¿De qué manera ha sido deshonesta la civilización occidental? Nuestra civilización no está libre de pecado.
Ninguna civilización realmente entiende sus estrategias grupales de evolución. Pero nosotros podemos hacer el intento de comprender la nuestra.
Cuando los arios combinaron el bronce, la rueda y el caballo, lograron cubrir grandes distancias con velocidad. Se arriesgaron, y el caballo, la carreta y las armaduras eran costosas. Pero le permitían a los hombres ser depredadores de otros hombres así como defenderse de otros hombres. Así que los hombres utilizaron esta tecnología con fines militares para expandir su dominio desde la China Occidental hasta España.
Resulta que si los hombres son militarmente capaces de desarrollar una casta guerrera profesional, capturar y conquistar territorio y esclavizar a habitantes primitivos de los territorios conquistados para ponerlos a trabajar, eso resultó ser una industria rentable. Pero solo un subgrupo de la población es apto para ser gobernado de una manera costo-efectiva y con bajo riesgo.
Así que mientras las tribus consanguíneas habían tolerado amplias variaciones en personalidades, sus gobernantes no lo toleraron, y encontraron a los más problemáticos, agresivos y la más constante persecución de las partes más aisladas, los gobernantes lograron con el hombre lo que lograron con los perros, cerdos, vacas y caballos: la domesticación progresiva del hombre animal.
La esclavitud es costosa, eres responsable de todos los costos, incluida la servidumbre. Y sólo se toman las ganancias de alguna parte del proceso del trabajo del esclavo. Cuando se toman parte de esas ganancias y se les paga, se utiliza el crédito fiduciario de manera dilucional para otorgarles a los ex-esclavos-ahora empleados el poder de consumo y capturar las verdaderas ganancias de su producción.
Así que con el pasar de los siglos nuestros ancestros han combinado el ahorcar desde el 1% hasta la mitad de la población de forma anual, retrasar la tasa reproductiva y limitar la reproducción con el señorío, duros inviernos para matar de hambre a los débiles y flojos, se libraron guerras de forma consuetudinaria con la promesa de obtener botín, y la conspiración de la Iglesia para debilitar a las clases inferiores a finales de la edad media. Eso logró que la población europea fuera la progenie de la clase media genética.
El cristianismo proveyó poco más que la excusa para justificar a los arios: La industria por la cual la clase marcial domestica a los hombres para su ganancia. Esto fue seguido por el yugo del hombre blanco- el restablecimiento del ideal ario en términos de la moralidad. Lo cual fue seguido por el proyecto americano- el restablecimiento del ideal ario en términos heroicos. Lo cual fue seguido por el humanismo democrático secular de la postguerra- un restablecimiento de la cristiandad en términos seculares. Y ahora la tendencia más reciente es el neo-conservadurismo: un restablecimiento del judaísmo en términos arios.
Ahora démosle la vuelta esto y digamos que porque hemos domesticado al hombre, hemos mantenido el tripartidismo, practicado el gobierno descontrolado para cada clase, y creado mercados para todo, la ley común natural, una definición eterna de la verdad, hemos arrastrado a la humanidad de su ignorancia, superstición, pobreza, esclavitud, enfermedad y elmiedo constante de las vicisitudes de la naturaleza.
Hemos hecho de este mundo mucho más que cualquier otra civilización.
Y lo hicimos no porque fuéramos los primeros en hacerlo, sino porque lo hicimos más RÁPIDAMENTE y EFICIENTEMENTE que otros, porque aprendimos a aprehender y adaptarnos a pesar de ser una pequeña población al borde de la edad de bronce.
El problema que afronta la humanidad es que no hemos terminado el trabajo. Nosotros constreñimos los intentos de Alemania de completar la formación de la civilización hanseática, y creamos una guerra civil que casi nos destruyó y permitimos la segunda invasión ideológica de Occidente en la figura de la pseudociencia, y ahora estamos trayendo abordo a millones de personas con las que hemos librado guerras durante mil cuatrocientos años para prevenir la diseminación de su ideología cancerosa – una versión más venenosa de la profesionalización de la mentira.
Así que calladamente seremos vencidos por las sombras o continuaremos domesticando a la humanidad o regresaremos a la domesticación del hombre, obteniendo ganancias de dicha domesticación, y continuando la trascendencia de muchos, por medio del uso de los bien más costoso que cualquier civilización jamás haya desarrollado: la verdad.
¿Por que la democracia no funciona?
La democracia funciona si se desarrolla bajo la figura de un voto por familia, en un estado pequeño y homogéneo, bajo una sociedad agraria, y si tenemos las cuatro casas gubernamentales bajo el modelo anglosajón: Monarquía, aristocracia, negocios, industria y la Iglesia (proletaria, aseguradora y cuidadora de los enfermos).
Porque las clases y las familias tienen suficiente en común para usar el gobierno mayoritario como un medio para seleccionar prioridades para financiarse con recursos escasos. Pero la democracia en la que hombres, mujeres y clases poseen votos por igual solo resulta en el gobierno parasitario proletario con todos los incentivos negativos para que las sociedades saquen lo peor de si. Podemos usar el sistema de gobierno mayoritario para seleccionar prioridades entre pueblos con intereses comunes pero no podemos usar el gobierno mayoritario para seleccionar preferencias entre pueblos con intereses dispares. Es ilógico
Los datos señalan que si las mujeres no votaran, estaríamos bien. Las mujeres expresaron sus estrategias reproductivas en la política bajo la democracia. Ellas deshicieron a la civilización occidental. Es una píldora dura de tragar.
El paternalismo y los derechos de propiedad, el jurado y el testimonio honesto y la familia nuclear absoluta, junto con la reproducción retrasada bajo el señorío fueron medios por los cuales logramos suprimir la reproducción de las clases inferiores, y controlamos el comportamiento destructivo de la mujer- reproducirse a su voluntad, de forma aleatoria, y causando que su tribu sufra las consecuencias de sus impulsos Malthusianos.
Las mujeres seleccionan una estrategia reproductiva tipo “r” (volumen), no una estrategia reproductiva tipo “K” (excelencia). La civilización requiere la supresión del parasitismo masculino (agresión) así como la supresión del parasitismo femenino (reproducción).
Nosotros deshicimos la historia indoeuropea y la familia como la unidad política central, con una sola actuación. Así que, ¿Cómo construimos compromisos en vez de opresiones? Diferentes casas, bien sea físicas, y representativas o electrónicas y virtuales para aquellos grupos con estrategias reproductivas distintas.
¿Hay alguna salida a la situación actual? ¿Cómo ganamos el control de nuestros países de vuelta?
Por supuesto, pero el chismorreo es barato. La violencia es costosa -aunque muy rápida y efectiva, y las preferencias se demuestran, no se declaran.
No hay una solución astuta, no hay una respuesta fácil. O usamos la violencia para exigir un cambio o perdemos nuestra civilización para siempre.
Nosotros o agitamos a una pequeña minoría para que eleve los costos de carga de nuestros competidores, sobrecargando su capacidad, enfrentándonos a la pseudo ciencia y la mentira, y elevamos el costo de su colonización o nosotros hemos probado que sólo estamos hablando y no actuando.
¿Cómo creamos una revolución?
El problema con la revolución es que en sí misma es una expresión de frustración. No trae cambios buenos necesariamente. Y algunas revoluciones son peores que sus estados originales: Francia y Rusia son buenos ejemplo de ello.
Para implementar cambios uno tiene que tener algo que exigir. Y lo que uno exija debe satisfacer los intereses de mucha gente. Esas demandas tienen que ser posibles y ser puestas en procesos operativos que habremos de llamar “instituciones”. Ellas tienen que ser posible para persistir, a pesar de las creencias de sus participantes. Así que debemos crear los incentivos adecuados.
- Para crear una revolución se requiere de autoridad moral -algo en lo que la gente vaya a usar la violencia como recurso de forma voluntaria como imperativo moral y como justificación moral. CON LA VERDAD BASTA. Estamos cansados de mentiras, pseudo ciencia, y justificaciones racionales oscurantistas. Estamos cansados de que nuestras élites quemen nuestra civilización.
Con la verdad basta. A diferencia del chisme, el culpar y acusar. Y a diferencia de la pseudociencia y la propaganda, la verdad es costosa. La verdad es el arma argumentativa más poderosa jamás desarrollada. Y el propietarismo nos enseña a exigir la verdad y a decir la verdad.
- Después de tener autoridad moral. Se requiere de una solución política – algo que exigir, y de forma suficiente que sea posible discutir racionalmente e implementarlo como instituciones formales.
- Luego se requiere de un plan de transición suficiente para que una revolución no sea necesaria y no mueran millones de personas para llevarla a cabo.
- Se requiere de una serie de objetivos-no un plan- para anular, seccionar, revolucionar y librar una guerra civil. Con la esperanza de que puedas lograr con la anulación progresiva pero estar dispuesto a librar una guerra civil o desarrollar una revolución de ser necesario. Y que de ser requerido, lleves todos esos objetivos a cabo a la vez.
- Se requiere de organización. Un grupo de personas que actúan como el personal general que responde preguntas, y propone ideas sobre cómo implementar, como traicionar y como elevar el costo del estatus quo para que la transición sea preferible a la incertidumbre e inestabilidad.
- Es necesario tener una cierta cantidad de hombres dispuestos a morir por su pueblo, por su cultura y por su civilización, pero que tengan la creencia razonable de que su sacrificio no sea en vano.
No es sabio entrar en los detalles de las tácticas. Pero en general. La idea es ésta: ¿Cuántos días de electricidad, agua, alimentos, y días de “orden” están en la línea de producción todos los días? Si cosas malas pasan en Ucrania o Rusia, el 40% de los alimentos los produce su pueblo. Todos podemos regresar a los campos.
¿Que ocurre en el mundo desarrollado si se éste se altera?
Vivimos en los tiempos más frágiles de la historia. Ya no es necesario que las masas tomen las calles para hacer la revolución. Se requiere de un número pequeño de personas que incrementen la fricción de la vida diaria. Nunca ha sido más fácil crear una revolución. Sólo necesitamos un plan, autoridad moral y algo que exigir.
Y es nuestro trabajo el otorgárselo a la gente.
UNSOLICITED OPINION – THE ANSWER TO THE PETERSON HARRIS DEBATE
The current debate between Jordan Peterson and Sam Harris over the constitution of truth propositions and whether or not they can be used as a means of decidability between frames of reference has raised the most important issue of our time to a discourse between public intellectuals who the citizenry might learn something substantial from. However, both Peterson and Harris lack the vocabulary and arguments with which to resolve their conflict. In this short article, I’ve provided the terminology, argument, and judgement for both of their positions.
1 – For the most ancient of reasons, by accident of geography, and accident of technology, the West alone relies on Sovereignty as its organizing principle (means decidability of last resort – or on archaic parlance: metaphysical value judgment.).
2 – Choosing Sovereignty requires natural law (perfect reciprocity) to resolve disputes (via-negativa).
3 – And conversely choosing Sovereignty requires markets in everything to organize cooperation. (via-positiva) (association, cooperation, reproduction, production, production commons, production of polities, production of group evolutionary strategies)
4 – Markets allow for cooperation on means despite different ends, given different abilities, different resources, and different specializations.
5 – The combination of Sovereignty, Natural Common Law, Markets in Everything, and the universal indoctrination of men into ‘reporting‘ testimony in militia service, allowed the west to adapt and evolve faster than the rest.
We (the West) are not always first, but we are fastest at defeating the red queen. This is the origin of western man. Not Hegelian Literary ‘Spirit’ but a group evolutionary strategy for those who combined horse, bronze, and wheel to create a social, economic, and political order we call aristocracy on the Eurasian Plain, where agrarian production was widely distributed and difficult (prohibitively expensive) to organize into a central administration as did the flood river valleys. And where nothing – not language, not literature and law, not religion, or not class, not power, was conflated.
1 – Philosophies allow for the production of argument and decidability within a domain.
2 – The search for Truth seeks the production of argument and decidability regardless of domain.
3 – Deflationary truth allows us to construct truthful arguments regardless of domain.
4 – Deflationary, operational, and promissory (truthful) arguments can be warrantied for due diligence against ignorance, error, bias, wishful thinking, suggestion and deceit – as well as demand productive, fully informed, warrantied, voluntary exchange free of negative externality. Using this form of truth, it is extremely difficult for false argument to survive due diligence against all dimensions of the human ability to reason.
5 – Science is not a positive, but a negative research program: the means by which we warranty that we have eliminated ignorance, error, bias, suggestion, obscurantism, and deceit from our speech.
6 – Ergo science when applied to both categorically deterministic (physical) and categorically dynamic (heuristic social / cognitive) disciplines functions as the means of decidability regardless of domain. i.e.: the discipline of science when sufficient in scope of due diligence, produces truth candidates regardless of a division of inter-temporal perception, experience, knowledge, labor, and advocacy. i.e.: where in a society of markets (choice) in everything.
1 – In each era of transformation the “truthful” eugenic aristocracy has been opposed by the dysgenic practitioners of deceit:
a) The Bronze Age Origin of heroism/paternalism/Aristocracy – the invention of oral authoritarian religion.
b) The Iron Age Origin of Reason – the invention of written, conflationary, authoritarian – scriptural religion as law, distributed by organize religion.
c) The Steel Age of Empiricism (bacon/locke/smith/hume/jefferson,) – was opposed by the invention of printed, argumentative rebellion: (Rousseau/Moral, Kant/Rational, Mendelssohn/Legal.)
d) The Age of Automation and the reformation of the social sciences ( Poincare, Maxwell, Darwin, Spencer, Menger, Durkheim/Pareto/Weber, Nietzche, and the Romanticists ) Was opposed by the invention of pseudosciences (Boaz, Marx, Freud, Cantor, Frankfurt School, Mises, Keynes, Rand/Rothbard, Strauss and The host of Postmoderns, and Macro Economists.)
2 – In each era, despite the fact that humanity is transformed by the aristocratic (martial), order, the opposition generally seems to ‘win’ through numbers. This causes anything from a stagnation to a dark age.
3 – The challenge of our time is the industrialization of lying made possibly by automation and media in the pseudoscientific era. Combined with the failure of the west to advance ‘science’ (Truthfulness) sufficiently to suppress the (desirable) lies.
4 – The solution to the industrialization of lying is the demand for warranty of due diligence in law, economics, and politics in the information we bring to market – just as we require warranty of due diligence in the products and services we submit to the market (a commons).
5 – The returns on the suppression of the industrialization of lying by operationalism will be greater than the returns on the returns on the suppression of mysticism by empiricism. every lie or falsehood produces a friction against human reason, just as every atomic rule created a greater friction than was produced by the transformation to general rules (science).
6 – Definition of PSEUDOSCIENCE: Followers know that I use a rigorous definition of what constitutes scientific speech and therefore truthful speech. My use of the term ‘pseudoscience’ refers to the addition of or subtraction of information that must be complete but unloaded in order to render decidability across contexts. Scientific speech requires due diligence against subtraction(cherry picking) and addition (loading, framing, overloading). To perform due diligence of truthfulness requires we test each possible dimension of speech.
1 – categorical consistency – Identity – non-conflation
2 – logical consistency – internal consistency, non-contradiction.
3 – empirical consistency – external correspondence – falsification
4 – existential consistency – operational language – consistency.
5 – reciprocity-consistency – moral reciprocity of Property in Toto.
6 – scope consistency – full accounting and specified limits.
These questions are easily testable in a court of law. Any essay, article, paper, contract, or constitution may be written in these terms. The intuitionist/operationalist movements failed (unfortunately) because they were discovered in categorically static math, logic, and physical science, where they are of less utility, but neither discovered nor applied in heuristic and therefore categorically dynamic sciences, where they are necessary: law, economics, politics, and group evolutionary strategy.
What I have tried to briefly suggest here is that grammar and terminology alone are nearly sufficient to reverse the industrialization of lying in law, economics, politics, and group evolutionary strategy. (See research on EPrime for example). And that extension of the involuntary warranty of due diligence that we currently apply to products and services can be extended to all market, commons, and political speech. We are saturated with lies and falsehoods, and they are cheap to produce and expensive to defeat. This is the reason for the success of the era of pseudoscience and pseudo-rationalism, and outright lying.
1 – In the second great transformation (the ancient world) we developed three attempts at decidability with different appeals to coercive decidability: Supernatural (religious) Mythic and Theological, Ideal/Supernormal(Platonic) Literary, and Demonstrated(existential) Historical. The Supernatural attempts to solve the problem of authority by appeal to a superhuman deity. The supernormal by appeal to ideals or utopias. The historical, by appeal to demonstrated existence: survival from competition. It is the sovereign, existential, that survives competition that comprises the uniqueness of western thought: we preserve the right to choose: sovereignty – for there is no authority among sovereigns.
2 – Peterson’s conflation in the literary (Platonic) tradition is anti western and unnecessary. It is the competition between conflationary narrative analogy, and deflationary operational criticism that assists us in identifying truth candidates. All civilizations that practice conflation stagnate. Literature is sufficient for the loading and framing and experiential without resorting to truth claims. Conflation of the good, true, and beautiful is a literary technique, and is helpful if not necessary for the immature or unable mind. But only if the mind is also taught how to truth test conflationary statements such that the true, the good, and the beautiful can be tested, so that the citizenry can distinguish between truth and lie, good and bad, beautiful and ugly. It is through this method of conflation that the culture wars were conducted.
3 – Harris‘ cherry-picks in the pseudoscientific tradition, fails to account for changes in state of the full scope of capital, and the lost opportunities for productive voluntary exchange. (This will take some explaining – outside of the scope of this paper.) Most frequently he gives parasitic action a pass if he agrees with it. Humans accumulate capital, and humans cooperate to accumulate capital more readily. And humans evolve cooperative social orders to accumulate capital even more rapidly – by the production of commons. Harris’ presumed ‘goods’ are cosmopolitan, destroy accumulated intergenerational capital, and produce eugenic outcomes that over time destroy the possibility of not only choice, and prosperity, but of transcendence (evolution). Reality is not kind. There are no free rides. And that is an uncomfortable, scientific, truth. We must continue to defeat the red queen.
Science (truth) rarely tells us what we desire, it merely gives us power to choose that which is desirable in fact over that which is desirable in pretense, or that which is a mere deception.
The Natural Law of Sovereign Men
The Philosophy of Aristocracy
The Propertarian Institute
(BTW: One or two years ago Harris issued a challenge as to whether morality could be scientifically expressed. I lacked the time (or inclination) to do so, but it can be (easily and thoroughly and irrefutably). And it is just as dehumanizing as the work of Darwin and Copernicus.)
—“Aristocracy creates sovereignty*: the prevention of monopoly by the enforcement of markets.”— James Augustus Berens
The problem is not DEMOCRACY (the choice of leadership) but the combination of:
1) DISCRETIONARY RULE, where leaders can legislate (issue commands) anything that the public will allow them to, rather than RULE OF LAW, under NATURAL LAW, where (like our trial-run original constitution) they can only construct otherwise legal contracts between members of the polity on their behalf. Much legislation is not (objectively) LEGAL in the sense that it violates NATURAL LAW: the preservation of the incentive to cooperate by the requirement for productive, fully informed, warrantied, voluntary exchanges, limited to productive externalities.
And 2) UNIVERSAL ENFRANCHISEMENT rather than demonstrated ability earning enfranchisement. But unlike Plato and Socrates, recommend, it’s not EDUCATION that demonstrates wisdom, but ACHIEVEMENT in life. Why? Because the reason we no longer possess RULE OF LAW, and are the victims of DISCRETIONARY RULE is the fault of the academy’s teaching of social pseudoscience for 140 years. So conversely, how do we know we are in fact ‘educating’ rather than ‘deceiving’? I am not the first philosophy to suggest that the 20th century will be remembered as an era of pseudoscience and the refutation of democracy – because of the failure of the academy. So the reason our ancestors required PROPERTY(demonstrated ability) and military service (warranty or ‘skin in the game’) was that together they DEMONSTRATED knowledge and investment, they didn’t ‘imagine’ that they were knowledgeable, because they had an education, or ‘imagine’ people were moral – they wanted empirical EVIDENCE OF IT. For a criticism of the university systems see either Sowell’s work on education and intellectuals, or See Kaplan’s work on the fallacy of the rational voter, and his work on Universities: there is very little evidence that universities do anything more than filter by workload. They teach almost nothing that produces outcomes other than fitness for workloads.
3) MONOPOLY COMMONS. All MONOPOLIES are ‘bad’ because they prohibit innovation, and they allow us to violate the Natural Law of Cooperation. Yet majoritarian democracy produces a monopoly. There is no reason why Seattle must choose between a Monorail and a Train, when they can choose both and let the best solution win. The excuse is efficiency. But this is a deception. Instead, the competition will force voters to pay for that which is most likely to succeed not what they themselves want at the expense of others – and that is more efficient. The purpose of majoritarian democracy is to legitimize authority – to rubber stamp the oligarchy’s choices. Majoritarian democracy is possible for the selection of priorities among people with common interests (farmers), where resources are scarce.
But markets (contracts) are the solution to heterogeneous polities with disparate or competing interests (like ours today), where expenditures of resources are plentiful (surpluses are possible) must be constrained in order to prevent expansion of debt. So instead of single house majoritarian democracy, our ancestors created houses for each class, so that classes could construct exchanges, rather than rule over one another. They created a MARKET for the construction of COMMONS between the classes, just as they had created a market for the consumption of goods and services: cities. Just as they had created a market for leadership by voting. Just as they had created a market for dispute resolution that we call the ‘independent judiciary’ under ‘rule of law’.
So you see, democracy can function as a market if and only if we restore market institutions, instead of market-violating institutions: multiple houses of government (families, businesses, territories, monarchy-as-vote-of-last-resort-by-veto, and then we can have democracy. Otherwise democracy is just a means by which to fraudulently legitimize the formation of tyranny by monopoly.
Why this is so difficult? Because the academy teaches pseudoscience, not social science.
The Philosophy of Aristocracy
The Propertarian Institute
1) SOVEREIGNTY (leads to)
2) PROPERTY IN TOTO (leads to)
3) TESTIMONIAL TRUTH (leads to)
4) DEFLATIONARY/DECONFLATIONARY, (leads to)
5) REASON, RATIONALISM, EMPIRICISM, TESTIMONIALISM (leads to)
6) MARKETS IN EVERYTHING, (leads to)
7) DEFEATING THE RED QUEEN (leads to)
0) THE BIRTH OF THE WEST: SOVEREIGNTY.
1) RELIGION: THE FIRST INFANTILIZATION OF THE INDO-EUROPEANS.
(corrected with aristotelian reason, stoic and roman law)
2) CHRISTIANITY: THE FIRST INFANTILIZATION OF THE WESTERN INDO-EUROPEANS
(corrected with empiricism, and anglo common law)
3) COSMOPOLITANISM: THE SECOND INFANTILIZATION OF THE WEST. AND THE NEW WEST.
(corrected with testimonialism, and propertarian natural law)
WHY IS IT WE MUST DE-INFANTILIZE MAN IN EVERY GREAT ERA?
THE FUTURE IS JUST A CHOICE. RETURN TO OUR MAJOR INDUSTRY: RULE.
We could take a very different perspective: “They are our minorities. They are our Africans, our Jews, our Caribbeans, our Mestizos. We have paid a high price for them. Under the right circumstances they make excellent wage labor. All we must do is return to our ancient industry of Ruling the Lesser Peoples. It is an industry we excel at and have profited from for thousands of years – much to the benefit of not only the ruled but all mankind. To rule for profit is just a choice. But to make that choice we must admit that our ancestors the aristocracy were right and we were wrong.”
You see, the future is just a choice. Rule and profit. Or be rule parasitically.
(this ought to get me in trouble) (important piece)
Don’t dis on black or other impulsive peoples, we have white trash too. Blacks just haven’t organized to cull their herd as much as we have. They didn’t have winters. The entire warm zone of the planet consists not of failed states but of people who failed to cull the herd.
Don’t dis on Jewish people. We have vociferous gossiping parasitic white people too – most of our women. Jews organized to specialize in verbal creation of the opportunity for parasitism through the use of gossip and suggestion. To maintain Jewish separatism, escape payment for the commons, and to survive and profit by privatizing commons, they have allied with the state against the people in every society and been outcast or decimated for it. But that is the same strategy our women have always practiced since their invention of gossip, and the strategy our women have adopted since their enfranchisement in politics: alliance with the state in order to extract parasitically. Hence the treatment of jews and women by every society in history: as a useful danger to be carefully managed.
The problem that the transcendence of mankind faces is not the races but the classes and the genders. The bottom is more harmful than the top is beneficial. And because people act as racial kinship groups in all areas of life, we try to solve the wrong problem that generates the conflict: parasitism. We solve by war, religion (deceit), and propaganda (lies), that which we failed to solve by truth: the natural common, judge discovered law, of voluntary transfer prohibiting parasitism. We force them into productive voluntary exchanges in order to survive. We force them into productive work in order to survive. We force them into careful mate selection. And we force them back to the status of undomesticated animals if they do not, and sterilize them.
We don’t need to conduct wars of extermination, to put people in ovens, or hang them from ropes, or spit them on pikes – unless they rally in numbers. We need only limit their breeding to one child, and pay them to have no children. And to extend the legal prohibition on false and immoral speech products – protect information just as we protect land, air, water, commons, and institutions from harm.
We need to return to our long, successful, and widely profitable history of domesticating the universe, nature, plant, animal, and those animals sufficiently sentient that we have the potential to cooperate with via productive, fully informed, warrantied, voluntary transfers, limited to productive externalities: at present, that is limited to homo sapiens-sapiens and his sub-species we call the ‘races’, and ‘sub-races’.
Because Western Aristocracy is not a religion, or a philosophy, or a government – it is a technology and an INDUSTRY. And it is by use of this industry we have profited by dragging the beast man out of his parasitic past on the margins of nature into the transcendent mastery of himself, and nature.
Man is an animal. Human is a domesticated man. Aristocracy is a transcendent human: “one who domesticates the beast man”.
You can dis on Muslims in particular, and all religious fundamentalists in general, and all pseudo-academics, and all pseudo-intellectuals, and all pseudoscientists, and all frauds of any kind that spread error, bias, wishful thinking, suggestion, obscurantism, pseudo-rationalism, pseudoscience, and deceit. Because there is no place for fraud in the marketplace of information and ideas any more than there is for fraud in the marketplace of goods and services. All these people merely profit from undomesticating the animal man.
Because it is only the burden of the underclasses that cannot verbalize abstract ideas, and learn by self-instruction that prevents us from the universal human future we all desire.
And it is those who profit from the un-domestication of the animals, more so than the animals themselves that are our, and mankind’s enemy.
The Propertarian Institute
—“The Western peoples transferred, or rather limited, the universal drive to find and exploit high yield, low investment, low maintenance sources of energy from other people (“parasitism”) to immediately and personally moveable resources including your own body and everything it produces (“industry”). Turns out that’s the only scalable solution.”—Moritz Bierling
CAN WE COMPLETE THE GERMANIC PROJECT? FINALLY?
—“We will complete the system of German Idealism.”—Z.A. Corbett
i used to be against it, but now i see that we need both law, literature, and poetry. and that my work merely is the science underneath the literature and poetry. And that we require the entire corpus of science, law, literature, and aesthetics in order to provide each ‘method of sense’, from the intellectual to the political to the religio-spiritual a consistent message.
This is what I learned from the study of religion. Successful religions do all. The issue is conflation. We cannot break the western tradition of conflation. So instead of one narrative mythos, we must have layers, from the scientific to the purely aesthetic. This is how we preserve western uniqueness but obtain the virtue of religions.
So, the germans failed to resist christianity, they failed in the reformation to overthrow it, they failed in the enlightenment. they failed in the romantic period, they failed with national socialism.
So hopefull this time we all will reunite germanic (eruopean) civilization. not by ONE Method. But by the POLYTHEISTIC method, of LAYERS of different forms of argument, rather than attempting anglo analytic alone, german rational alone, italian poetic alone, and russian literary alone.
WE CAN FINALLY DO IT (I THINK).
There is a vast difference between the scientific enlightenment which was a tremendous success, and the classical liberal seizure of political power through the various revolutions against the aristocracy and the monarchies.
Yes we can blame the aristocracy from failing to evolve the organization of the state and incorporate the bourgeoisie. And yes we can blame the bourgeoisie for failing by incorporating the proletariat and women into the house of commons.
But in the present, of the Marxist proletariat(worldwide), the classical liberal bourgeoisie, the ‘liberal’ priesthood (20th century), and the martial aristocracy(antiquity to 1800), all have failed except the martial aristocracy. And more frighteningly, they have failed quickly, and in succession.
The aristocracy created markets in every aspect of life: freedom, marriage, commerce, commons, dispute resolution, and rule. But failed to abandon their rents and accommodate the finance and merchant class when commerce rather than agrarian territory evolved to the central source of production.
The classical liberal bourgeoisie tried to make the market everything, at the expense of the tribe. They tried to create a monopoly of the entrepreneurial classes. And they failed. They destroyed the family and community as a unit of production. They brought people to capital rather than capital to people. Even if the primary beneficiaries of their financial order were the common people’
The Marxists proletarians resisted the bourgeoise’s impact on home and family – and committed the greatest crimes in human history by trying to take over rule from the bourgeoisie. They tried to create a monopoly of the laboring classes. And they failed. They destroyed entire nations, tribes, families, economies and traditions. Worst of all they destroyed all trust.
The secular priesthood we call ‘liberals’ or ‘the cathedral’ tried to take over from the Marxists, in pursuit of a global secular religion consisting of utopian promises, pseudoscience, and faith in the persistent expansion of technology – and destroyed the entirety of western civilization in less than a century.
They tried to create a monopoly of the secular priestly caste. And they failed. They failed because they treated as equal in potential and demand people who are not. As the classical liberals destroyed the family as a unit of production, the liberals destroyed the nation as a unit of production.
But only the martial aristocracy forced the creation of markets in everything by the total prohibition of monopoly – even a monopoly of rule – by resisting all unification and federalization until Napoleon used fiat credit to create ‘total war’ and forced them to relent out of defense.
Only the monarchy created markets for the voluntary production, distribution, and exchange of goods, services, information, and commons, between the classes.
And only the aristocracy understood that each class’ attempt to create monopolies would lead to a breakdown of the cooperation between the ‘estates of the realm’ – what we call today ‘the social classes’.
Aristocracy creates a monopoly: the prevention of monopoly by the enforcement of markets.
Q&A: ARISTOCRACY VS OLIGARCHY
—“What are the features that distinguish aristocracy and oligarchy?”— William Butchman
An aristocracy preserves a judge of last resort (monarch).
You can kill a monarch and change the judge of last resort.
It is much harder to kill an oligarchy (group).
It is much harder to kill a government (larger group)
it is much harder to kill a bureaucracy ( larger group )
An oligarchy subverts the market (rule of law) by use of:
The defense against an oligarchy is a judiciary that rules by productive fully informed, warrantied, voluntary transfer limited to productive externalities.
Most oligarchies persist only because they violate one or more of the provisions of natural law. Most commonly: productivity.
In other words competition in the market and prosecution in court are EQUALLY necessary methods of preserving sovereignty by the suppression of parasitism, and the demand for sovereign transfer, in a market for opportunities, rather than in a market for rents, where the market for opportunities is made possible by nothing more than an increase in population density and an increase in the suppression of parasitism.
TO RULE ARISTOCRATICALLY IS TO LIMIT NOT TO DIRECT. WE MUST RULE, OR BE RULED. WE FORGOT. WE ARE MEN. WE MUST RULE.
Nov 18, 2016 3:07pm
TO BE A EUROPEAN IS TO PRACTICE PAGANISM:
1 – Aristotelian Reason, Science, and Truth (science)
2 – English, Roman, and Stoic Natural Law (law)
3 – The Lives of the Great Men (history)
4 – The Literature of the Great Books (literature)
5 – The Ideas of the Great Philosophers (philosophy)
6 – The Parables of the Saints and Prophets (religion)
7 – The Myths and Legends of Pagan Warriors (myth)
We have always been, and always will be, a PAGAN people.
We permit no conflation. Because any conflation breeds a monopoly.
And we permit no monopoly. Becuase we are the people who practice sovereignty.
And sovereignty can exist only under markets, not monopoly.
And the secular socialist state seeks to deprive us of sovereignty by delivering us to monopoly.
European Paganism Consists of Different Forms Of Reasoning
PRECISE CASES (Deciding Class)
GENERAL RULES (Organizing Classes)
BROAD ANALOGIES (Working Classes)
We can restore the west’s evolutionary trajectory as the principle source of mankind’s innovation, restore our people and our civilization, and overthrow a century and a half of pseudoscience, by restoring to the common law the organizing principle of sovereignty – and consequential markets in everything, with just one law: truthful speech by the involuntary warranty of due diligence against error, bias, suggestion, obscurantism, pseudoscience and deceit, for the purpose of circumventing a voluntary, fully informed, warrantied, voluntary exchange, limited to productive externalities, by the imposition of costs against property in toto: that broad spectrum of things, relationships, behaviors, and commons, which we have borne costs to inventory, without imposing costs upon the things, behaviors, and commons of others.
This warranty is achieved by proofs (demonstrations) of consistency in 1) categorical consistency, 2) internal consistency, 3) empirical consistency, 4) existential consistency, 5) moral consistency, 6) scope consistency. And while it might take a small effort to learn how to provide these warranties on all information, just as we have learned to provide warranties on products, warranties on services, and limited warranties on the reporting of basic research, we can complete the scientific method and require these proofs on all information.
In every era we invent new expansions of the method of cooperation we call the division of perception, cognition, knowledge, labor, and advocacy. But in doing so we create greater asymmetries of knowledge, and therefore new opportunities to invent means of benefitting from the imposition of costs upon others that we call ‘parasitism’. And we rely upon courts, testimony, jury, judge, empirical truth, and the accumulated empirical knowledge of the common law of torts, to incrementally suppress and render illegal each innovation in parasitism as soon as the first case adjudicated is recorded for reference by other lawyers, prosecutors, and judges.
The west was not first, nor wealthiest, nor possessed of greater numbers, superior resources, superior climate. But instead, by accident of circumstance, chose Sovereignty as their principle of organization – a choice which is possible only under empirical, testimonial speech we call ‘truth’, and a market for the resolution of any negotiation, exchange, or conflict – depriving all of authority over anything other than the preservation of sovereignty. Europeans created the distributed dictatorship of sovereign men, open to any man willing and able to reciprocally insure every other against violations of his sovereignty.
This choice resulted in a civilization that calculates advancements faster than all other organizing models, and produces the least opportunity for parasitism and rents. And it is this velocity in the ancient and modern worlds that has allowed the west to defeat the red queen of corruption, and drag mankind kicking and screaming out of ignorance, superstition, mysticism, justificationism, conflationism, deception, hunger, poverty, physical labor, cellular decay, disease, and increasingly, the vicissitudes of nature, in an unforgiving universe hostile to life in all but the rarest of exceptions.
We have been misled to thinking that ‘religion’ requires superstition. But that idea is a product of the authoritarian dogma created by the church under christianity. It’s simply not true.
DECONFLATED, RELIGION CONSISTS OF:
1) Narrative: historical, mythical, supernatural
2) Metaphysical Judgments: (in many forms)
3) Group Evolutionary Strategy: (in many forms )
4) Normative Rules: (in many forms)
5) Registries of Familial Property (birth, maturity, marriage, death)
5) Rituals both private and public: (mindfulness in its forms)
6) Feasts, Sports, Arts, and Festivals:(in their many forms)
RELIGION ‘WORKS’ BY:
1 – providing some variation on ‘mindfulness’ in which we can escape the problem of being honest with ourselves independently of all our accumulated intuitions and biases.
2 – Forming associations between the ‘pack-response’ and group participation, and eliminating the problem of stress from post-tribal life’s lack of feedback, thereby extending trust bonds across kin groups, class groups, and market groups, which decreases transaction costs of all kinds in all walks of life.
3 – Establishing normative rules for familial and cross familial behavior, that made (and continue to) reduce natural frictions between genetic variations in gender, class, tribe, race that (truthfully) translate in to different demands for association, reproduction, economic cooperation, and rule – and the status seeking that affects each of those demands, dramatically.
THE FUNCTIONAL PROBLEM OF WESTERN RELIGION
1 – Separation of education and religion
…….. – The failure of religions to reform in response to the scientific enlightenment.
…….. – The failure of religions to reform in response to Darwin.
…….. – The Academy’s seizure of the functions of the church upon the failure of the church to reform.
…….. – The End of western separation and competition between Religion and State by the adoption of the synthesis of jewish cosmopolitan and puritan postmodern by the State, Academy, Media complex the current generation of thinkers refers to as “The Cathedral Complex”, or just “The Cathedral” for short.
…….. – The beginning of state financed New Indulgences (we call them ‘college diplomas’) that promise a middle or upper class level of consumption instead of forgiveness of sins and entry into heaven – when the postwar economic boom that made possible the rapid expansion of the consumer class was just a temporary product of the combined tragedies of the Great European Civil War’s destruction of centuries of accumulated production capacity, plus the destruction of, and delay of expansion of, world production caused by the movement we call world communism (and now, its inheritor, world islamism).
2 – the academy seized control of the commercial education and the ‘religious’ education (liberalism), but failed to seize familial education – and in most cases, assisted the state in the destruction first of black families, then white families, and now all families, in order to (a) provide women with child care (schooling), force them into the labor pool (feminism), and then consume the entire proceeds of women’s labor so that the war and boomer generation could retire early and lie on the next generation’s labor, and then immigrating third world labor to provide cheap labor (social programs) that cannot replace the prior generation because of lesser aggregate abilities. The family destruction was increased by attempt to create a mobile workflorce and thereby deprive women of the multi-generational support necessary to raise more than one child without exhaustion. And now it is impossible for women to return to child bearing and child rearing because of the tax demands placed upon their earnings by the immigration of underclasses and the dependency of the aged yet healthy enough to work.
3 – The state sponsored secular ‘religion’ that we currently teach is pseudoscientific (false, and dishonest), where the content of christian religion (the extension of kinship forgiveness to non kin) was ‘true’ but conveyed by nonsense and authoritarianism.
4 – One of the unstated drivers for the current conflict in america is not just the decline of the white population and the ascent of the colored cities, but because science has caught up and since 1990 has been aggressively disproving the universalist, globalist, equalitarian democratic secular socialist religion. And those who are aware of this are … angry … and full of conviction that their traditions and intuitions were correct. Therefore they feel betrayed and deceived.
THE WEST HAS ALWAYS BEEN POLYTHEISTIC
While it is the secret to the west’s competitive advantage, we are sometimes misled by our (false) historical narrative: The west never engaged in conflation, by creating ‘one book’ so to speak. We have always had:
1) Law (limits) for the Ruling (fathering) Classes,
2) Commerce (pragmatism) for the producing classes.
2) Religion (utopianism) for Science / pseudoscience, philosophy / pseudorationalism, and Theology / fraud for the Educating (mothering) classes (church/academy).
And have always maintained the three estates of the realm using the three methods of coercion
1) Law/Limits: Force / ostracization from movement/ resources / life itself.
2) Exchange/Utility: Payment / Remuneration / Ostracization from consumption.
3) Religion: Gossip / Rallying / Shaming / Ostracization from opportunity for insurance from the tribe.
THE WEST’S ADMINISTRATIVE RELIGION IS THE COMMON SOVEREIGN INDO-EUROPEAN/ARISTOCRATIC/ANGLO SAXON LAW, AND ITS PRIEST’S ARE OUR JUDGES
Reason, empiricism, science, and now ‘testimonialism’ (the completion of the scientific method) all evolved out of western empirical common law.
There is no reason our founding myths:
1) Homer, takes of kings, princes and princesses: the germanic myths, legends, and fairy tales;
2) History and the lives of the great thinkers;
3) the tales of jesus and the saints;
Cannot be taught as ‘religion’ and their contributions celebrated.
RELIGION IS NECESSARY FOR EVOLUTIONARY REASONS, BUT SUPERSTITION, PSEUDO-RATIONALISM, PSEUDOSCIENCE, CONFLATION AND DECEPTION ARE NOT.
THE CYCLE OF REVOLUTIONS (TRUTHS) AND COUNTER REVOLUTIONS (LIES)
1) REVOLUTION: The invention of aristocracy (horse, bronze, wheel).
COUNTER-REVOLUTION: organized conflationary superstitious advisory religion.
2) REVOLUTION: The invention of truth, reason, deconflation, competition.
COUNTER-REVOLUTION: Conflationary Monotheistic Authoritarian Religion
3) REVOLUTION: Empricism
– French Pseudoscientific Moralism: Rousseau et al.
– Russian literary nihilism.
– German pseudorational philosophy.
4) REVOLUTION: Science: Darwin (evolution), spencer (operationalism), poincare(mathematical realism), maxwell (electromagnetism), nietzche(restoratino of aristocratic aesthetics)
– Jewish Cosmopolitan Pseudoscience: Boaz (anthropology), Marx (economics and sociology: cooperation), Freud (psychology), Adorno et al (Aesthetics).
THE DE-PROFESSIONALIZATION OF INFORMATION DISTRIBUTION
Little did they know what they were doing. But by removing the duel, libel, slander, and falsehood from the common law, the state eliminated warranty (skin in the game). And by the elimination of warranty under the law, converted a moral imperative captured in common law, to a moral imperative discarded in exchange for market profits.
It was the elimination of duel, libel, slander, and falsehood under the assumption of a naturally moral man, and the catastrophe of free speech that made possible the war against the west: judaic cosmopolitanism, puritan postmodernism, french pseudoscientific moralism, and german pseudo-rationalism.
THAT IS THE PURPOSE OF BUREAUCRACY: DE-PROFESSIONALIZATION AND LOSS OF WARRANTY (SKIN IN THE GAME)
0) THE BIRTH OF THE WEST: SOVEREIGNTY.
1) RELIGION: THE FIRST INFANTILIZATION OF THE INDO-EUROPEANS.
(corrected with aristotelian reason, stoic and roman law)
2) CHRISTIANITY: THE FIRST INFANTILIZATION OF THE WESTERN INDO-EUROPEANS
(corrected with empiricism, and anglo common law)
3) COSMOPOLITANISM: THE SECOND INFANTILIZATION OF THE WEST. AND THE NEW WEST.
(corrected with testimonialism, and propertarian natural law)
WHY IS IT WE MUST DE-INFANTILIZE MAN IN EVERY GREAT ERA?
1) SOVEREIGNTY (leads to)
2) MARKETS IN EVERYTHING, (leads to)
3) DEFLATIONARY/DECONFLATIONARY, (leads to)
4) REASON, RATIONALISM, EMPIRICISM, TESTIMONIALISM (leads to)
5) TRUTH: PERFECT PARSIMONY (leads to)
You want me to say something offensive? Ok. How’s this: what’s a greater crime? The holocaust (the forcible deportation to of a gypsies, jews, and other non-conformists) or the inventions of the infantilizing lies of the Abrahamic religions and Cosmopolitan pseudoscience? (Boaz, Marx, Freud, Cantor, Mises, Adorno+Co, Rothbard/Rand, Straussian Neo-Conservatism, Feminism, Postmodernism, and “Political Correctness”?)
What has caused more harm to mankind? It’s not even worth discussing. And after the west rescues the disenfranchised, what do they do? They struggle to destroy it by turning our high trust homogenous polity into another failed Levantine catastrophe.
THE UTOPIA CANNOT EXIST
We either create small prosperous redistributive high trust homogenous states, or we create a large corrupt low trust poor caste system.
There is no alternative.
So what do we do with a generation that has no productive market value, was intentionally infantilized, and has nothing to offer but virtue signalling by giving away via the political process what they did nothing to obtain?
—“You will not find some emotional appeal for heroism therein. Heroism is not mere emotionalism, but a state of deep detachment, the sovereign psychology.”— Josh.
Thats dominance, not heroism. That’s Excellence as an expression of dominance.
Heroism cannot exist without a commons to benefit from the hero.
- It may be true that heroism is merely the reward for dominance on behalf of the tribe.
- It may be true that heroic status is merely compensation for breaking the ingroup moral bias against what would otherwise be interpreted as ‘dangerous’ displays of dominance. In other words, it may be true that heroism is a means of insuring the dominant that they will be free of retribution by ingroup members, by reversing the prohibition on dominance.
- It may be excuse making by the population as a means of defense against dangerous displays of dominance.
- You might be correct in that its dominance not heroism that inspires, and heroic status is merely a reward.
- You might be correct in that heroism provides training for the young in the appropriate uses of dominance. (This is my interpretation).
In this sense your statement is correct: That 1) we seek to be free of the evolutionary norm that inhibits our desire for alpha dominance, and 2) that heroism is a normative institution that justifies the mature, and incentivizes the young, and limits uses and abuses to those that benefit the commons (ingroup members).
But you cannot conflate heroism, with dominance as you have done above.
So since dominance exists in all cultures, but only the west has constructed a (universal) heroic society, where the incentive to apply dominance is constantly rewarded, and heroism is a pedagogical means of channeling it to good uses, and punishing it for bad uses, then I think we can come to agreement.
It just took me overnight to think it through. I knew you were not so much wrong as not using the right language because conflation is natural to you, but if we agree that heroism is value/virtue that we train so that we do not need to suppress dominance, but instead, FOCUS dominance, so that we are a more competitive ‘tribe’ then I think we can agree that almost all men of ability seek to excercise their dominance just as much as a beautiful woman seeks to exercise hers so to speak.
If you had not written this post I would not have been able to put this question in to words, so yet again, I have to thank you for your insights and criticism, which over the past few years has been extremely helpful and influential.
I guess in this sense, the heroic tradition is our central ‘teaching’. “Your dominance is an asset to the tribe so long as it is channeled for the tribe’s benefit. And if we channel all our men’s dominance rather than suppress it, then we are concentrating a scarce and valuable resource into a constant evolutionary cycle.”
This plays into the argument that we develop faster than the rest because we do not seek to limit our people by limiting what they can do, only limiting what they cannot do. Most tribes do the opposite: they create rules of repetitive conduct (for stupid creatures) that focus effort in static directions, rather than focusing efforts of men in innovative and creative directions.
So through heroism (training for competition) and through dominance, and reward for ‘good cunning’ and punishment for ‘bad cunning’, and through the enfranchisement of all who will fight, we create a constant stream of predators at-the-ready in constant competition with one another, producing constant innovations in war, politics, industry, family, craft, and arts.
And this is why heroism (encouraging the mastery of dominance) is so effective a strategy: it creates a market (calculator) for excellence in dominance.
The Propertarian Institute
— Original Post from Josh —
After studying Aryan traditions more, it’s become increasingly clear to me what I was always suspecting would happen.
You will not find some emotional appeal for heroism therein. Heroism is not mere emotionalism, but a state of deep detachment, the sovereign psychology.
I understand you want methods for class collaboration; you want inspiration for the working class, but the Aryan mind doesn’t play that game. Such appeals to emotionalism would themselves lead to petty attachment.
Instead, this mind simply does what is necessary—katam karaniyam—without regret, hesitation, or feeling. This impersonal action would also concern policing the classes, but any downward inspiration would be indirect and secondary.
Thus, very much opposite of considering the ancient Aryan traditions as silly hokum for the less bright, they were the highest form of consciousness and represent the missing raison d’être that was plaguing your scientistic system.
Regarding what we do to inspire the working class, we can consult Evola and Nietzsche, who both believed these men of lesser consciousness (the telluric, the lunar, the Catholic) inherently can only behold these higher states in fractured ways, as separated salvationist divinities, and the avatars of these divinities are heroic men past and present.
So, this would be the skeleton of my synthesis and how I solve your problem. Catholic Traditionalism, as it did at the time, can be a method of organizing women and lower men around higher men, but it’s very important to understand that that isn’t the only spiritual dynamic going on. It won’t work if that’s all you have; the lower classes will orient around their myopic perception of spirituality if there isn’t authentic divinity in their presence, which requires the heroic, which is only produced by the Olympian, which is as I said the missing “soul” of your system.
So, being that some of this isn’t your first choice of study, I’ll recap:
1: Aryan traditions are not an appeal to the lower classes, but are the ‘why’ of why someone would commit themselves to the heroic ‘aristocratic’ deeds (deep sovereignty, authenticity, detachment).
2: There are grades of ‘spirits’ in Evola’s work, just as Nietzsche theorized personhood was inherently an aristocratic phenomenon, with few people possessing deep authenticity. Understanding this, if we want to know what interfaces with the lower tiers, we must study the spiritual schools that occur there (telluric animism < lunar salvationism < Catholic Traditionalism < Olympian Aryan).
3: The main takeaway for you is that the Aryan traditions are not mere tools for your scientistic system, but the very psychology that animates its most involved functions, which is why it’s not accurate to even look at these traditions as ‘religions’, really. They aren’t escapist or Platonic, but completely holistic. For an expansion on that, I’ll use Jünger’s brother.
It’s called Paedomorphic Evolution: Genetic Pacification selecting for lower maturity – the “juvenile”. One of which is Gracilization: loss of bone mass. The ‘strange’ sexual interests of the Japanese (and the asians) and our men’s attraction to Asian women, is very likely due to the greater paedomorphism of the asians and the lower levels of testosterone. The east and the west have been engaging in genetic pacification over a long long time. The rest of the world has not. Because they were unable to reduce the bottom population.
—“It was precisely this domestication of men and women into family units that propelled Europeans forward. That the Germans were more monogamously disciplined than the Celts is why they went on to be the source of Northern European success, more so than the Irish. The eugenic footprint can be seen even to this day.”— Josh Jeppson
THE WEST’S OTHER FIRE: THE FIRE OF THE MIND: “TRUTH”
Prometheus may have stolen fire. But we gave mankind the Fire of The Mind: Truth.
And from the Fire of the Mind, we gave mankind debate, reason, rationalism, science, physics, medicine, and testimonialism. We gave him testimony, the jury, natural law, the common law, the independent judiciary, the constitutional order: the contractual-order of mankind.
To hell with equality and those who appeal to it – it’s a deceit by the weak to return us to dysgenic barbarism. We domesticated the human animal, and raised him from mysticism, ignorance, poverty, starvation and disease.
We domesticated man through the incremental suppression of his natural parasitism, leaving productive, fully informed, warrantied, voluntary exchange in the market as his only possible method of survival: survival through the service of others. Using the common law, we changed the behavior of those we could. And we hung those we could not. And we built walls and armies to resist those who wish otherwise.
We have no equals. We either rule or are ruled by and preyed upon by our inferiors, who, by their sheer numbers, like locusts, are parasites upon this earth, that with every birth, prevent man from achievement of his promise: godhood.
Kill them all. Revel in your defense of man from another dark age of dysgenia, mysticism, ignorance, and suffering.
In lower trust countries people justify their various forms of lying just as we high trust people justify the externalities caused by our combination of linguistic conveniences, methodological habits, variations in morality and ethics, and of course political correctness
That does not mean that just as we live considerably better than all these lower trust societies, that we world not yet again live better than we do now if we spoke more truthfully than we do now.
The reasons are not terribly hard to understand. And in simple terms the people you associate with are more important in determining your prosperity and safety than your own abilities.
So just as the Flynn effect is the product of reducing the bottom and saturating everyone else in scientific general rules, we can likewise expect the same increase by saturating everyone in testimonial speech and reducing the bottom.
We are not yet at the end of history. There is a long way to go. And perhaps the reson we seem stalled in physics is because we aren’t producing enough patterns in our own behavior to deduce the construction of the rest of the universe.
The Universal, Reciprocal, Insurance, of Sovereignty To All Who Will Take the Oath.
“I will fight for your sovereignty if you will fight for mine.”
Brothers in arms first.
Our People Third.
That’s why the west is best.
Trust let us evolve faster than the rest.
Trust creates economic velocity, technical velocity, and martial agility.
( edited by William L. Benge )
THE NEXT GREAT LEAP 🙂
“The next great leap in human civilization is not technology. it’s morality and law: truth telling. It will be as great a leap as science has been.”
THE BAD AND THE UGLY — BUT NOT THE GOOD
“And likewise I am quite certain that just as the mystics fought reason tooth and nail, and just as the religious and theological fought empiricism tooth and nail, and just as the spiritual fought darwin tooth and nail, and those who practice theology, rationalism, and pseudoscience, and justificationary deception will fight tooth and nail.”
“Because, each of these groups profits from their lies.”
THERE’$ LITERALLY NO EXCU$E FOR ALL THE GREAT LIE$ THEY CONTINUE TELLING TO MI$LEAD AND BILK MANKIND
“But how many fundamental truths are there? (we have estimates in the range of a few hundred to less than two thousand). Why is it that people should be lied to and not taught truth, or spoken to, but not spoken to truthfully, or speak, and not speak truthfully?
Why do we have any more right to pollute the informational commons than we do the other commons of air, water, and land? Why can we cause informational harm out of ignorance, yet we are prohibited from economic and criminal harm out of ignorance or not?
What was the cost of literacy? What was the cost of creating rule of law? What was the cost of western high trust?”
TOLERANCE FOR LIES IS COMPLICITY, FRAUD
“Tolerance is an excuse to conflate convenience (cost) with conviction, in exhcange for false status signals, fraudueltly obtained, by the pretense of charity versus the evasion of the tax necessary for the preservation of a high-trust society and its benefits.
The tolerant so to speak are just engaged in fraud and nothing more.”
Q&A: “Curt: How would you compare the merits of the British civilization viz a viz the accomplishments of the ancient Greek civilization?”
The Aegean vs The North Sea
Reason vs Empiricism
Slave-hold Manors vs Manorialism
Athens/Sparta vs England/Germany
Rome vs the United States
Bronze vs steel
Trireme vs warship
In other words, there isnt any difference.
Athens and sparta exahusted each other leaving rome like england and germany exhausted each other leaving america.
The question is whether we spend another thousand years trying to restore our civilization, or we do it today.