(on writing style)(via pm)(with a friend)

As the guys tell me, I tend to write for a cognitive elite, and it seems that it takes about a 130 IQ to understand it.

Our strategy group for the past five years has been for me to work out all the fine details then hope the guys like you translate it for the masses.

I try but I just don’t think I can talk tot he masses. I think in very … granular(?) terms. In my mind I’m talking about identity, math, logic, programming, and operational law. And that is just … alien to the mass of humanity that was raised upon myth, literature, and history. (the narrative.)

I feel my job is to create the equivalent of the Frankfurt School, or the Jesuits, the Inquisition, and create a hundred and then a thousand people who can argue natural law.

I would rather enjoy starting a revolution and getting that job done. But I think others will do that job better than I will.

I would love it if I could reach the masses through speech.

I would love it if I could write novels and stories as the literature of natural law – even though the Iliad and the Odyssey, the greek and roman myths, the rings of the Nibelungelied, the tales of Arthur and the Carolingians, or the story of Colonialism, and now the great heroic task that is before us, are probably sufficient and tested narrative.

I’m just one guy. I’m in my 50s. I’ve been seriously ill multiple times, and had a possibly lethal amount of radiation. I have a product in development for many years which I must work on at the same time as the philosophy. Both are taxing. The purpose of the product is to fund me (and others) in taking it to its conclusion: the ‘bible’ of western civilization beyond which no man or government may tread: the cult of non-submission: the philosophy of aristocracy: sovereignty, and its ‘scripture’: natural law.