You don’t understand.
Sovereignty is decidable.
The first cause of western civ is this decidability – a feature that no other has.
Source date (UTC): 2018-04-13 23:50:00 UTC
Theme: Sovereignty
-
You don’t understand. Sovereignty is decidable. The first cause of western civ i
-
But the origins of roman and common law traditions are the same: germanic sovere
But the origins of roman and common law traditions are the same: germanic sovereignty, and empirical resolution of disputes over property by reciprocity.
Source date (UTC): 2018-04-12 23:08:12 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/984568898233225216
Reply addressees: @Eric_Eibergen @TheAustrian_
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/984564916987351040
IN REPLY TO:
Original post on X
Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/984564916987351040
-
Untitled
Source date (UTC): 2018-04-07 18:17:00 UTC
-
Hence Why Europeans Need Their Empire of Nation States Under Our Own “White”: Natural Law
—“Our field’s fixation on the Westphalian state has tended to obscure the fact that the main actors in global politics, for most of time immemorial, have been empires rather than states … In fact, it is a very distorted view of even the Westphalian era not to recognize that it was always at least as much about empires as it was states. Almost all of the emerging European states no sooner began to consolidate than they were off on campaigns of conquest and commerce to the farthest reaches of the globe… Ironically, it was the European empires that carried the idea of the sovereign territorial state to the rest of the world…”— Burbank and Cooper -
Hence Why Europeans Need Their Empire of Nation States Under Our Own “White”: Natural Law
—“Our field’s fixation on the Westphalian state has tended to obscure the fact that the main actors in global politics, for most of time immemorial, have been empires rather than states … In fact, it is a very distorted view of even the Westphalian era not to recognize that it was always at least as much about empires as it was states. Almost all of the emerging European states no sooner began to consolidate than they were off on campaigns of conquest and commerce to the farthest reaches of the globe… Ironically, it was the European empires that carried the idea of the sovereign territorial state to the rest of the world…”— Burbank and Cooper -
—“Are China And Russia Military Allies?”—
CHINA HAS NO ALLIES, ONLY DEPENDENTS **China has no allies. She only has dependents.** This principle is central to east asian thought. There are no equals. In all circumstances someone is superior and another is subordinate. When confucius could not solve the problem of politics he directed all men to organize into a paternal hierarchy, from the emperor on down to the new born child. When chinese history says ‘middle kingdom’ they mean ‘the center of the world’ with them at the top. Chinese thought requires the preservation of harmony – meaning non disruption of the status hierarchy. Even if that means doing everything possible to avoid speaking the truth. Chinese strategy, is to delay and deceive, while building up offensive and defensive capability, until a competitor can no longer even negotiate, but simply obey. This is a very paternal model of thought. It is not necessarily a bad one, for the simple reason that chinese pursuit of harmony, and parenting is somewhat grounded in their (rather questionable) morality. That said, they will kill millions of their own happily if necessary, and have far less regard for human life than westerners (or indo europeans in general) do or can even imagine. So no, **China has no allies, she has only enemies, subordinates, and candidate subordinates.** This is all you really need to understand about Chinese policy, culture, and civilization. Just as heroism sovereignty, reciprocity and truth are all you need to understand the west. In this sense we are not very compatible civilizations.
-
—“Are China And Russia Military Allies?”—
CHINA HAS NO ALLIES, ONLY DEPENDENTS **China has no allies. She only has dependents.** This principle is central to east asian thought. There are no equals. In all circumstances someone is superior and another is subordinate. When confucius could not solve the problem of politics he directed all men to organize into a paternal hierarchy, from the emperor on down to the new born child. When chinese history says ‘middle kingdom’ they mean ‘the center of the world’ with them at the top. Chinese thought requires the preservation of harmony – meaning non disruption of the status hierarchy. Even if that means doing everything possible to avoid speaking the truth. Chinese strategy, is to delay and deceive, while building up offensive and defensive capability, until a competitor can no longer even negotiate, but simply obey. This is a very paternal model of thought. It is not necessarily a bad one, for the simple reason that chinese pursuit of harmony, and parenting is somewhat grounded in their (rather questionable) morality. That said, they will kill millions of their own happily if necessary, and have far less regard for human life than westerners (or indo europeans in general) do or can even imagine. So no, **China has no allies, she has only enemies, subordinates, and candidate subordinates.** This is all you really need to understand about Chinese policy, culture, and civilization. Just as heroism sovereignty, reciprocity and truth are all you need to understand the west. In this sense we are not very compatible civilizations.
-
—“If you were the President, and you wanted to destroy America’s power in the world and unity as a nation, what would you do?”—
This assumes American power is good thing (empirically, we have pretty much always been wrong in every single conflict). And it assumes it’s not a good idea to withdraw from the burden of continuing the British Empire’s network of finance and trade despite having dragged humanity kicking and screaming out of ignorance, poverty, and disease in the face of competition from marxism, communism, socialism, and its modern variation: islam. We are no longer asymmetrically advantaged either technologically, economically, or militarily, and we have even lost our demographic superiority through vast underclass immigration. So while the minds of children make moral and emotinoal judgements, those of us who have adult minds make empirical judgemnts. The answer is pretty simple: we can’t finance the world transformation from superstition to empiricism any longer because enough of the world has adopted our aristotelianism (empiricism, science, technology, law, markets) that it has been costing us quality of life since the 70’s. in other words, VIRTUE SIGNALING SO THAT YOU FEEL GOOD ABOUT YOURSELF IS NO LONGER AFFORDABLE. But to answer the question: I would create power vacuums as did Obama and Carter rather than demand vacuums be filled by depriving other countries of subsidies. But this requires you understand not only economics, but capital. And strangely enough, mainstream (saltwater) economics, does not measure capital changes, only consumption.
-
—“If you were the President, and you wanted to destroy America’s power in the world and unity as a nation, what would you do?”—
This assumes American power is good thing (empirically, we have pretty much always been wrong in every single conflict). And it assumes it’s not a good idea to withdraw from the burden of continuing the British Empire’s network of finance and trade despite having dragged humanity kicking and screaming out of ignorance, poverty, and disease in the face of competition from marxism, communism, socialism, and its modern variation: islam. We are no longer asymmetrically advantaged either technologically, economically, or militarily, and we have even lost our demographic superiority through vast underclass immigration. So while the minds of children make moral and emotinoal judgements, those of us who have adult minds make empirical judgemnts. The answer is pretty simple: we can’t finance the world transformation from superstition to empiricism any longer because enough of the world has adopted our aristotelianism (empiricism, science, technology, law, markets) that it has been costing us quality of life since the 70’s. in other words, VIRTUE SIGNALING SO THAT YOU FEEL GOOD ABOUT YOURSELF IS NO LONGER AFFORDABLE. But to answer the question: I would create power vacuums as did Obama and Carter rather than demand vacuums be filled by depriving other countries of subsidies. But this requires you understand not only economics, but capital. And strangely enough, mainstream (saltwater) economics, does not measure capital changes, only consumption.
-
HENCE WHY EUROPEANS NEED THEIR EMPIRE OF NATION STATES UNDER OUR OWN “SHARIA”: N
HENCE WHY EUROPEANS NEED THEIR EMPIRE OF NATION STATES UNDER OUR OWN “SHARIA”: NATURAL LAW
—“Our field’s fixation on the Westphalian state has tended to obscure the fact that the main actors in global politics, for most of time immemorial, have been empires rather than states … In fact, it is a very distorted view of even the Westphalian era not to recognize that it was always at least as much about empires as it was states. Almost all of the emerging European states no sooner began to consolidate than they were off on campaigns of conquest and commerce to the farthest reaches of the globe… Ironically, it was the European empires that carried the idea of the sovereign territorial state to the rest of the world…”— Burbank and Cooper
Source date (UTC): 2018-04-04 21:46:00 UTC