( I hate conflict. I hate gender conflict. I fk–ing hate race conflict. And most of all I hate religious conflict. Competition, particularly signal competition creates conflict. the only solutions are nation states or regression to the bottom. empires are self destructive. They give opportunity to the worst of everything. )
Races, Subraces, Tribes, Clans, Families and Classes can interbreed, but differences matter. The primary differences are the degree of neoteny (white and east asian) vs deeper maturity (semites, iranics, africans, and australoids), the more feminine or masculine structure of the brain (yes really), and the size of the underclass due largely to winter climates, manorial farming, and close cohabitation in winters while caring for animals. (Or in the european and chinese cases, aggressive use of criminal punishment – particularly european hanging of large portions of the underclasses every generation).
Using size of class, degree of neoteny or maturity, and balance of masculine and feminine traits, each of the Races, Subraces, an sometimes Tribes, has evolved (adapted) for certain excellences that are geography, climate, means of production, and method of socialization dependent.
Human domestication like animal domestication, uses neotonic selection to suppress sexual maturity and preserve the features and cooperative intuitions of youth. The goal for any polity is to increase intelligence, industriousness, and trust. Counter to our assumptions the San (the oldest continuous tribe) were more gentle, and humans appear to have become increasingly AGGRESSIVE in some regions and increasingly GENTLE in other regions, which is easily measurable by group testosterone distributions, rates and ages of maturity, and ‘hardiness’ of features (deeper maturity). By the upward redistribution of reproduction (china, europe, and jewish) you increase the distribution of neoteny in the public largely by the reduction of rates of reproduction of the underclasses. The simple fact is that many people are a harm to their fellows simply because they are a drag on norms, laws, traditions, values, and institutions, literacy, technology, and the work force capacity – perhaps most importantly making a sufficient middle class to produce a voluntary organization of possible impossible, and forcing the dependence upon familial corruption (india, south america, south europe, all of islam) despite access to trade routes.
THE OPTIMUM POLITICAL ORDER
The optimum political order is homogenous – diversity is always and everywhere bad for obvious and well documented reasons. It trades short term profits for long term costs that destroy the political order and reduce it to levantine, south american, and indian levels of poverty and corruption.
The optimum political order is Small – The only value of scale military power to exploit others. The only value of federations is to produce defense of trade routes and prohibit rent seeking (corruption) on those trade routes.
THE EUGENICISTS WERE RIGHT.
And any group of size (the east asians) who succeed will leave the rest of the world behind. The europeans managed by the late middle ages to nearly eliminate their underclasses. This is why european intelligence is dropping (the flynn effect is reversing). Not because of individuals. But because of restoration of their underclasses. If Norway can lose IQ (they have) then any group can.
Smarter people are more moral – simply because they can afford to be.
“NO MORE LIES”
The curse of postmodern pseudoscience in most of the other answers. Postmodernism like Marxism was designed, like Abrahamic Religions, as an attack on European Peoples (civilization), to eradicate our civlization in the modern world just as Abrahamic religion was used to eradicate the five great civilizations of the ancient world: Roman New Europe), Byzantine (old europe), Anatolian, Persian (Iranic), Egyptian, and North African. All those civilizations were destroyed by the last attempt at cultural destruction.
Why? Marxism/Postmodernism in the modern world, and Abrahamic Religion in the ancient world foster dysgenic rapid reproduction of the underclasses reversing genetic domestication under small farm mixed agrarianism, effectively weaponizing reproduction and ignorance and superstition against civilization.
There are reasons that the Han, Koreans,Japanese and Europeans succeeded and other civilizations failed to maintain rates of innovation. The reason is that the Han, Koreans and Japanese remained insular and homogeneous, and whites succeed as long as they also remain homogeneous and practice eugenic reproduction through manorialism (meritocracy).
The rest of the world did the opposite and the sizes of their underclasses pose such a burden that they cannot produce sufficient middle and upper classes to produce high trust commercially successful political orders.
Again. Let me help you. A TEMPLE was a BANK. That’s why.
Don’t be daft. Moneychanging (converting between currencies, storing money, lending money at interest), was a terribly important function given the diversity of monies used – today that function is provided by central banks and larger commercial banks, and travel currency exchanges. In the ancient world the roman treasury used ‘agents’ the way we use these banks. (I prefer the agents model and want to eliminate consumer banks as they are known today.) The problem was that the people at some temples took abusive advantage of the poor. When Romans invaded Judea they established their temples and their money changers. This competition prevented the Jewish priests from charging high rates at their temples. And so they sought marginal cases to charge usurious rates. This is what jesus was rebelling against: the abuse of the poor. The complete story is never stated. The fact that Jews specialize in usurious lending to those who cannot afford, or lend into moral hazard, predates their introduction to europe – it is the original occupation of their priesthood.
The abrahamic, marxist-feminist-postmodernist struggle against white man. Versus the classical and modern struggle against nature.
It’s no wonder they created ignorance and stagnation wherever they went.
Of the four major races: Negroid, Australoid, Mongoloid, and Caucusoid, we tend to use the term ‘Caucasian’ to refer to Europeans, because that’s the only choice the government gives us on our surveys.
To be accurate it should be northern european (atlantic-germanic) eastern european (slavic), southern european(mediterranean), old european(balkans), anatolian european (greek, sardinian, boot of italy). Iranic, semitic, turkic. and so on.
This is more important in america because we have had a civil war over race and we are very close to having another.
The Romanticists almost did it. We can easily produce a Revival of Classicism. We will have to rid ourselves of hostile subversives and traitors through either separatism or repatriation.
As I said elsewhere, the market for leadership will supply leaders. We must lead one another to sufficient numbers that leadership in that market can emerge.
I agree with the ‘sentiment’ of the Mannerbund narrative, but I express it as ‘it all begins with the militia’, and the militia functions on the brotherhood of warriors. I disagree with the Social Matters / Mannerbund in that the fact that our civilization begins there, does not mean it is SUFFICIENT to defeat enemies, or that much can be made of that ‘feeling’ alone. What binds people are incentive to bind with one another.
Many of you are seeking the sense of safety and power in the pack and the restoration of our institutions of brotherhood throughout society due to the intentional destruction of them by the deconstructionists in marxism, femininsm, postmodernism, who exploit a ready willingness in our female population to defect by sh-t testing us.
But you are making the mistake of an intuitionistic bias that is VERY RARE, instead of providing MAJOR incentives (military, political, economic, personal wealth, agency, status, and a plan to get there you are searching in the dark for emotional support, rallying without resources to do so.
Those institutions of brotherhood are the last good we will achieve, not the first. They are a premium achieved for having worked to obtain military, political, economic, wealth, status benefits.
Men will REPORT affiliation for sentiments.
Men will DEMONSTRATE conviction for material rewards.
The feeling of safety of the pack comes only from the shared experience of working as a pack to produce an outcome which provides an alternative to the present, yet promises only chaos because of an ABSENCE OF VISION.
I do not operate from your perspective but work backward to achieve that emotion through demonstrated action together by the use of incentives to achieve material success.
The answer to our problem is to provide an actionable plan the end result is mannerbund.
That actionable plan is a means of altering the status quo such that POSSIBLE demands are met.
One does not defeat a fortress by direct attack, but by starving it. One does not threaten potential allies but pays them off. One does not create incentives for defenders of the fortress by promises of suffering, but promising them returns.
Once the fortress is won, the holdouts must be flayed and salted and hung from the walls for their crimes.
All revolutions are suspect in prospect but deterministic in retrospect.
It’s time to win.
—“The (((leftist))) response to Western truth telling is to insist that literally no knowledge can be known at all. It is only from this subjective reality that their mental poison can take root.”— Joseph Smith
Just as females sew doubt and undermine any change in direction that includes any risk, and promises anything other than an immediate effortless windfall that requires no trust between parties.
—“Christianity is so subversive that, according to Nietzsche, that even Luther’s rebellion in trying to stop Christianity’s worst excesses…actually cemented Christian predominance for a few more centuries as the Catholic Counter-Reformation to Luther’s Reformation strangled the revival of Classicism that was beginning in Renaissance Italy”—Nick Dahlheim
—“Here’s how a typical speeding ticket (in this case a ticket from Indiana that we paid though our Traffic Justice Program) is divvied up:
State Courts: $49.00
County Courts: $18.90
City Courts: $2.10
Law Enforcement Fee: $4.00
Jury Fee: $2.00
Highway Work Zone: $0.50 (??)
Auto Record Keeping Fee: $7.00
Document Storage Fee: $2.00
Infractional Judgments: $99.50 The fine!
Public Defense Administration Fee: $3.00
Judicial Insurance Adjustment: $1.00
Judicial Salaries Fee: $18.00: Do you think murderers and rapists pay this fee too?
DNA Sample Processing Fee: $2.00 Very common service for traffic tickets.
Court Administration Fee: $5.00
Total Cost Of Ticket: $214.00
Traffic tickets are the mother’s milk of the court system. Thousands of judges rule on traffic cases knowing full well that guilty verdicts pay their salary, fund their retirement systems, and build their courthouses.
This should help explain why average traffic ticket recipients start out with two strikes against them when they enter traffic court. The court system just can’t afford to offer real justice. If it did it would drown in its own workload and go broke in the process.”—-
If I teach you to stand at attention, put your hand over your heart, and speak the pledge of allegiance to our flag, or teach you to speak the lords prayer (a pledge of allegiance) while kneeling, hands clasped, and both actions, once habituated, fill us with ‘a sense of peace’ when performed as a group, what is the difference?
The central issue is this: we need those collective rituals to invoke the pack response which generates intuitionistic trust among superpredators who do not necessarily trust one another, and who compete in all other walks of life OTHER than the ritual. Those oaths to a proxy of each other are useful to associate with that response.
As a test of agency (man) vs the lack of it (animal) reason, science, and law does demarcate those of us who are fully human from those of us who are still principally animal. We are not equal. Speech does not qualify one as human no matter how sophisticated the parrot.
The fundamental problem is producing submission to the pack (piety) when the leadership of the pack is just as much of a bunch of bitchy whiny egoistic a–holes as you are. Hence idealistic third party proxies, OR monarchies. My preference is monarchies backed by judges and warriors. They’re not false. And they tend to subsidize the arts and letters.
Religion just means ‘education’. The problem is we understand physical ed, intellectual ed, and vocational ed, but only the stoics understood education of intuition in a disciplined fashion. The only ‘evil’ method of educating intuition that was invented was abrahamism.
Religion is just education in intuition. The question is what is the method of educating our intuitions such that we demonstrate positive rather than negative externalities?
Left Weak Herd vs Right Strong Pack
by John Mark
Left (the weak): The strong should invest in us (allow/enable us to consume beyond what we are able to earn in reciprocity).
Right (the strong): That’s a bad investment. It will drag us all down.
Left (the weak): You are evil.
Right (the strong): No, we’re just wise. And we’re just better than you.
(War ensues.) (The only way the Right loses the war is if they refuse to use force – rule of law etc. – to suppress the Left’s theft.)
Religion: what we can get away with? (mysticism),
Philosophy: what I can get away with? (sophism),
Science: What we can’t get away with (warranty).
Law: What you can’t get away with (liability).
—“People cherry-pick data according to the narrative their instinct causes them to embrace.) It just so happens that the right-wing instinct builds civilization and the left instinct destroys it.”— John Mark
––“Invention of mass media led to explosion of sophism. Add in social media so you can see what everybody is thinking, and it becomes clear – most people are just operating on instinct. Even most right-wingers. (What Haidt points out is readily observable. People cherry-pick data according to the narrative their instinct causes them to embrace.) It just so happens that the right-wing instinct builds civilization and the left instinct destroys it. Point is, this modern explosion of sophism (leftists overloading the discourse via mass media) hasn’t actually changed the underlying dynamic, which is the same as in the previous battles between the two instincts.”— —John Mark
1) “Priests” had no doctrine only obligatory rituals (the japanese ritual model). The monarchy originally performed the rituals, then appointed patricians, but the duty was separated under the republic because of scale. All that I know of were a variation on sacrifice (contract).
2) To equate “the performance of ritual”, when it was not required they even understand the words they spoke, only that they performed the ritual precisely, with ‘priesthood’ as ‘a competitor to the state’ or means of state sponsored deception, is more than a mischaracterization.
3) A professional priesthood in the sense I use it (education in doctrine under pretense of divine authority) as a competitor to the state (see Huntington’s history mesopotamia) rather than archetypes and anthropomorphic instantiations of nature, was an import.
4) Alexander should be heralded for his techniques and cursed for his introduction of semitism and supernaturalism to old europe. Thankfully the romans were as skeptical of those religions as they were of greek sophisms.
5) once you start looking at history as the battle between western truth and law for aristocracy and it’s domestication of animal man, and semitic occultism and sophism for the expansion of production by the underclasses, the cycles of history are much more obvious.
6) Masculine western truth, duty, reciprocity, and empirical law, eastern masculine hierarchical and empirical bureaucracy, and semitic feminine fictional rule of flood river production. Everything comes back to geography, climate, means of production, and degree of neoteny.
Whites CAN create commons so they prefer to create commons and live off them.
Commons are difficult to produce but they are cheap given the returns. Producing a high trust civic polity does not require high income. it just requires truth, duty, trust, and reciprocity.
Quality of life is not expensive. It just requires choice of commons rather than choice of material consumption.
—“If police investigations were run by capitalist philosophy, would the poor get adequate justice?”—
THE CORRECT ANSWER
Police investigations already are capitalistic. They balance the market for tolerance with crime rates with the market for taxes to pay for the suppression, prosecution, and punishment of crimes. The cost of the externalities of physical crimes are far smaller than the cost of the externalities of clerical and informational crime. The distrust produced by physical crime is greater than the distrust created by clerical and informational crime.
The problem for the poor is that they have worse ABILITIES and worse PERSONALITIES, and even worse HABITS than their working, middle, and upper class peers, and therefore low sexual, social, economic, and political value to other people. Hence, they are poor. They have nothing to trade. And worse, even interacting with them forces others to bear the cost of doing so.
We ended the period of stagnant human capital by the middle of the last century. That is why IQ’s are declining. We are now reversing gains of modernity by increasing the rates of reproduction of the underclasses by suppressing the rates of reproduction of the middle classes through tax extraction.
by Martin Štěpán
I understand the cycle of civilizations is that the decadence/decline phase is characterized by inflating various bubbles such as misandry bubble (feminism), underclass bubble (subsidy of the reproduction of the unemployed), immigration bubble and so on and due to their interconnectedness, they all pop at the same time which is when civilization ends.
This could be avoided if we manage to pay the costs upfront (such as letting the unemployed die out and giving up potential economic benefits of immigration).
The standard of decidability in philosophy is excuse making (justificationism).
The standard of decidability in law is malincentive, evidence, and warranty. (less well articulated as Means, motive, opportunity, and evidence)
NO MORE LIES:
1) SCIENCE = LAW,
2) PHILOSOPHY = SOPHISM,
3) THEOLOGY = FICTIONALISM
Science consists of performing due diligence such that we can warranty our testimony in operational terms each of which is testable by the audience (jury). In other words, science (which emerged out of western customary law) In science we attempt to falsify until only truth existentially possible candidates remain.
Philosophy as the term is used, and as the consists of justificationism. It is an attempt to bridge the legal(scientific), and Imaginary (fictional). Just as theology is an attempt to exit the legal(scientific). In other words, both philosophy and theology seek to circumvent the demand for testimony.
Law/Science (falsification) > Philosophy (justification) > Theology justificationary fictionalism).
In other words, you either practice law or your practice sophism (fraud) or you practice fictionalism (lying).
The question is, if you can’t state your testimony in legal (scientific) language, then you either don’t know what you’re talking about or your lying for one reason or another, because you CAN’T DO OTHERWISE.
The resurrection was added much later and copied from a babylonian source. There are no records of testimony from the period, nor records of his existence. We know the origin of the three days narrative, and we know the origin of the rising from the dead narrative. These were added later by other authors. Saul (Paul) made up most of it, from what was possibly a real person who was rebelling against the use of the temple to raise more money – the roman occupation and the introduction of roman gods meant that temple revenues had decreased rapidly, so the priests were ‘drumming up new business’ and it seems likely some zealot rebelled and was imprisoned and killed for it. But there are no ‘testimonies’ and every pretense of testimony we have appears to be a fabrication.
NATURALISM contains Science, Math, History, and LIterature, and Demonstrates Reciprocity, with man a risen beast making ‘deals’ with nature and the gods.
SUPERNATURALISM contains Magic, and Demonstrations of submission, with man a fallen angel, begging forgiveness from a despot.
It is just clear that Heathens (non-abrahamics) in the ancient world and ‘pagans’ (post-Abrahamics) in the modern world were thousands of times more effective than Abrahamists, who by and large manufactured ignorance and superstition, causing the Abrahamic Dark Age of ignorance and dragging every civilization it touched into collapse.
The purpose of a Sophism is to overload your reason such that you must appeal to intuition for decidability. And intuition is even more negatively biased than our cognitive biases.