I could give a similar lecture that would reduce economics to a science, and my claims would be obvious, and obviously true, and they would terrify the audience. In large part, economics is a pseudoscience that tries to circumvent the laws of the universe just as do philosophy and religion, when the underlying science is rather simple: The demographic composition and distribution of a people, the institutional sequence and time necessary to produce rule of law of natural law, by the incremental suppression of irreciprocity, resulting in the highest trust, least friction in an economy at whatever of level of effort (work hours) the population prefers in exchange for its standard of living (consumption). What’s the problem? markets perform natural selection if they can suppress reproduction of the unfit for markets, and democratic politics suppress natural selection until the population’s abilty to maintain pace with competitors eliminates the possibility of redistributions by investments in commons. In other words, the only long-term variable that maintains competitive advantage is human capital and the single most important human capital is the combination of intelligence and conscientiousness both of which are the result of neotenic evolution by natural selection for cooperation in increasingly complex markets. Or in simple form: economic science is and always will be limited to the measurement of the success of institutions in producing human capital by adherence to the logical, physical, behavioral, and evolutionary laws of the universe by the implementation of rule of law, markets, and meritocratic reproduction. Now try to sell that inescapable scientific law of the universe under democracy, the entire function of which appears to be to use fiat credit to evade the laws of the universe, and return us to Malthusian limits. That’s the science. So like I said, what we call positive economics is an attempt to cheat mother nature and it’s just never going to happen. The only economic science is like the law, negative: eliminating what we should NOT do.
Theme: Science
-
Defining Conservatism In Scientific Terms
CONSERVATISM UNDERSTOOD
1. A conservative questions the overestimation of reason, and above all questions consensus. Conservatism is familial, stoic, pragmatic, and empirical. In other words risk averse to capital.
2. As a means of questioning, a conservative requires reciprocity (tort): american < british < anglo saxon < germanic < european < norther indo european in law. That law evolved from the oath (tell the truth, never steal, never flee, in combat).
3. A Conservative requires ‘empirical’ results – and where empirical fails, the ‘traditional’ is adequate, since traditional survived empirical tests in competition in reality.
4. A Conservative accumulates genetic, cultural, normative, institutional, physical, and territorial capital – attempting to pass on to future generations of his family, more than he himself inherited.
5. Conservatism is a eugenic group evolutionary strategy that increases accumulated capital through intergenerational transfer, using intergeneration lending, in order to produce increasingly ‘noble’ families.
6. Ergo successful individuals in the market for craftsmanship, successful purchase of the franchise through military service, successful individuals in the market for marriage and child rearing, successful individuals in the market for industry, successful families in the market for noble (intergenerational) families.
7. In other words, conservatism(aristocracy) is a eugenic group evolutionary strategy. And while bipartite manorialism was practiced from 700, and aggressive hanging of up to 1% of the population every year after 1000, and an attempt to escape church-state nobility, and create an entrepreneurial nobility (meritocracy), succeeded by 1600, there was a great reaction to the english revolution, and a greater reaction to the french revolution. Thus while Locke,smith,hume,adams, and jefferson promised an aristocracy available to everyone, Burke, after the french revolution, and germans after that, recognized that the peasantry was even worse at rule (see russia) than the nobility.
The problem with today’s conservatism is that darwin and spencer were famous before the war, after the second world war, conservatism and eugenics were effectively banned from discourse, academy, and science.
As such conservatives never (until perhaps 2000) restored empirical discourse to conservatism, because eugenics are antithetical to the experiment with democracy. This changed incrementally beginning in 76, through the 80s, and aggressively since 2000, and more aggressively since 2008.
1 – Soveriengty requires reciprocity
2 – Reciprocity requires rule of law (tort), jury(thang, senate, house of lords, supreme court), and an independent judiciary.
3 – Rule of law forces markets, since it incrementally suppresses each innovation in parasitism.
4 – Markets cause hierarchies, because they are necessary to voluntarily organize production.
5 – Markets are eugenic, because they are empirical means of testing industry and impulse.
6 – But they make possible liberty for those with property, freedom for those who labor, and subsidy for those who impose no costs on sovereignty, liberty, freedom, or property.**
DOMESTICATION Man domesticated the human animal after he had learned to domesticate the non-human animal. And he did so by the same means. And the result in both domestication of the human and non human animal is the same: eugenics.
CONSERVATIVES Most conservatives do not write philosophy, they run businesses, or write history, economics, science, and law. (I write because I was successful enough in multiple businesses to spend my time writing full time.) Conservatives also are actively suppressed in academy and media.
This has been true since the end of the war and teh rise of the Frankfurt School, and the Postmodern school, both of which were necessary after the failure of marxist pseudoscience. (a pseudoscience marx died knowing, since he stopped writing as soon as he read the Mengerians, and kept silent only to keep the checks coming in from Engels.)
AUTHORS TO READ Burke, Hayek, Burnham, Sowell, Buchanan, Murray, and maybe Nietzsche. Veblen. (The essayists are nonsense) Anyone in Hoover or Heritage institutions.
READING LIST Propertarianism’s Reading List (https://propertarianism.com/reading-list/).
My reading list (above) contains most of the science we’ve been looking for, while the pseudosciences dominated the mid to late 20th century under the marxist-postmodernists.
Cheers
Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine.
-
Defining Conservatism In Scientific Terms
CONSERVATISM UNDERSTOOD
1. A conservative questions the overestimation of reason, and above all questions consensus. Conservatism is familial, stoic, pragmatic, and empirical. In other words risk averse to capital.
2. As a means of questioning, a conservative requires reciprocity (tort): american < british < anglo saxon < germanic < european < norther indo european in law. That law evolved from the oath (tell the truth, never steal, never flee, in combat).
3. A Conservative requires ‘empirical’ results – and where empirical fails, the ‘traditional’ is adequate, since traditional survived empirical tests in competition in reality.
4. A Conservative accumulates genetic, cultural, normative, institutional, physical, and territorial capital – attempting to pass on to future generations of his family, more than he himself inherited.
5. Conservatism is a eugenic group evolutionary strategy that increases accumulated capital through intergenerational transfer, using intergeneration lending, in order to produce increasingly ‘noble’ families.
6. Ergo successful individuals in the market for craftsmanship, successful purchase of the franchise through military service, successful individuals in the market for marriage and child rearing, successful individuals in the market for industry, successful families in the market for noble (intergenerational) families.
7. In other words, conservatism(aristocracy) is a eugenic group evolutionary strategy. And while bipartite manorialism was practiced from 700, and aggressive hanging of up to 1% of the population every year after 1000, and an attempt to escape church-state nobility, and create an entrepreneurial nobility (meritocracy), succeeded by 1600, there was a great reaction to the english revolution, and a greater reaction to the french revolution. Thus while Locke,smith,hume,adams, and jefferson promised an aristocracy available to everyone, Burke, after the french revolution, and germans after that, recognized that the peasantry was even worse at rule (see russia) than the nobility.
The problem with today’s conservatism is that darwin and spencer were famous before the war, after the second world war, conservatism and eugenics were effectively banned from discourse, academy, and science.
As such conservatives never (until perhaps 2000) restored empirical discourse to conservatism, because eugenics are antithetical to the experiment with democracy. This changed incrementally beginning in 76, through the 80s, and aggressively since 2000, and more aggressively since 2008.
1 – Soveriengty requires reciprocity
2 – Reciprocity requires rule of law (tort), jury(thang, senate, house of lords, supreme court), and an independent judiciary.
3 – Rule of law forces markets, since it incrementally suppresses each innovation in parasitism.
4 – Markets cause hierarchies, because they are necessary to voluntarily organize production.
5 – Markets are eugenic, because they are empirical means of testing industry and impulse.
6 – But they make possible liberty for those with property, freedom for those who labor, and subsidy for those who impose no costs on sovereignty, liberty, freedom, or property.**
DOMESTICATION Man domesticated the human animal after he had learned to domesticate the non-human animal. And he did so by the same means. And the result in both domestication of the human and non human animal is the same: eugenics.
CONSERVATIVES Most conservatives do not write philosophy, they run businesses, or write history, economics, science, and law. (I write because I was successful enough in multiple businesses to spend my time writing full time.) Conservatives also are actively suppressed in academy and media.
This has been true since the end of the war and teh rise of the Frankfurt School, and the Postmodern school, both of which were necessary after the failure of marxist pseudoscience. (a pseudoscience marx died knowing, since he stopped writing as soon as he read the Mengerians, and kept silent only to keep the checks coming in from Engels.)
AUTHORS TO READ Burke, Hayek, Burnham, Sowell, Buchanan, Murray, and maybe Nietzsche. Veblen. (The essayists are nonsense) Anyone in Hoover or Heritage institutions.
READING LIST Propertarianism’s Reading List (https://propertarianism.com/reading-list/).
My reading list (above) contains most of the science we’ve been looking for, while the pseudosciences dominated the mid to late 20th century under the marxist-postmodernists.
Cheers
Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine.
-
I’ve read enough that it’s the work of a manchild about one thousandth as sophis
I’ve read enough that it’s the work of a manchild about one thousandth as sophisticated as nietzche.
If you can’t do science of the day. You can’t make a narrative that uses it.
Source date (UTC): 2021-02-17 02:39:17 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1361867786075729921
Reply addressees: @TiAIjatLKoML4B5
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1361867126135431170
-
the square root of negative one isn’t a number it’s a function that compensates
the square root of negative one isn’t a number it’s a function that compensates for math’s conflation of quantity, position, and direction. So we have absolute value and square of negative one. “Magic!” An advanced civ would not use this ‘hack’, but disambiguate the signs.
Source date (UTC): 2021-02-17 01:48:49 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1361855087094677504
-
This brings up the central problem of the church’s claim for legitimacy of scrip
This brings up the central problem of the church’s claim for legitimacy of scripture is finality, instead of incremental progress of our knowledge of the universe (the mind of god) and our potential (role) in it. This is how islam died, and how christianity failed. Its fixable. https://twitter.com/AlbusDunadan/status/1361711612088958982
Source date (UTC): 2021-02-16 19:13:16 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1361755544487419905
-
In retrospect it’s easy to see all the pieces that made my work possible, the sa
In retrospect it’s easy to see all the pieces that made my work possible, the same way we can see all the pieces that made einstein’s work possible. And that all major innovations is three generations of thinkers beforehand. Same reason we get a Beethoven, Mozart, Bach. https://twitter.com/curtdoolittle/status/1361753823333777415
Source date (UTC): 2021-02-16 19:10:24 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1361754822060441602
https://twitter.com/curtdoolittle/status/1361753823333777415
-
Weather is a highly variable, noisy algorithm. We are in a global warm period be
Weather is a highly variable, noisy algorithm.
We are in a global warm period between glacials.
It is not yet clear that our effect on the climate is meaningful unless we fail to limit reproduction.
The real debate is over population quantity vs quality with climate as a proxy.
Source date (UTC): 2021-02-15 22:53:16 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1361448519467417606
Reply addressees: @JulieBorowski
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1361312310623678464
-
No I’m dealing with the universal problem of postwar pseudoscience consisting of
No I’m dealing with the universal problem of postwar pseudoscience consisting of pretense that regression to the mean is inescapable. A far deeper criticism than the limits of mathematics, and the use of the wrong calculus. De facto K’s do not account for all dependent capital.
Source date (UTC): 2021-02-15 18:14:22 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1361378331422314501
Reply addressees: @Lord_Keynes2
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1361376998254276609
-
Weather is a highly variable, noisy algorithm. We are in a global warm period be
Weather is a highly variable, noisy algorithm.
We are in a global warm period between glacials.
It is not yet clear that our effect on the climate is meaningful unless we reverse overpopulation.
The debate is over population quantity vs quality with climate as a proxy for it.
Source date (UTC): 2021-02-15 16:30:45 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1361352258672279559
Reply addressees: @JulieBorowski
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1361312310623678464