Sunday, September 30, 2018
Xenomorphic anarchism is the concept of using the resources of the state to destroy the state from within. Why xenomorphic? Because in the 1979 movie Alien an organism infests its host, gestates inside of it, and then comes bursting out of the chest of the host. The ideal xenomorphic anarchist runs for President of The United States while pretending to be a completely normal pro-Cathedral Democrat. He (or she), then proceeds to direct hundreds of billions of dollars in funds to anarchist technology projects, off the books, without being noticed. He seeks to make statism technologically impossible.
The perfect xenomorphic anarchist gives you 3D printed atomic bombs in 3 to 5 years, decentralized ISP, drug 3D printers that can make any drug you want, international untraceable crypto currency, smart contracts that can be used to build alternative political and economic systems, and everything else, and uses taxpayer dollars to do it.
Thursday, September 27, 2018
Why repeat myself when I can just republish myself?
First a twitter comment:
I said is before a few years ago and I will say it again because now is the perfect time:— McKibben (@AMK2934) September 28, 2018
As the government expands so do the costs of losing control over it. Thus, THE LARGER THE STATE THE MORE HYSTERICAL THE POPULATION, because the more each person stands to lose by losing https://t.co/o6WmHQgBXf
bought the law remain in power, so that the law once made, is never repealed.— McKibben (@AMK2934) September 28, 2018
Thus, all democracies evolve from libertarian to totalitarian as their legal codes expand without bound.
Actually Existing Democracy, Part One
Powerful people don't think like you. You look up at the system and see injustice. The powerful look down at you and see incentives for wealth, power, and success. It is these incentives that drive their behavior, and it can be shocking and enraging to see the world through their eyes. But that is what we are going to do. We are going to look at how the system really works.
The Subject of Economics is Incomplete
Economics is defined as the study of how humans fulfill unlimited wants with scarce means. It is the view of this author that the entire economic profession erred when it classified the study of government as something separate and distinct from itself. This occurred because the economist failed to correctly rectify the terms used to describe what the state was doing. He took the states terminology of itself for granted rather that realizing that all worlds the state uses to describe itself are meant to conceal its true activity. The state is by nature a corrupt and coercive institution. As such, it's politics is never rationally described on the face of things because it has an institutional need, one may say a marketing need, to hide what is really does in order to gain public support and minimize insurrection. Lying saves money are reduces the number of people you have to kill; it is utility maximizing.
The second flaw in economic analysis is the idea that humans are motivated by greed — that man is homo economicus. But money is only one path to utility, and the ultimate utility for a human primate is sex, and more directly, what sex produces in the form of children. Humans are biological organisms and thus all utility is derivative of those things that yield reproductive fitness. As a result, the whole range of what yields fitness is the proper study of economics. An expansive and complete economics would be defined in terms like, "the means by which humans further large wants of sexual fitness in the face of limited means of achieving sexual desires," with wealth pursuit being only one of those means, and pursued typically by men. Women do not typically pursue wealth for reproductive success since men are not hypergamous like women are, and since a high status female (high in the financial sense) may actually harm her reproductive success. For a woman, high status is found in high attraction, and not in high wealth. All of these forms of utility are proxies for reproduction and sex.
Utility does not just come through money. In point of fact, money is one of the weakest motivations. It also arises through the pursuit of power, status, popularity, charisma, and beauty. Popularity often translates more effectively into reproductive success that any of these other ones.
Secondly, economics must contain the full range of human behavior that enables physical survival, since one cannot reproduce if one is dead. And thirdly, the subject of economics is incomplete if it does not encapsulate politics completely.
One often hears endless debates over what exactly IS capitalism. Oftentimes the libertarian argument is made that "this isn't the true capitalism," meaning, and activity that is exploitative and corrupt cannot really be indicative of capitalism because it occurred under market conditions that were distorted by the violence of the state. This debate is even more pronounced when left libertarians point out that the state nearly always puts its thumb on the scale on the side of capital and against labor.
These endless arguments over terminology are useless and I won't engage in them. We will define ALL human activity through economics and start by defining the role of the state in it. Then we will see that there is no such thing as this "ism" or that "ism," but that it is all just a market of human behavior, and that the state lies at one extreme of coercive market behavior while the "free market" lies at the other extreme. It is a continuum of market behavior ranging from one theoretical state of pure voluntary exchange on one side, to another extreme of pure coercive slavery on the other, with the vast majority of human behaviors ranging somewhere on this continuum and all being more or less distorted by asymmetrical coercive force. Even the simple relationship of an employee to their employee involves an asymmetry; the employer knows more about what the employee is worth financially than the employee does, and the employer has more bargaining power since the employee may become homeless if chronically unemployed for too long. So a simple, seemingly consensual transaction can be less consensual that it looks.
A lot of economics is about the behavior of humans under conditions of theoretical pure competition. It is easy to model mathematically. This is about actually existing economics as it really occurs, and specifically about actually existing democracy.
The Rectification of Names
Let us go through a list of terms and replace them with more correct ones.
The free market is actually a theoretical pure archetype. In reality all transactions are semi-free in modern corrupt states since the state is producing various market distortions for its clients. The free market is thus semi-free and always operating under distortion.
The state is actually a coercion market. That is, it is a market that sells coercive force to private buyers. While it is true,that it often legislates in the general interest, (the criminal code is an example of this), it is also true that it is in the general interest of its client lobbyists and public interest groups to have a properly functioning society and economy. Just as the selfish desires of individual businessmen may lead to an "invisible hand" of collective public good in production, so the selfish interest of various pressure groups acting upon the legislative process may also produce legislation in favor of the general welfare, especially if they negotiate and compromise their interests against each other. So despite the fact that the state is a marketplace for the purchasing of laws, it may still legislate for the common good most of the time. Even parasites need a function economy to expropriate.
A senator or congressman is actually a coercion market broker that sells other peoples money. The state has a monopoly on the use of force. But it sells this monopoly through either bribes or campaign contributions. A very real example is the ban on Canadian drug imports. Canada has a process for drug approval that is adequate for drug safety. There is no legitimate reason to prohibit the importation of Canadian pharmaceuticals. Yet, this is done anyway. Every truck driver that is arrested for crossing the Canadian border with safe drugs that are legal in Canada is being arrested to enforce the cartel rights of American pharmaceutical manufacturers. This is done only to enforce artificially high prices for drugs, and this sort of thing is done in countless industries.
A lobbyist is actually a buyer of coercion market services, (force) or defense from force, (protection).
A campaign contribution is actually the financial sponsorship of a coercion market broker with the expectation of future reward in the form of economic rents, favors, or protections from force.
A bribe is a direct purchase of a vote from a coercion market broker. A bribe entitles the purchaser to buy the vote of a Congressman on the honor system: the Congressman may not vote the way he is bribed to. Generally, all bribes are aggregated with the others, so that the highest total aggregation of bribes wins out. Bribes are less effective at buying political positions than candidate sponsorship (campaign contributions), thus, the buyers of the coercion market (lobbyists) have allowed laws to be passed that outlawed bribery because it was less effective at controlling politicians than sponsorship. Campaign finance laws are not intended to protect the voter. They are intended to make the process of vote buying more reliable by switching the market to a model of candidate sponsorship, similar to the way individual athletes are sponsored by advertising.
There are two voting systems in a democracy. One is the formal vote that all Americans may participate in. The other is the market vote. In the market vote, first the market decides what candidates it will sponsor (give contributions to). It chooses from a range of options the candidates that are most likely to produce a return on investment. The longer the candidate has been in office the more established his voting record and the more predictable and less risky he tends to be as an investment. Thus, the market favors incumbents and they tend to win elections more often than challengers. A conservative war hawk may receive market sponsorship (contributions) because he is tough on crime (good for the pockets of police unions), a war hawk, (good for the pockets of defense contractors and veterans), while a Democrat may receive sponsorship from labor unions, teachers unions, academics, and students because of their financial interests. Conversely, a libertarian will often not receive much sponsorship because he enriches no one. The market vote has the effect of sorting out unprofitable candidates. Since sincere politicians tend to be mentally unbalanced, it often times also has a screening effect on the mental health of candidates. AFTER, the market has sorted for profitability through sponsorship the formal vote is held where the people "decide" who will be their leader. Of course, all candidates have already been chosen through this market sponsorship mechanism that behaves exactly as if it were a formal vote that uses money instead of ballots. Thus, all elections are really two-part affairs; one involving money and a second part involving ballots. The first election, the monetary election, produces a sorting effect of candidates in favor of the market. The second election then chooses from these candidates.
- A monarchy is a monopolized coercion market that "underperforms" at redistribution. If performance is measured as redistribution then monarchy underperforms at it best. Note that "redistribution" here says nothing about its direction upward or downward, and the term "performance" does not make a moral assertion.
- A multi-party democracy is an oligopolistic coercion market. These oligopolies are usually operating on various versions of the Westminster system. Oligopolistic coercion markets have the most generous welfare states and the most responsive governments.
- A two-party democracy is a duopolistic coercion market that remains duopolistic because the two players (political parties) cooperate to exclude third parties with winner-take-all rules.
- A political party is actually a firm whose "profits" come in the form of votes. Since profits in a coercion market are a zero-sum game between competitors, and a negative sum game for society as a whole, one firms "profits," (or votes), must always come at the expense of the other. Actors are willing to participate in a zero-sum game because their utility comes from power, and because of the economic rents they receive. Costs are ultimately paid by third-parties.
- Voting is actually giving profit to one or more of the coercion brokers sponsored by a party and it's campaign contributors (financial sponsors).
- Votes are a form of property in government which is non-transferable, cannot be accumulated, can be used only once, are exercised anonymously, and are theoretically equal. Votes are a type of share, or corporate stock which pays no dividends directly, and which has zero transferability rights. The act of eliminating transferability rights (sale of votes) protects small players at the expense of larger players.
- Redistribution is actually "market performance" in a coercion market.
- Indoctrination is actually marketing for power. Indoctrination is to the state what marketing is to the firm.
- The coercion market has at least five actors; the buyer (client of the lobbyist), the sales broker, (lobbyist), the primary seller of other peoples money, (the permanent civil service), the secondary seller of other peoples money, (Congressman), and the defender against attack (person or group being expropriated). Usually, the defender is absent from negotiations.
Friday, September 14, 2018
Jordan Peterson: fat shit. Here he is in 2010 eating a standard American diet filled with carbohydrates, chemicals, and processed foods. He used to have depression too.
Now here he is after eating MEAT for years. He also ate some greens for a while.
Peterson is on a meat only diet. I have trouble believing any human can do that without going blind, but whatever. What do I know. He says that it has cured his depression and his daughters medical problems. I have no reason to disbelieve either of them because body types differ radically.
I have my own theory about why the meat only diet might get results, which is that micro plastics and phthalates are laced in absolutely everything. There are two biological effects that occur in the natural world that are mediated by animal protein, and those are bio-magnification and animal liver filtration.
Bio-magnification is what happens when toxins accumulate as they move up the food chain. This is why fish have mercury, and why sharks have more mercury. The larger the fish the higher the mercury content since it is higher on the food chain.
Animal liver filtration is what happens when the liver of an animal processes out toxins so that the resultant product is less toxic to ha human being. Basically the animal performs some of the process of processing harmful chemicals for you, kind of like how cooking is a form of partial digestion.
Anyway, my theory is that Mikhaila Peterson is actually just allergic to some chemical that is in everything BUT meat, since whatever that chemical is is filtered out by the livers of the cows she eats. Micro-plastics? Phthalates? Triclosan? Even our water supply contains trace amounts of antibiotics, synthetic hormones, birth control, opiates, pesticides, etc. By the time water flowing from Colorado (my state) reaches Louisiana it has been through the bodies of an average of 3 humans or 5 animals. We piss it out and it goes to the waste treatment facility where it is cleaned almost to the point of being drinkable, yes drinkable. You could almost get away with holding a cup up to the sewage treatment plant outflow spigot and drink from it. Almost. You can thank the EPA for that.
She might just be allergic to Roundup or something, and cow livers are the only thing that can process it out. How do you go on a chemical elimination diet?
Remember: chemicals versus elements. Mercury is an element. As such it will bio-magnify as it travels up the food chain. So is lead, strontium 90, etc. All poisonous metals and some chemical compounds will bio-magnify, but with most chemicals there is the possibility of natural metabolism and breakdown in the livers of other animals. Thus, it can be safer to eat meat than fish, and safer to eat meat than plants, especially if the animal is just eating plants all day and running toxins out through its liver.
Saturday, September 8, 2018
Thinking is an art and people who do it well have far less psychological pain that others. For example, take the following two statements;
"Capitalism will destroy us all"The first statement is a factual assertion, that is, it is an assertion in the category of positive information. The second statement is a normative statement, or value statement. Alternately it might be rephrased as the positive statement "capitalism is treated as the best thing ever by humans."
"Capitalism is the best thing ever."
The above two examples are just examples, and not important. The important thing is that the above two statements are not actually contradictions. It is possible for capitalism to both be the best thing ever and to be destroying us. In fact, only the best thing ever could destroy us because humans would fight against obvious danger. Only something that was so good we could never give it up could destroy us.
The reader may be tempted to concentrate on the issue of capitalism, and I apologize for distracting you with that, but this is not about capitalism. It is about category errors and cognition.
Inevitably people think badly because they respond to one category with another category of assertion. Someone will say something like;
"X is a fact"and another person will say;
"X is immoral/evil/racist"What is going here is that a person is responding to information in one category: "potentially factual statements," with another category, "moral statements or objections."
The same happens in reverse;
"Y is evil"
"Yeah, but factually it is economically efficient."People are always tripping past each other with category errors. Simply put;
FACTUAL INFORMATION SHOULD BE REFUTED WITH FACTUAL CLAIMS AND MORAL ASSERTIONS SHOULD BE REFUTED WITH MORAL CLAIMS, AND THE TWO SHOULD NEVER CROSS.
Doing this one thing (keeping the factual separate from the moral) will alleviate almost all the psychological tension in your life surrounding politics.
People think badly because they cannot stop their knee-jerk reactions from interfering with their judgement. They cannot stop their knee-jerk reactions because they refuse to separate factual and moral information. Morality is the end of logic. The minute you say "ought" "should" or "must" you have already stopped thinking.
Friday, September 7, 2018
Sunday, September 2, 2018
Bitch rant. . .
The Old Testament is a book written by jews, for jews. It tells them how to survive in the midst of enemies who want to destroy them. It advocates compulsory monogamy, suppression of degeneracy, and the enslavement of the enemies of Israel. Not only does it advocate killing people who challenge the faith and engage in sodomy, but it advocates stoning: a form of punishment that makes the entire community guilty of murder by giving everyone the motivated cognition necessary to believe the murder was just. If The People constitute the executioners then The People will justify execution on principle.
The New Testament is a book written by jews, for gentiles. It advocates love, peace, harmony, socialism, and adultery. It tells you to leave your family and follow a jewish teacher. Socialism has destroyed every society that has tried it. Adultery has destroyed every marriage that has tried it.
The white race is the "Outer Party" to the "Inner Party" of the jewish race. There are two books because there are two parties represented by two races. There are three layers; the "high" (jews), the "middle" (whites), and the "low" (minorities). As the book says, the proles (minorities) are animals, and there is a constant war of the high against the middle in alliance with the low.
Every ownership race needs a competent and trustworthy management race.
The last time the Outer Party tried to become the Inner Party was Nazi Germany. It's failure makes it evil, otherwise we would all think it good, since history is written by the winners.
The moon landing was not an american achievement. It was the remnants of the old Confederacy riding rockets engineered by the remnants of Nazi Germany, which was later culturally appropriated as american success. (See this). But america is a communist country, and communists are too stupid to build rockets. Now we appropriate the technological achievements of a White South African to give us reusable rockets. He is a remnant of apartheid. When he is done there will be no more remnants.
The origin of equality is the institutional need of the catholic church (Outer Party Ministry) to grow beyond the confines of the white race. If all humans are equal then they are equally capable of salvation, equally capable of paying tithe, etc., and The church is equally capable of growing fat off their donations. Equality enables the profit margin.
This standardization of the parishioner precedes the standardized consumer, and follows the standardization of god(s) through monotheism. The jews standardized god, which destroyed the Roman Empire, the Empire that made the mistake of conquering them. A jewish man, saul of tarsus, exported the cult of death and mysticism to Rome during the occupation of israel by Emperor Tiberius. Gnosticism is the form of christianity without unprincipled exceptions.
First the gods are standardized through monotheism. Then the believer is standardized through equality. Then his genetics are standardized through gene editing. Capitalism worships the standard object, the standard employee, the standard international law, the monoculture, the "international style" of glass skyscraper. Capitalism is the standardization of everything that follows the standardization of religion in the feudal era.
Religion passes through different hands; first various tribes and their various individual gods, the the state and its one god, then the corporation and is godless worship of objects. First the christian was too holy for the many pagan gods of Rome, then the puritan was too holy for the pope. The atheist is too holy for God, and the social justice warrior is too holy for reality.
The uniqueness of the white race is it's division of racial labor. All other races are more or less a single thing, but the division of western society is not just a division of labor between races, (jews, whites, and prole/minority), but a division within the white race itself. There is some hand wringing about where asians fit into this.
Whites are divisible into vaishyas, brahmins, and jews (if you include jews as part of the white race). These roughly translate as warriors/lower management, upper management, and owners.
Warriors/vaishyas come from Scots-Irish ancestry. They were shit on by the British for a thousand years and genetically adapted to serving masters who hate them. They are your modern cuckservatives. Their loyalty is worse than a dogs, and they don't even yelp when beaten. The purpose of the vaishyas is to kill the enemies of the jews and fight israel's wars for her. The warriors are sent in to exterminate the native americans, or butcher the aztecs, or enslave the africans. Afterward they will bear the cultural shame so that upper management can wash its hands of things.
Then come the liberals/brahmins. Their purpose is to thrive in the spaces cleared by conservative genocide. while virtue signaling against the conservatives/vaishyas who protect them from minorities/proles.
Equality and war a are both gene maximizing strategies. War maximizes gene flow by clearing the field of genetic competition through genocide. Equality transfers wealth to the poorer members of your society so they can have more children. Equality enables you to fill up the environment with children once you have cleared it.
The conservatives clear the territory. The liberals occupy and fill it up. The jews bankroll the whole operation. The minorities serve as manual labor slaves, (hispanics) or paid thugs, (blacks) to keep the conservatives in line. The whole operation is an elaborate caste system and profit machine disguised as a battle for equality.
The low have superstition. The middle have FAITH. The upper management has "atheism." The owners have "reform judaism."