Mar 29, 2020, 5:24 PM
I mean you have ‘act in imitation of jesus’ that’s as simple as it gets. You have the silver rule, and the golden rule second. You have reciprocity within the limits of proportionality third. After that you’re into supply and demand curves, and sorry, there is no dummies version.
Mar 31, 2020, 1:50 PM propertarianism.com MY WORK ON CHRISTIANITY I work under the principle that the laws of nature, the natural law of man, and the evolutionary necessity of transcendence are the same whether we state them in Theological, Philosophical, and Scientific language. So whether you intuit, think, and speak in the Christian, Deist, or Naturalist language, and whether you choose to adhere to physical laws, the natural law of man, and the necessity of evolutionary laws out of faith, reason, or science, is irrelevant to the individual or to the polity, or to mankind unless you selfishly demand the rest of the world conform to your way of thinking, speaking. On the other hand, if you do not live in accordance with the physical, natural, and evolutionary then you work against yourself, your polity, your people, and mankind – and when you do so, you work against the Christian God, the deist god, or the condition of our people past present and future. In my work, to defend against the enemies of physical, natural, and evolutionary laws, I must put these laws in a constitution in the language of the law, and science is the language of the law. Because we need people to think across the spectrum of intuitive, rational, and empirical thought so that we can solve intuitive, rational, and empirical questions, for intuitive, rational, and empirical minds. And we cannot demand people intuit, think, and speak in exclusively intuitive, rational, or empirical language. All we can do is demand that people behave according to physical, natural, and evolutionary laws. We cannot force people to have faith, reason, or the burden of the sciences, nor to abandon faith, reason, and the utility of the sciences. We can only write the law such that those who ACT contrary to the laws of nature, of man, and of evolutionary transcendence, can be prosecuted by the law, in the language of the law, if they transgress. Because the law consists only of the means of resolving disputes over action – not of intuition, feeling, or thought. REASON FOR CHRISTIAN AGITATION Over the past few years I have worked very hard on comparative religion, and have come to understand why we desire it and how it fulfills those desires by a spectrum of means from the rational to the emotional. I was trying to solve a number of problems:
I care only about the generations of our european religions. Including prehistoric natural, ancient heroic, and medieval Christian. And I care about preserving all three generations of them because of one of our unspoken secrets: european trifunctionalism. When christians use this method of teaching and arguing against me or my work it makes me very angry – because I understand that this method is the means by which our civilization has been destroyed by the postwar jewish movement against western civlization. And I this threat is very real, very serious, and we are almost lost. So between my investigation into how to eliminate the abrahamic method of teaching and arguing, and between my frustration with the frequent use of this method by christians who were agitated by my investigation, I created a great deal of friction between the faithful, philosophical, and empirical Christians.
I want to restore the religion to its political competition to the state, and restore its responsibility for birth, age of maturity, marriage, family and – at least – early education, and death. The state has proven too fashionable and religion’s value is in defense against the fashions and folly of the age.
These three challenges are the reason for the conflict we have created between those of us who practice empirical christianity in the natural law, and those that practice spiritual and theological christianity. I advocate that we speak faith in matters of faith – the spirit, and law in matters of law – the material. And that if we attempt to cross those lines we must engage in deceit. And deceit is neither moral under the natural law, or moral under christian ethics. So we must continue our prehistoric practice of Trifunctionalism, which is the continuous balance of power between the Military, Law, and Faith. And in short, deliver unto God and Caesar each as his due. There is no place for theology in court. There is no place for court in faith. ABOUT EUROPEAN TRIFUNCTIONALISM
Mar 31, 2020, 1:50 PM propertarianism.com MY WORK ON CHRISTIANITY I work under the principle that the laws of nature, the natural law of man, and the evolutionary necessity of transcendence are the same whether we state them in Theological, Philosophical, and Scientific language. So whether you intuit, think, and speak in the Christian, Deist, or Naturalist language, and whether you choose to adhere to physical laws, the natural law of man, and the necessity of evolutionary laws out of faith, reason, or science, is irrelevant to the individual or to the polity, or to mankind unless you selfishly demand the rest of the world conform to your way of thinking, speaking. On the other hand, if you do not live in accordance with the physical, natural, and evolutionary then you work against yourself, your polity, your people, and mankind – and when you do so, you work against the Christian God, the deist god, or the condition of our people past present and future. In my work, to defend against the enemies of physical, natural, and evolutionary laws, I must put these laws in a constitution in the language of the law, and science is the language of the law. Because we need people to think across the spectrum of intuitive, rational, and empirical thought so that we can solve intuitive, rational, and empirical questions, for intuitive, rational, and empirical minds. And we cannot demand people intuit, think, and speak in exclusively intuitive, rational, or empirical language. All we can do is demand that people behave according to physical, natural, and evolutionary laws. We cannot force people to have faith, reason, or the burden of the sciences, nor to abandon faith, reason, and the utility of the sciences. We can only write the law such that those who ACT contrary to the laws of nature, of man, and of evolutionary transcendence, can be prosecuted by the law, in the language of the law, if they transgress. Because the law consists only of the means of resolving disputes over action – not of intuition, feeling, or thought. REASON FOR CHRISTIAN AGITATION Over the past few years I have worked very hard on comparative religion, and have come to understand why we desire it and how it fulfills those desires by a spectrum of means from the rational to the emotional. I was trying to solve a number of problems:
I care only about the generations of our european religions. Including prehistoric natural, ancient heroic, and medieval Christian. And I care about preserving all three generations of them because of one of our unspoken secrets: european trifunctionalism. When christians use this method of teaching and arguing against me or my work it makes me very angry – because I understand that this method is the means by which our civilization has been destroyed by the postwar jewish movement against western civlization. And I this threat is very real, very serious, and we are almost lost. So between my investigation into how to eliminate the abrahamic method of teaching and arguing, and between my frustration with the frequent use of this method by christians who were agitated by my investigation, I created a great deal of friction between the faithful, philosophical, and empirical Christians.
I want to restore the religion to its political competition to the state, and restore its responsibility for birth, age of maturity, marriage, family and – at least – early education, and death. The state has proven too fashionable and religion’s value is in defense against the fashions and folly of the age.
These three challenges are the reason for the conflict we have created between those of us who practice empirical christianity in the natural law, and those that practice spiritual and theological christianity. I advocate that we speak faith in matters of faith – the spirit, and law in matters of law – the material. And that if we attempt to cross those lines we must engage in deceit. And deceit is neither moral under the natural law, or moral under christian ethics. So we must continue our prehistoric practice of Trifunctionalism, which is the continuous balance of power between the Military, Law, and Faith. And in short, deliver unto God and Caesar each as his due. There is no place for theology in court. There is no place for court in faith. ABOUT EUROPEAN TRIFUNCTIONALISM
Mar 31, 2020, 2:38 PM by Daniel (or Dan) McCoy Georges Dumézil was a twentieth-century comparative mythologist like Joseph Campbell or Carl Jung. Dumézil’s primary contribution to Indo-European studies was his theory of “trifunctionalism,” the idea that a particular arrangement of three societal “functions” lay at the heart of Indo-European life and thought. This arrangement manifested itself most straightforwardly in the social hierarchy, which consisted of three classes that corresponded to the three functions. However, as the word “function” implies, the three classes were distinguished not just according to differing quantitative amounts of power, but also qualitatively in terms of the “functions” that each of the three groups served within society. The Indo-Europeans’ gods, too, were organized into this trifunctional structure. What, then, are these three functions? The first function is that of sovereignty, and corresponds to the highest social class – that of rulers, priests, and legal specialists. This function is divided into two aspects, one “magical” and the other “juridical.”[2] The former “consists of the mysterious administration, the ‘magic’ of the universe, the general ordering of the cosmos. This is a ‘disquieting’ aspect, terrifying from certain perspectives. The other aspect is more reassuring, more oriented to the human world. It is the ‘juridical’ part of the sovereign function.”[3] The Indo-Europeans’ gods of the first function tend to include one god who falls into each of these two categories. One is a “magician-creator” who rules “by virtue of [his] creative violence,” while the other is a “jurist-organizer” who rules “by virtue of [his] organizing wisdom.”[4] The two types of sovereign gods form an “antithesis,” but complement one another rather than being in conflict.[5] The second function “carries the trait of physical force in all its manifestations, from energy, to heroism, to courage.” Its “insatiable champions… vanquish demons and save the universe.”[6] In human society, the second function is the class of warriors, who carry out the orders of the first class and fight on behalf of their people. The gods of the second function are warriors whose intellectual abilities are inferior to those of the first, but who possess the necessary strength to actually put the decisions of the intellectual gods into action. The third function “is the generative function. It is the domain of the healers, of youth, of luxury, of fecundity, of prosperity; also the domain of the healing gods, the patron deities of goods, of opulence – and also of the ‘people,’ as opposed to the small number of warriors and kings.”[7] The third function’s human social class consists of the farmers, herders, and other “common people” engaged in productive physical labor, who provide the goods necessary for the sustenance of themselves and of the rest of society. Its gods are those who preside over fertility, abundance, and peace. They tend to be simple but wealthy and fun-loving. For Dumézil, “The Indo-European vision of a smoothly functioning world required an ‘organization’ in which the representatives of the first function commanded, the second fought for and defended the community, and the third (the greatest number of them) worked and were productive. In their eyes, it was in this hierarchy that one found the harmony necessary to the proper functioning of the cosmos, as well as that of the society. It’s an Indo-European version of the ‘social contract.’”[8] Although a similar social organization can be found in various non-Indo-European societies, what makes the Indo-European concept distinct is just how foundational and pervasive it was in their worldview, theology, cosmology, mythology, and political philosophy. It touched every aspect of their way of life and their outlook on life.[9]
Mar 31, 2020, 2:38 PM by Daniel (or Dan) McCoy Georges Dumézil was a twentieth-century comparative mythologist like Joseph Campbell or Carl Jung. Dumézil’s primary contribution to Indo-European studies was his theory of “trifunctionalism,” the idea that a particular arrangement of three societal “functions” lay at the heart of Indo-European life and thought. This arrangement manifested itself most straightforwardly in the social hierarchy, which consisted of three classes that corresponded to the three functions. However, as the word “function” implies, the three classes were distinguished not just according to differing quantitative amounts of power, but also qualitatively in terms of the “functions” that each of the three groups served within society. The Indo-Europeans’ gods, too, were organized into this trifunctional structure. What, then, are these three functions? The first function is that of sovereignty, and corresponds to the highest social class – that of rulers, priests, and legal specialists. This function is divided into two aspects, one “magical” and the other “juridical.”[2] The former “consists of the mysterious administration, the ‘magic’ of the universe, the general ordering of the cosmos. This is a ‘disquieting’ aspect, terrifying from certain perspectives. The other aspect is more reassuring, more oriented to the human world. It is the ‘juridical’ part of the sovereign function.”[3] The Indo-Europeans’ gods of the first function tend to include one god who falls into each of these two categories. One is a “magician-creator” who rules “by virtue of [his] creative violence,” while the other is a “jurist-organizer” who rules “by virtue of [his] organizing wisdom.”[4] The two types of sovereign gods form an “antithesis,” but complement one another rather than being in conflict.[5] The second function “carries the trait of physical force in all its manifestations, from energy, to heroism, to courage.” Its “insatiable champions… vanquish demons and save the universe.”[6] In human society, the second function is the class of warriors, who carry out the orders of the first class and fight on behalf of their people. The gods of the second function are warriors whose intellectual abilities are inferior to those of the first, but who possess the necessary strength to actually put the decisions of the intellectual gods into action. The third function “is the generative function. It is the domain of the healers, of youth, of luxury, of fecundity, of prosperity; also the domain of the healing gods, the patron deities of goods, of opulence – and also of the ‘people,’ as opposed to the small number of warriors and kings.”[7] The third function’s human social class consists of the farmers, herders, and other “common people” engaged in productive physical labor, who provide the goods necessary for the sustenance of themselves and of the rest of society. Its gods are those who preside over fertility, abundance, and peace. They tend to be simple but wealthy and fun-loving. For Dumézil, “The Indo-European vision of a smoothly functioning world required an ‘organization’ in which the representatives of the first function commanded, the second fought for and defended the community, and the third (the greatest number of them) worked and were productive. In their eyes, it was in this hierarchy that one found the harmony necessary to the proper functioning of the cosmos, as well as that of the society. It’s an Indo-European version of the ‘social contract.’”[8] Although a similar social organization can be found in various non-Indo-European societies, what makes the Indo-European concept distinct is just how foundational and pervasive it was in their worldview, theology, cosmology, mythology, and political philosophy. It touched every aspect of their way of life and their outlook on life.[9]
Curt Doolittle 1st November 2018 at 6:08 pm It’s a very simple difference. Agency vs Submission. Heathens (Pagans in the pejorative) in western civilization are imagined heroes in competition with the spirits(dead), non-humans(green man, primitive man), demigods(powerful but mortal), and gods (powerful and immortal), and can, by effort and cunning outwit them – or – negotiate (bribe) them. This is a universal artifact of the conquest and replacement of european peoples by the westward expansion of the indo-europeans (Yaman, Corded ware et al) and their Militaristic, Expansionist, Sky Worshipping, Metalsmithing, business of profiting from the domestication of animal man, with horse, bronze, wheel and their very visible power over nature. It is a religion of agency not submission. Demand for a “religion of empires” increases with the distribution of peoples under rule, and the group strategies of those people under rule, and the compatibilities of those group’s strategies under such a universal rule. The semitic methodology of INVERTING the aristocratic (western) ethos by converting the bible of greco roman civilization (iliad of homer) which occupied the vast majority of writings in the greco roman period, with a ‘hero’ of ‘submission and resistance’ was an interesting strategy by which the vast underclasses of the old european (byzantine), and greco-anatolian, syrian levantine world could create a resistance movement by the cultural destruction of their superiors, Just as the Marxists (Marx, Boas, Freud, Cantor, Mises, Adorno et al, Rothbard, and the neocons) repeated 1700 years later (monopoly marxism of private property, monopoly marxism of common property, monopoly marxism of identity-property (culture)). The Semitic method of undermining was as successful in the Modern world (undermining colonialism) as it was in the ancient world (undermining colonialism). False promise of salvation after death. False promise of economic salvation. False promise of cultural (identity) salvation. The method of using sophism (false promise + sophism (Pilpul) + Straw Manning (Critique) is in fact a successful method of undermining a civilization that is overwhelmed by overextension, and profiting from overextension through commerce, and the dependence of commerce at international scales on trust. Christianity succeeded because trade collapsed in europe after (a) undermining by jewish-christian vanguard, (b) enforcement by byzantine (old world, greek) defeat of rome, and (c) collapse of world trade under arab-muslim expansion, (d) and the eventual consumption of all capital of the great civilizations of the ancient world, and the destruction of all those civilizations as a consequence. So, as trade and knowledge increased, europeans gradually (expectedly) extracted themselves from Semitic superstition, the church’s’ monopoly on information and literacy, the 50% of dead capital in europe under the church. and the corruption of the church as a monopoly federal government selling false receipts of salvation the way the current academy sells false diplomas. Given that the remains of Christianity are what leave us vulnerable to Semiticism (abrahamic monotheism, marxism-socialism-postmodernism-feminism, and the use of false promise, sophism, straw-manning, and the discount on disapproval, shaming, ridicule, moralizing, rallying as a substitute for truthful (scientific, rational) argument. It is only logical that the aristocratic right in Europe (using literary philosophy, moralism, and history) and aristocratic right in the States (using law and, economics, and science) should produce arguments to restore our native religion of the hearth to one that is heroic and expansionary rather than submissive and assisting in our surrender. Nothing in human behavior or history is difficult. It’s all simple. Once you understand that nearly all use of language is simply means of lying in order to obtain discounts on the acquisition of the power to alter the probability of outcomes in one’s favor. And all we do is search for narratives to echo (script). Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine
Curt Doolittle 1st November 2018 at 6:08 pm It’s a very simple difference. Agency vs Submission. Heathens (Pagans in the pejorative) in western civilization are imagined heroes in competition with the spirits(dead), non-humans(green man, primitive man), demigods(powerful but mortal), and gods (powerful and immortal), and can, by effort and cunning outwit them – or – negotiate (bribe) them. This is a universal artifact of the conquest and replacement of european peoples by the westward expansion of the indo-europeans (Yaman, Corded ware et al) and their Militaristic, Expansionist, Sky Worshipping, Metalsmithing, business of profiting from the domestication of animal man, with horse, bronze, wheel and their very visible power over nature. It is a religion of agency not submission. Demand for a “religion of empires” increases with the distribution of peoples under rule, and the group strategies of those people under rule, and the compatibilities of those group’s strategies under such a universal rule. The semitic methodology of INVERTING the aristocratic (western) ethos by converting the bible of greco roman civilization (iliad of homer) which occupied the vast majority of writings in the greco roman period, with a ‘hero’ of ‘submission and resistance’ was an interesting strategy by which the vast underclasses of the old european (byzantine), and greco-anatolian, syrian levantine world could create a resistance movement by the cultural destruction of their superiors, Just as the Marxists (Marx, Boas, Freud, Cantor, Mises, Adorno et al, Rothbard, and the neocons) repeated 1700 years later (monopoly marxism of private property, monopoly marxism of common property, monopoly marxism of identity-property (culture)). The Semitic method of undermining was as successful in the Modern world (undermining colonialism) as it was in the ancient world (undermining colonialism). False promise of salvation after death. False promise of economic salvation. False promise of cultural (identity) salvation. The method of using sophism (false promise + sophism (Pilpul) + Straw Manning (Critique) is in fact a successful method of undermining a civilization that is overwhelmed by overextension, and profiting from overextension through commerce, and the dependence of commerce at international scales on trust. Christianity succeeded because trade collapsed in europe after (a) undermining by jewish-christian vanguard, (b) enforcement by byzantine (old world, greek) defeat of rome, and (c) collapse of world trade under arab-muslim expansion, (d) and the eventual consumption of all capital of the great civilizations of the ancient world, and the destruction of all those civilizations as a consequence. So, as trade and knowledge increased, europeans gradually (expectedly) extracted themselves from Semitic superstition, the church’s’ monopoly on information and literacy, the 50% of dead capital in europe under the church. and the corruption of the church as a monopoly federal government selling false receipts of salvation the way the current academy sells false diplomas. Given that the remains of Christianity are what leave us vulnerable to Semiticism (abrahamic monotheism, marxism-socialism-postmodernism-feminism, and the use of false promise, sophism, straw-manning, and the discount on disapproval, shaming, ridicule, moralizing, rallying as a substitute for truthful (scientific, rational) argument. It is only logical that the aristocratic right in Europe (using literary philosophy, moralism, and history) and aristocratic right in the States (using law and, economics, and science) should produce arguments to restore our native religion of the hearth to one that is heroic and expansionary rather than submissive and assisting in our surrender. Nothing in human behavior or history is difficult. It’s all simple. Once you understand that nearly all use of language is simply means of lying in order to obtain discounts on the acquisition of the power to alter the probability of outcomes in one’s favor. And all we do is search for narratives to echo (script). Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine
Unfortunately it’s a means of social construction of falsehoods by use of virtue signal spirals. In other words it’s how christianity, judaism, islam were spread and how marxism, neo-marxism, postmodernism, feminism, human difference denialism was spread: The Religions of Deceit. https://twitter.com/DegenRolf/status/1264037336813318146
Source date (UTC): 2020-05-23 11:35:57 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1264158121834024960
Unfortunately it’s a means of social construction of falsehoods by use of virtue signal spirals. In other words it’s how christianity, judaism, islam were spread and how marxism, neo-marxism, postmodernism, feminism, human difference denialism was spread: The Religions of Deceit.
Source date (UTC): 2020-05-23 11:34:20 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1264157712260173824
Reply addressees: @DegenRolf
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1264037336813318146
Apr 1, 2020, 2:54 PM Over the past few years I have worked very hard on comparative religion, and have come to understand why we desire it and how it fulfills those desires by a spectrum of means from the rational to the emotional. I was trying to solve a number of problems:
I care only about the generations of our european religions. Including prehistoric natural, ancient heroic, and medieval Christian. And I care about preserving all three generations of them because of one of our unspoken secrets: european tripartism and trifunctionalism. When christians use this method of teaching and arguing against me or my work it makes me very angry – because I understand that this method is the means by which our civilization has been destroyed by the postwar jewish movement against western civlization. And I this threat is very real, very serious, and we are almost lost. So between my investigation into how to eliminate the abrahamic method of teaching and arguing, and between my frustration with the frequent use of this method by christians who were agitated by my investigation, I created a great deal of friction between the faithful, philosophical, and empirical Christians.
I want to restore the religion to its political competition to the state, and restore its responsibility for birth, age of maturity, marriage, family and – at least – early education, and death. The state has proven too fashionable and religion’s value is in defense against the fashions and folly of the age.
These three challenges are the reason for the conflict we have created between those of us who practice empirical christianity in the natural law, and those that practice spiritual and theological christianity. I advocate that we speak faith in matters of faith – the spirit, and law in matters of law – the material. And that if we attempt to cross those lines we must engage in deceit. And deceit is neither moral under the natural law, or moral under christian ethics. So we must continue our prehistoric practice of Tripartism and Trifunctionalism, which is the continuous balance of power between the Military, Law, and Faith. And in short, deliver unto God and Caesar each as his due. There is no place for theology in court. There is no place for court in faith.