Because it does work *IF* the voters share a common interest in taking individual responsibility for the self, others, the commons and institutions including institutions of cultural production, AND are limited by the rule of law by the natural law of sovereignty and reciprocity.
Source date (UTC): 2023-04-18 20:20:42 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1648421313726537729
Reply addressees: @TomKawczynski
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1648419977991688193
(ironic humor)
Working on Natural Rights Obligations and Inalienations:
Me: “We do good work together.”
Brandon: “Not many people want to disambiguate the differences between punishment, abuse, and torture.”
Source date (UTC): 2023-04-18 15:00:52 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1648340826899054594
😉 Funny how everyone thinks I’m talking about them when I remind the team about maintaining decorum – despite the temptation social media puts on all of us. We are not in the position, as are most think tanks, academics, politicians, and media personalities where we can’t discuss the difficult questions. But to do so we must use P-Law, Logic, and Grammar to make truthful statements explaining causality and consequence – often in the face of ad hominem attacks. The only way we will continue to successfully educate via social media and increase our numbers is by resonably rigorous disciplinen of ourselves and each other.
In other words, the enemy has only one strategy (undermining) and tactic (baiting into hazard). So don’t take the bait. 😉
Reply addressees: @RobOU812Rob
Source date (UTC): 2023-04-18 13:29:36 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1648317858923905025
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1648315488387170304
😉 Funny how everyone thinks I’m talking about them when I remind the team about maintaining decorum – despite the temptation social media puts on all of us. We are not in the position, as are most think tanks, academics, politicians, and media personalities where we can’t discuss the difficult questions. But to do so we must use P-Law, Logic, and Grammar to make truthful statements explaining causality and consequence – often in the face of ad hominem attacks. The only way we will continue to successfully educate via social media and increase our numbers is by resonably rigorous disciplinen of ourselves and each other.
In other words, the enemy has only one strategy (undermining) and tactic (baiting into hazard). So don’t take the bait. 😉
Source date (UTC): 2023-04-18 13:29:36 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1648317859053928448
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1648315488387170304
RT @LukeWeinhagen: @Moms4Liberty @KBVMD Children’s lives are property, of themselves. Parents are stewards of that property, investors in t…
Source date (UTC): 2023-04-17 20:54:39 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1648067470157049857
Quite the opposite.
SHORT LIST OF FEMALE MEANS OF ANTISOCIAL BEHAVIOR, EVADING RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE COMMONS WHILE HIDING BEHIND MORAL PRETENSE
CAUSE: Evasion of responsibility for the common but demand for control of the commons, externalizing consequential responsibility to males.
Industrialize the sale and distribution of false promises by the tactics of by means of:
Denial
1. Dismissal of the Evidence, History, Argument, Incentives, Norm, or Tradition
2. Evading providing a competitive, equally criticizable and testable alternative.
3. Equating Desirability-Undesirability and Approval-Disapproval or Denial with Truth and Falsehood
4. Face-Before-Truth rather than European truth-before-face, or threat to the dominance or competence hierarchy.
4. NAXALT – “Not All X Are Like That” – Denying a general rule describing a distribution is false because there are some cases at the tails.
Undermining by Ad Hominem (GSRRM)
Consisting of:
1. Poisoning the Well (Polluting the Informational Commons)
2. GSRRM:
… denial
… disapproval,
… outraging
… ridicule,
… shaming,
… moralizing,
… psychologizing,
… rallying,
… gossiping,
… reputation destruction
… and Social Construction
Creating Plausible Deniability
1. Hiding Behind Moral Pretense
2. Hiding behind Voluntary Choice
3. Hiding behind Sympathy for Hyper consumption (experiences)
4. Hiding Behind (Selective) Evasion of Responsibility
5. Heaping Undue Criticism (Persecution) and Undue Praise (personalizing)
Fraud by: Claiming Oppression by individuals as a proxy for laws of nature, or conversely claiming false promise of possibility of evading the laws of nature:
1. False Promise of Freedom from Formal Laws (logic, truth) by the use of social construction of repetitive feedback of information counter to formal, physical, natural, and evolutionary laws.
2. False Promise of Freedom from Physical Laws (scarcity, false promise of endless growth). by the false promise of endless growth, an end to scarcity, and an end to human competition by demonstrated acquisition.
3. False Promise of Freedom Natural Laws (of self-interest, rational choice, amorality, reciprocity, competitive organization), by the false promise of an end to kin selection, koinophillia, ethnocentrism, sex, class, subrace, and racial differences, and the sexual, social, economic, and political value of organization by ethnocentrism given the class, subrace, and subrace differences in sexual, social, economic, and political value to one another, given the substantial evolutionary difference between the races and subraces.
4. False Promise of Freedom from Evolutionary Laws ( ending natural, and market selection, accumulating mutation and regulation, the impossibility of isolation, inescapable regression, accumulated genetic load, dysgenia, and the red queen of resources, competitors, biological, climatological, geological, solar, and galactic risks. ).
Using “Storytelling” by:
1. Faith Healing, delaying into hazard. Faith Healing consists of providing temporary psychological relief while allowing the cause to persist, grow, and evolve.
2. False Story Telling, baiting you into empathy, loading, framing, obscurantism, suggestion, suspension of disbelief and overloading.
3. False Promise, baiting into hazard. Baiting into hazard consists of making false promises of freedom from the laws of the universe. arguing them with sophistry to idealism, magic to pseudoscience, or occult to theology.
4. False Criticism, undermining into hazard.
5. Duplicitous, Double Standard, Irreciprocal, and Poly Logical Ethics, like their polylogical unequal laws,
Escalating from the least burdensome to the most burdensome tactic:
1. Faith healing at every opportunity (lie and deny)
2. Selling false promise if they can (fraud)
3. Evading or silencing at every necessity (shaming, moralizing, psychologizing)
4. Undermining if they have opportunity to (sedition)
5. Attack if they can get away with it (de-platforming, conspiracy)
6. Hiding behind plausible deniability of freedom of choice (non-coercion)
he opposite.
Reply addressees: @WomanPissedoff
Source date (UTC): 2023-04-17 20:13:37 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1648057143289958421
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1648045661147877415
Quite the opposite.
SHORT LIST OF FEMALE MEANS OF ANTISOCIAL BEHAVIOR, EVADING RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE COMMONS WHILE HIDING BEHIND MORAL PRETENSE
CAUSE: Evasion of responsibility for the common but demand for control of the commons, externalizing consequential responsibility to males.
Industrialize the sale and distribution of false promises by the tactics of by means of:
Denial
1. Dismissal of the Evidence, History, Argument, Incentives, Norm, or Tradition
2. Evading providing a competitive, equally criticizable and testable alternative.
3. Equating Desirability-Undesirability and Approval-Disapproval or Denial with Truth and Falsehood
4. Face-Before-Truth rather than European truth-before-face, or threat to the dominance or competence hierarchy.
4. NAXALT – “Not All X Are Like That” – Denying a general rule describing a distribution is false because there are some cases at the tails.
Undermining by Ad Hominem (GSRRM)
Consisting of:
1. Poisoning the Well (Polluting the Informational Commons)
2. GSRRM:
… denial
… disapproval,
… outraging
… ridicule,
… shaming,
… moralizing,
… psychologizing,
… rallying,
… gossiping,
… reputation destruction
… and Social Construction
Creating Plausible Deniability
1. Hiding Behind Moral Pretense
2. Hiding behind Voluntary Choice
3. Hiding behind Sympathy for Hyper consumption (experiences)
4. Hiding Behind (Selective) Evasion of Responsibility
5. Heaping Undue Criticism (Persecution) and Undue Praise (personalizing)
Fraud by: Claiming Oppression by individuals as a proxy for laws of nature, or conversely claiming false promise of possibility of evading the laws of nature:
1. False Promise of Freedom from Formal Laws (logic, truth) by the use of social construction of repetitive feedback of information counter to formal, physical, natural, and evolutionary laws.
2. False Promise of Freedom from Physical Laws (scarcity, false promise of endless growth). by the false promise of endless growth, an end to scarcity, and an end to human competition by demonstrated acquisition.
3. False Promise of Freedom Natural Laws (of self-interest, rational choice, amorality, reciprocity, competitive organization), by the false promise of an end to kin selection, koinophillia, ethnocentrism, sex, class, subrace, and racial differences, and the sexual, social, economic, and political value of organization by ethnocentrism given the class, subrace, and subrace differences in sexual, social, economic, and political value to one another, given the substantial evolutionary difference between the races and subraces.
4. False Promise of Freedom from Evolutionary Laws ( ending natural, and market selection, accumulating mutation and regulation, the impossibility of isolation, inescapable regression, accumulated genetic load, dysgenia, and the red queen of resources, competitors, biological, climatological, geological, solar, and galactic risks. ).
Using “Storytelling” by:
1. Faith Healing, delaying into hazard. Faith Healing consists of providing temporary psychological relief while allowing the cause to persist, grow, and evolve.
2. False Story Telling, baiting you into empathy, loading, framing, obscurantism, suggestion, suspension of disbelief and overloading.
3. False Promise, baiting into hazard. Baiting into hazard consists of making false promises of freedom from the laws of the universe. arguing them with sophistry to idealism, magic to pseudoscience, or occult to theology.
4. False Criticism, undermining into hazard.
5. Duplicitous, Double Standard, Irreciprocal, and Poly Logical Ethics, like their polylogical unequal laws,
Escalating from the least burdensome to the most burdensome tactic:
1. Faith healing at every opportunity (lie and deny)
2. Selling false promise if they can (fraud)
3. Evading or silencing at every necessity (shaming, moralizing, psychologizing)
4. Undermining if they have opportunity to (sedition)
5. Attack if they can get away with it (de-platforming, conspiracy)
6. Hiding behind plausible deniability of freedom of choice (non-coercion)
he opposite.
Source date (UTC): 2023-04-17 20:13:37 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1648057143784886280
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1648045661147877415
Demonstrated feminine relativism.
Responsibility evasion for truth that might cause self-regulation of instinct by reason – women avoid self regulation at all times because emotion MUST drive their behavior because evolution discovered rationality is incompatible with the raising of high-cost offspring for long periods. Therefor female emotionality temporality and irresponsibility for the commons regardless of the truth or falsehood is endemic. 🙁
Source date (UTC): 2023-04-17 18:23:56 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1648029544320778240
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1648028518889009153
Demonstrated feminine relativism.
Responsibility evasion for truth that might cause self-regulation of instinct by reason – women avoid self regulation at all times because emotion MUST drive their behavior because evolution discovered rationality is incompatible with the raising of high-cost offspring for long periods. Therefor female emotionality temporality and irresponsibility for the commons regardless of the truth or falsehood is endemic. 🙁
Reply addressees: @DiceCookPlate @RobOU812Rob @terrilbruce @GregAbbott_TX
Source date (UTC): 2023-04-17 18:23:56 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1648029544241065988
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1648028518889009153
Excellent.
See the problem of ‘utils’ in econ, and now we have the problem of ‘responsibilities’ in behavioral econ and law. 😉
–It’s a shame we can’t put a number on responsibility the way we do prices of commodities.”– Green Graciano https://twitter.com/GracianoGreen/status/1647855099962707969
Source date (UTC): 2023-04-17 06:54:17 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1647855986768588803
https://twitter.com/GracianoGreen/status/1647855099962707969