talmudic Sages conceived of the idea of pilpul as a means to join each Law to its Biblical prooftext.
The Ashkenazi rabbis saw pilpul as a substantive debate over the content of the Law rather than as a simple rhetorical matter. Their understanding of Talmudic pilpul took the form of a radical reinterpretation of the Law.
(CD: let’s repeat that: —“radical reinterpretation of the Law.”—)
“Reinterpretation” is actually a misleading term. More accurately one should ask what led them to read the Talmud, to perceive the Talmud, in a fashion which could be construed as a justification of the status quo.
(CD: let’s repeat that: —“..justification of the status quo.”—
The Ashkenazi rabbis were less concerned with promulgating the Law transmitted in the Talmud than they were with molding it to suit their own needs.
Pilpul was a means to justify practices already fixed in the behaviors of the community by re-reading the Talmud to justify those practices.
As if this was not enough, the Tosafists instituted one more pilpul principle into Talmudic discourse. This was called the Lav Davqa method. In English we might call it the “Not Quite” way of reading a text. When a text appeared to be saying one thing, the Tosafot — in order to conform to the already-existing custom — would re-interpret it by saying that what it seemed to mean is not what it really meant!
The Tosafist reading based on the Lav Davqa method completely transformed Judaism; the Ashkenazi tradition was the one that ultimately triumphed.
Pilpul occurs any time the speaker is committed to “prove” his point regardless of the evidence in front of him. The casuistic aspect of this hair-splitting leads to a labyrinthine form of argument where the speaker blows enough rhetorical smoke to make his interlocutor submit.
Reason is not an issue when pilpul takes over: what counts is the establishment of a fixed, immutable point that can never truly be disputed.
What is thought to be the Jewish “genius” is often a mark of how pilpul is deployed. The rhetorical tricks of pilpul make true rational discussion impossible; any “discussion” is about trying to “prove” a point that has already been established. There is little use trying to argue in this context, because any points being made will be twisted and turned to validate the already-fixed position.
Pilpul is the rhetorical means to mark as “true” that which cannot ever be disputed by rational means.
by David Shasha
Director, Center for Sephardic Heritage
Source date (UTC): 2018-04-28 14:13:00 UTC
-
ON THE CHURCH I think that people are easily confused between the the biblical s
ON THE CHURCH
I think that people are easily confused between the the biblical stories and our relation to god as absolutely horrific, and the church as a governing institution that developed and eventually implemented natural law.
The Aryan version of “church” is the military (militia) and the law. But with massive invasion, over extension, and the loss of military discipline, that church (cult) fell to an underclass cult of superstition, and the sequestering of literacy to obscure the pretense of knowledge.
Upon invasion by the vikings restoring militarism, and upon subsequent restoration of greek knowledge, and the development of printing, we escaped our dark ages, with the prussian state under frederick the most successful example of that restoration. And it resulted in the great intellectual leap of germans, the second industrial and scientific revolution in germany, and if not for the defeat of germany by the anti aryans (catholic france, all but catholic england, and orthodox russia, followed by Jewish (Soviet) Russia, Germany might have restored our ancient order to its full scientific and romantic pagan origins.
I view Chesterson, Evola, Kirk and the others, like Kant as catastrophic failures trying to restore and preserve the invasion rather than continue our rescue from semitic deceit and barbarism. The fact that they stumbled upon vague half truths now and then doesn’t really impress me. Instead, look at the artists of the late 19th, the thought of the late 19th, and the science and technology and german academy of the 19th.
Once you understand what makes the west is the militia and the oath and the feast, and that western man prohibited priests for very good reasons, requiring the aristocracy to perform the rituals instead, you understand how sick a disease is the church, and how it made us weak, and vulnerable, and remains our enemy.
The church rediscovered natural law via aristotle via the scholastics. The church had the opportunity to reform. It has failed us. It has abandoned us, and now it works aggressively against us. And the mental diseases that the church gave us are why we are vulnerable to the ambitions of marxism and the lies of postmodernism.
So, while we may need *A* church, in the sense that we need a sacred place – and the churches were intentionally located in our sacred groves – and while we may need history, advice, oath, and feast (the mass), we do not need lies, pilpul, and anything other than worship and appreciation of nature and our ancestors, from whom we can select hundreds of heroes to learn from, rather than a false god whose behavior is that of a demon, and whose consequences were our destruction and enslavement.
WE BEGIN AND END WITH THE MILITIA.
Source date (UTC): 2018-04-28 11:21:00 UTC
-
We Have The Opposite Problem
OUR STRATEGY IS LIMITED BY THE COMMAND AND CONTROL STRUCTURES When there is chaos the opportunist wins, which is why politicians do not operate like Trump, while entrepreneurs and soldiers do. In other words, we all use the strategy that our command and control structure tolerates. This is why democratic polities are a disaster. They are only even marginally possible in periods of windfall wealth and safety. Russians are exceptional at this technique, but they have very poor unit cohesion. We have the opposite problem.