[A] lot of work on revolutions is just regurgitation of the American and french, both of which tell us little. And most is meaningless today.
For some background I would recommend these:
- Goldstone’s Short Introduction
- Goldstone’s Revolutions
- Brinton’s Anatomy of Revolution
- The IRA Handbook
- Search google for “revolutionary handbook” (most are there)
- Poole’s Tactics of the Crescent Moon
- Creveld’s The Culture of War
Culture is important because what you think is winning is what you feel is winning and what you feel is winning is a cultural norm NOT a truth.
(important piece on the form and content of philosophy)
Testimony vs Literature
Truth vs Experience
Criticism vs Free Association
Survival vs Creativity
Deflationary vs Conflationary
Clarify vs Obscure
Persuasion vs Suggestion
Decidability vs Opportunity
Decrease Cost vs Increase Cost
Save vs Spend
Action vs Consumption
Production vs Entertainment
Science vs Art
What is the difference between an action novel and a philosophical treatise? You are carried into the plot, vs the plot is carried into you.
But they are both literature.
That is all.
A recipe is different from a work of literature.
Science(Testimony) consists of the methods by which we create recipes and name them. Literature the methods by which we create experiences.
Communication, like violence, is a resource put to good or ill.
Whether we create fully informed, productive, warrantied voluntary exchanges free of externalities – meaning moral communication – or whether we create suggestion, unproductive or harmful, unwarranted, involuntary transfers full of externalities – meaning immoral communication.
And the fact remains that it is very difficult to communicate immorally with recipes, it is very easy to communicate immorally with literature.
Yet given that experience is our native language – one which evolved prior to reason – pedagogy is often best performed with loaded, framed, and repeated (overloaded) analogy.
There is a place for truth.
There is a place for pedagogy.
There is a place for creativity
The question we must ask of some philosophers is whether there is a place for immoral suggestion rather than moral communication.
And whether they transfer by moral or immoral means, immoral or moral ends.
The philosophy of the west is natural law, common law, testimony, jury, universal standing and rule of law (universal applicability). Science is the art of improving one’s testimony.
Everything else is merely literature.
The question is whether that literature conveys moral or immoral content, and does so morally or immorally.
And from that perspective, philosophers have a very checkered past.
The Philosophy of Aristocracy
The Propertarian Institute
[W]hen you switch from the conduct of pedagogy to science, justification to criticism, opportunity searching to error reduction, you see that philosophy has unjustifiably self congratulated itself quite a bit throughout history.
And when you find the central problem of epistemology is not improvement of your own meagre ability to produce ideas, but the detection of deception in the extraordinary ability of the collective to produce a market of ideas, then you treat the philosophical discourse very differently.
I have taken to assuming all philosophical statements are attempts at free riding, and that I must discover how they seek free riding.
This has become my current view of philosophy.
On the other hand it requires a catalog of human errors just as it requires a catalog of crimes, to practice the craft of prosecuting thought in the advancement of fraud.
[S]CIENCE REPLACES PHILOSOPHY
Existence (need for action)
Aesthetics (the sciences of experiences / experience / spirituality)
Testimony (the sciences of truth telling / knowledge / psychology)
Law (the sciences of cooperation / each other / sociology)
Engineering (the hard sciences / the universe / physics)
[M]ETHODS OF COMMUNICATION
Science (deflation). Names.
PHILOSOPHY IS COMPLETE
[G]reat progress on this problem of literature and deception that I have been struggling with for years.
I have these periods where I think I am not making progress, and then I make a great deal of progress in a few days. The periods where I make little progress are just records of the effort it takes to solve some of these problems.
Some of these problems are very hard. Which is why it takes generations to solve them.
I am sure rothbard would not appreciate what I have done. Hoppe isn’t going to love me any day soon. But it took us three generations to solve this problem. Each of us improving upon the last.
I could have moved much faster if Hoppe had given me some of his time. But I suspect the conceptual bridge would have been a bridge too far.
Unfortunately he was the only person worth talking to. So I had to do it almost all on my own. But with a little help from the Critical rationalists.
The critical rationalists are still mad at me.
But they were a necessary resource in the solution to the problem.
If I can’t bring them along, then I can’t. It’s not important.
[W]hy do we love myth, religion, literature, philosophy, so dearly and pursue history, science, and the various grammars (logics) of calculation with such reluctance?
The method of communication is experiential in the first and not so in the second.
Our mythology promises opportunities to free ride.
The truth does not.
[W]ishful thinkers all, we are easy prey for the literature of deceit whose plots promise free riding in a universe whose red queen we struggle to race. We long for suggestion. We long for entertainment. We long for respite that our Myths, Religion, Literature and philosophy provide for us. But we must not confuse fantasy with reality. When the curtains close, and the house lights rise, nature still awaits us.
[I] love Hoppe as an involuntary mentor and human being. But I had to reform (kill off) rothbardian libertarianism if I wanted to reunite conservatism (aristocracy) and liberty (anglo libertarianism)
A LIST OF HOPPE’S ERRORS
RENDERING ROTHBARD ARGUMENTATIVELY IMPOSSIBLE
MISES WORK IS A FAILURE TO DEVELOP ECONOMIC OPERATIONALISM
(Having an angry moment over “the big lies”.)
[B]efore the hebrew bible there were myths. But the invention of that history was the invention of lying. Its the invention of the big lie.
The battle between the cities in the ancient world is this:
Storytelling: Egypt (Memphis/Thebes?)
Let that sink in a bit.
Lying: The Ashkenazi Enlightenment
Storytelling: The French Enlightenment
Reason: The German Enlightenment
Truth: The anglo enlightenment
Let that sink in some more.
(by Eli Harman)
[A]dvanced civilization, with production and division of labor, is necessarily founded on property, which is a masculine innovation, the more private, the more masculine.
Property is that which you obtain and maintain at personal cost, and that which you are willing and able to defend. Property rights are a subset of that property that your peers are willing to ensure, just as law is a subset of morality.
Males evolved to specialize in the production of violence which sustains all property claims (and supply even the violence necessary to sustain communal forms of property in pre-civilized, matriarchal, societies.)
Patriarchy and private property originate in bands of men organized for aggressive conquest, and the subsequent necessity of dividing the spoils of conquest (land, goods, and women) between them, organizing them for production, and defending them henceforth.
Once unleashed on the world, patriarchal civilization proved unstoppable. And its advantages, in productivity, including but not limited to the production of violence, have only snowballed over time with the accumulation of capital and eugenic reproduction (made possible by restraining females’ dysgenic, egalitarian, tendencies.)
Recent innovations to the contrary, which are really just regressive throwbacks to the paleolithic, were only made possible because one patriarchal society, Western civilization, attained such a commanding lead over adversaries and antagonists, that our forefathers thought they could afford to indulge their women without limit. And for a while, we could. But the madness has gone exponential, and a century and a half of unchecked consumption and decay wrought by faulty egalitarian premises have brought our enemies, once more, near enough to parity that they may begin punishing us for our folly.
We will learn. Or we will die. But things will not continue as they were.
That it’s natural. That all human groups act in the interests of their kin. That people vote racially. They work in racial groups. They live in racial groups. They mate and marry in racial groups. They speak in racial groups.
All racial groups convey status because some groups are more desirable than others. That all those capable of escaping the lower classes of their racial groups rationally want to join in white culture so that they can have a better life, and that as such they want to limit racial discrimination. And that white middle and lower classes want to preserve their privileges by preserving the status of their elites from competition.
That race, religion, culture, tribe, gender are a part of life because they are meaningful differences because people act to their advantage at all times, and race, religion, culture, tribe and gender convey different advantages.
NO MORE LIES.
The century of pseudoscience and lying is over.
Kant, Boaz, Freud, Marx, Cantor, Mises, Frankfurt School, Rothbard, and the Postmoderns are just liars and pseudoscientists creating mythology of secular christianity that is the literary equivalent of science fiction and fantasy that provide the myth of pagan aristocracy.
It’s not complicated. Silly people in the ancient world believed in holy books. Silly people in the modern world believe in pseudoscientific books. But they’re both nonsense. Both lies.
The difference is that pagans and aristocracy know that science fiction and fantasy are just literature. The secular christians thought that mysticism was real. They think pseudoscience is real. They love propaganda. They love political correctness. They police speech that exposes their lies.
The fact that women are and the underclasses are vectors for mysticism and pseudoscience, and men and the middle classes are vectors for commerce, technology, and warfare shouldn’t be surprising.
Women and slaves spread the lies of mysticism in the ancient world. Women and the ‘slaves’ or underclasses spread the lies of pseudoscience in the modern world.
There is nothing even the least bit difficult to understand.
Wishful thinking is fertile ground for lies.
Lies are lies no matter how well you wrap them in story.
Stories are the perfect method for telling lies.
Why? Women invented gossip: stories. Men invented history.
- Coal mines, lumber, swamps. scandinavians.
- War era manufacturing on the lakes.
- Bridge = cheap land, ‘the sticks’. suburbia. very white.
- Tech boom (Microsoft), ‘ bizarre economy’, extreme wealth.
- Best city to live in in america because no viable underclass, highly educated upper middle class. too expensive for lower classes to move in. no underclass means of employment.
- Microsoft people are extremely dysfunctional because of the corporate culture and it leads to very strange social order that permeates the region.
Tech is useful because at present the cost of creating change requires the least capital of all other available options. Tech is still extremely disruptive. However, the desktop appears to have somewhat peaked, and the value of new handheld software appears to be close to peaking. The next disruption is when Apple must seek new revenue sources and must pursue the reformation of the desktop given the decades of failure by microsoft to do so. It appears very unlikely that the innovation that we anticipate: talking to machines, is anywhere on the horizon, despite drivel by the pop press.
Nordics do not practice socialism but very high levels of taxation and redistribution. They are highly capitalist economies. The reasons that they can achieve this state are that
- Northern europeans have been selectively eliminating the troublesome lower part of the gene pool for thousands of years (impulsivity and IQ under 80.) Cold weather, short summers, darkness, manorialism, lots of hanging, no immigration from north Africa, Levant, central Asia, steppe, or Asia to damage the gene pool.)
- These are very small countries.
- They have no diversity to create political conflict over redistributed wealth.
- They have no competitors on their borders to meaningfully defend against.
- They are bordered by near kin who have similar values and are not competitors.
- They are educated protestants exposed to Hanseatic and pre-Hansa cultures for many centuries.
- Northern european women have been able to use property and breed late for centuries.
(BTW: I get very tired of these fake questions dreamed up by paid workers in india in order to generate clicks.)
Isn’t 100 Million dead in one century because of a pseudoscientific economic and political system propagated by tyrants from the underclasses enough evidence? Isn’t India’s continued problem with ever-present corruption evidence?
How do you price the damage done by the soviets, the chinese, the southeast asians, the south americans, the hindus from these experiments with socialism?
The most capitalist societies provide the greatest benefits by redistribution.
The most socialist societies provide the worse benefits by redistribution.
THE ONLY PEOPLE TAUGHT ANYTHING ABOUT SOCIALISM?
Are liberal arts, and ‘extended high school’ students who are not smart enough to get into STEM classes. The kind of people who can learn by reading 100-120 IQ) but who are not smart enough to manage science (abstract empiricism). THe people who follow these mere literary believers in the sub-100 IQ space cannot be blamed. They cannot grasp these matters anyway. They imitate those that they understand.
Think of Socialism and Communism as a literary equivalent of Science Fiction and Fantasy (which constitute a libertarian movement). They are both nonsense extremes. The arose in nearly the same fashion at nearly the same times, as the myths of the new age. Socialism and communism the restatement of peasant christianity, and science fiction and fantasy the restatement of pagan aristocracy.
Rule of law under the common law under natural law, with which we suppress parasitism and free riding; the credit society under which our behavior is regulated more so by credit and job than by law and religion; and macro economics in which we attempt to stimulate production sufficiently to keep all employed; and finally genetic and cognitive science – are relatively scientific disciplines. They are not literary fantasies of socialism or science fiction.
Communism, socialism, and the myth of the horrid worker who chose the factory happily, willingly, and enthusiastically, over the subsistence of the farm, are all literary inventions. None of it is real. None of it happened.
Utopias always fail. Socialism and communism were the second attempt to spread a new religion – this time by pseudoscientific literature. The first time by religious mysticism in ancient era’s version of literature – myth.
Both have had nothing but evil consequences.
Why? Because only very stupid people believe them, and very stupid people can be led by them. Unfortunately, very stupid people make up more than half of the living population. In many countries they make up three to four fifths of the population.
We all seek justification of our reproductive strategies. The problem for the undesirable, unintelligent, and unproductive is that they are aware of their incompetence but must seek lies to justify their existences. It must be someone else’s fault. It cannot be that they are human waste products the result of dysgenic over reproduction, and the only reason they live is that we have petroleum products to keep them warm and feed them in winter… (ouch)
The Propertarian Institute
Like “meritocratic communism” it is either an impossibility, or a lie. Most likely a lie to cover an impossibility. Most such lies are created in order to perpetuate fraud by political means by making false moral appeals in an effort to avoid exchanging behavioral limitations for material rewards.
Libertarianism: universal individual ownership of property, and voluntarily constructed commons.
Socialism: Universal state ownership of property, and the involuntarily constructed commons, where bureaucratic or authoritarian leaders determine the assignments of work and the distribution of proceeds from the work – (which usually don’t end up existing) Socialism is a failed experiment.
Mixed economy: Involuntary organization of the production of commons using representatives who appropriate the proceeds of production. Plus the voluntary organization of production of goods and services which generates the proceeds that are later redistributed as commons. This is in practice the western model since voters demonstrably do not vote for policy but ideology.
Direct Economic/market Democracy: The voluntary organization of the production of commons by voting for desired commons with the contributions that one has produced. Combined with the voluntary organization of production of goods and services which generates the proceeds some portion of which are used to produce commons. In this model competitive commons are possible, and no monopoly commons are necessary. But competitive commons are class-weighted. This is an unlikely experiment except in small, very wealthy communities.
Direct Redistributive/Shareholder Democracy: The voluntary organization of the production of commons by voting a SHARE of the proceeds from a mixed economy. Combined with the voluntary organization of production of goods and services, which generates the proceeds some portino of which are used to produce commons. This means meritocratic contribution to commons but egalitarian decision of commons. In this model competitive commons are possible, and no monopoly commons are necessary. This is a likely next generation of Government since it eliminates the unnecessary conflcit of monopoly commons and eliminates the existence of politicians who engage in corruption.
We must organize cooperation (morality)
We must organize reproduction (family)
We must organize production (market)
We must organize commons (government)
We must organize a monopoly with which to hold our territory (military)
If you aren’t using these terms then you’re probably engaged in error or lie.
These rights we can observe humans demonstrate:
Constituo (homesteading / creation)
Usus (use of 3d space)
Fructus (consume the fruits of)
Mancipio (sale and transfer)
Abusus (destruction / conversion)
When we say ‘ownership’ we mean some subset of these properties. The limit on ownership is externalities. In other words, your use of a thing cannot harm another.
In almost no cases to we grant Abusus to land, water, air, knowledge, art, monument, norm and tradition. Even under slavery you can rarely kill a slave. Why? Because these things create externalities that affect others.
So most of the time when people say their ownership is limited, it is not the property that is limited but the consequences of use of that property.
All creatures that can move and remember tend to create and defend property: that which they have expended effort to acquire.
Property rights however are a product of organized cooperation. The purpose of property RIGHTS is this:
To reduce transaction costs in determining use. (reduce conflict)
To eliminate rent seeking from efforts at creating productivity.
To provide incentives to those who have local knowledge to make use of it in the service of others, through production and trade.
To provide constant punishment to free riders who are ever-present.
In other words, to create cooperation at scale in a division of labor in which none can seek rents and all must earn returns.
In order to accelerate consumption we borrow. In order to borrow others retain an interest. You are generally prohibited from Abusus, and your Mancipio is limited. And if you fail to pay off the lender you will gain back your rights of Mancipio. But rarely Abusus.
At all times you possess some subset of rights. in very few cases do you posssess all rights.
The current intellectual debate is whether it makes any sense at all to charge interest on home loans since this seems to be one of the the primary causes of inflation. Worse, it is such an important part of the american economy that most economists feel terror at the thought of interfering with it.
To say that the american economy is a house of cards, for this reason, is not too far off. Our primary source of wealth and our primary industry for two hundred years has been selling off the continent that we conquered to new generations and new immigrants.
This is our dirty little secret of how the american way of life is really funded.
It would look like a unicorn, a fairy tale, or a dystopian science fiction novel.
Communism is impossible for two related reasons: inability to calculate anything economic, and lack of availability of incentives. Communism is a farm for free ridership.
We have always had mixed economies and always will. Neither extreme is possible since under pure capitalism commons cannot be produced because incentives to produce them don’t exist, and under pure socialism production is impossible in no small part because incentives to produce don’t exist.
These two terms are also questionably dishonest. Capitalism refers to the voluntary organization of production of consumption and commons. Socialism to the involuntary organization of production of consumption and commons.
There is no state of post capitalism. It is possible that there is a form of pure contractualism available to us – and I am working on that solution.
But as long as women can bear children at will without certain to if the ability to support them or their eventual self support, then there will always be intolerable want.
The egalitarianism of Northern Europe was achieved through centuries of systemic eugenics under manorialism and its predecessors. And westerners do not like to admit this truth. They’d rather attribute their current luxury to the product of their character.
Hanjal line character is the product of dispassionate eugenics in all walks of life.
The early northern people delayed reproduction and outbred. The anglo Saxons starting in the Netherlands practiced manorialism. The rest of Europe hung half to one percent of the population every year as entertainment and constant suppression of the criminal underclasses. The peasantry was not oppressed – it was domesticated.
It is far more important for a people to eliminate the ‘Evil 80s’ from the population than it is to create genius.
This knowledge is the crisis of our age. mixed economies have won. There is no end to capitalism in the consumer economy and socialism in the commons economy.
Not as long as we are discussing humans.
People think and speak aware of race because people act aware of race.
- People vote as racial blocks. And therefore firm political competition for status and rent seeking.
- People associate in racial blocks.
- People work in racial blocks.
- People reside in racial blocks.
- Vast differences in reproductive desirability between races. And people mate in racial blocks except at the margins.
- Vast differences in the eugenic elimination of the evil 80s underclasses between racial blocks.
- Vast differences in criminality between the racial blocks.
- Significant differences in the abilities of racial groups because of the failure to suppress reproduction in the lower classes.
We are different. People are rational. They act rationally. Humans practice kin selection. They must. Or those that do practice kin selection will replace them.
Cooperation between families and tribes is only beneficial if each perceives a benefit. Otherwise instead of arguing against racism one is merely practicing war by a substitute of religion, rather than war by religion or war by violence.