(CD: add institutional differences, then differences in what they solve for reflecting evolutionary computation.)

The Short Version

1. Causality: All causality, and all of existence, results from the universe’s attempt to release pressure by decreasing dissipation (entropy) or increasing organization (negentropy).

2. (computation) Causality calculates potential for increasing organization

3. (Growth) A stable relation in time increases the opportunity for additional persistence over time both by its durability over time and its potential for increase by recombination.

4. All resulting phenomena, both organic and non, can be described as evolutionary computation of acquisition of energy(mass), by the process of continuous recursive disambiguation.

5. (life computation – genetics)

6. (sex computation – sex )

7. (cooperative computation – memory )

X3. Man Acquires: All all human cognition, emotion, and demonstrated behavior can be described as the acquisition of, and loss aversion to, life, time, material, cooperative, and common capital.

X4. Man Cooperates To Decrease Cost of Acquisition:

X5: Cooperation Requires Reciprocity to test Evolutionary Computation:

4. Man Divides Labor: All human differences in cognition, emotion, and demonstrated behavior can be described as sex differences (biases) in the division of the labor of evolutionary computation of time and population: female empathic, short, continuous, low risk, interpersonal, social, and male systematizing, long, peaks-and-valleys, high-risk, material, political.

X5. Man Organizes: All human organizational differences evolve from the three possible means of influence, coercion, and power, female undermining-seductive-caretaking, male forceful-defense-producing, or neutral, reciprocally beneficial, exchanges (trades).

X6. Man Organizes Institutions: All human political organizations evolve from the three methods of influence, coercion, and power: Feminine Seductive Social Constriction and Religion, Neutral Trade and Contract Law, or Masculine Forceful State and Military.

X7. Man Forms Polities …

X8. With A Founding Institution: All human civilizations develop these institutions in different orders, either rule of religion, rule of state, or rule of law.

X8. Institutions Create Path Dependence: All human civilizations produce institutions that are path-dependent upon the order of their development. The first institution is strongest, the second less so and the third weakest or a failed institution.

X9. Founding Institutions Vary In Rates of Evolutionary Computation: Of these institutions, Religion is negatively (Devolutionarily) computational. The state is statically (Stagnatingly) computational, and Law is Positively (Evolutionarily) computational.

X10. The Order of Institutions Determines Rates of Evolutionary Computation: The rate of evolutionary computation, the rate of innovation, adaptation, evolution, and the condition of the population during that devolution, stagnation, or evolution is determined by the order of, and path dependency of, founding institutions.

X11. (What institutions Solve-for determines rate of evolutionary computation)

X11. Human Nature Is Counter To Evolutionary Computation: Human nature drives to minimize costs, to seek the least work, to seek the least thought, to seek the least adaptation, and therefore, genetically, cognitively, socially, and politically regress to the mean of the ability of the population.

X12. Organizing Humans into Evolutionary Computation is Difficult, Rare, and Unfortunately, Unique: It is contrary to human nature to seek to maximize costs of physical, behavioral, cognitive, adaptation, duty to the commons before the self, truth before face to the self, family, or dominance hierarchy – despite that this produces the most commons, with the highest trust, highest risk tolerance, highest economic velocity, highest investment, and fastest innovation, adaptation, and evolution.

13. Europeans began voluntary organization by military entrepreneurship, producing law as the first institution, then state, then religion. This sequence of institutions (law > state > religion) produces the maximum rate of evolutionary computation at the minimum resistance to evolutionary innovation, and adaptation. European group strategy is the maximum means of evolutionary computation possible by man.

14. European group strategy consists in the One law:

Maximization of Evolutionary Computation, by maximizing the opportunity for self-determination, by reciprocal insurance of self-determination, by reciprocal insurance of sovereignty in demonstrated interests, limiting all to reciprocity in display word and deed, truth before face, and duty before self,

15. Europeans Alone Evolved Continuous Evolutionary Computation: While counter-intuitive, Europeans managed to defeat of the evolutionary Red Queen, by the mass production of self-determination, by reciprocal insurance of sovereignty in demonstrated interests, limiting us all to reciprocity in display, word, and deed, truth before face, duty before self, and markets in all aspects of life: association, cooperation, production, reproduction, commons, polities, and war.

Europeans mastered the production of commons. Europeans mastered ourselves, mankind, and the universe, by paying the high cost of producing commons, by the primary value of heroism: contribution to the commons from which we all gain, instead, of self, family, kin.

16. Christianity was successful because while Europeanism was an aristocratic meritocratic political order, Christianity gave women, and immigrants, slaves, and serfs, a means of heroic contribution to the commons, political worth, social worth, self-worth, and the resulting mindfulness, despite the absence of ability, knowledge, resources, or influence, by the extension of kinship love to the community thereby, solving the hard problem of social science: trust.

Commons-ism (capitalization) not Communism (consumption).

14. Every other civilization failed. And they all failed by 800ad. And if that doesn’t scare you. If that doesn’t make you defend European Civilization regardless of cost. Then you might want to think harder about what’s “good” or “right”. Because the universe is dark and full of terror without it.

The Long Version

Part I – Evolutionary Computation

Analogy To Experience

Existential, Operational, Intuitionism, Classical, vs Abstract, Ideal, Platonic, Mathy

The Universe’s Problem

“It has nowhere to go”

Under Pressure (Positive Pressure), The Universe only has the following three choices…

Vibrate (emit waves) (Wave, Frequency, Movement)
Rotate (externalize) (Polarity, Velocity)
Accumulate (increase) (Charge, Space)

… or to Dissipate into an available vacuum (Negative Pressure)

Note that we have not violated any intuition whatsoever in this description. (no additional dimensions, not magical space-time properties)

Spin

(Spin Image)

Flywheel (Think Gyroscope)

SUMMARY

Pressure vs Vacuum

Stable Relations

Or Dissipate (Collapse)

So we capture energy in a stable relation, or we don’t.

(sex differences illustration here)

TOPICS:

1) ” the problem of creating a scale-independent system of measurement

with terminology that developed for each stage of the scale. “

2) ” decidability, computation, cooperation, and sex “

3) Then back to continuing yesterday’s work.

4) Failure to operationalize math by computation, and failure to operationalize electromagnetism, leading to failure to solve the operations of the Aether, leading to einstein-bohr’s re-platonization of both math and physics, resulting in the loss of a century.

—

TOPIC: Decidabiilty vs vs Judgement(judge, law, procedure), Judgement (jury, incentives) vs Discretion(Sentencing)

—–

TOPIC: From Fitting(analogy, meaning) to Constructing (description, causality).
Our triangles are a tool reminidng us of the the first principle of stable relations that we use for disambiguation into measurement, not categorization of ideals thereby destroying the measurment we set out to produce!

In other words, there is a human tendency to ‘fitting’ into analogy brought about by both theological fitting, and philosophical fitting, versus ‘unfitting’ by disambiguating into scientific first principles.

People are want to auto associate into categories of what they think they know, instead of construct from first principles.

The point of producing the first principles of logics (the grammars), the first principles of the physical world (physics), and the first principles of the psychological world (individual), and the first principles of the cooperative (group), and first principles of consequences of group cooperation (evolution) is to memorize those four sets of rules and always and everywhere construct the description of causality from first principles specifically so that we don’t engage in ‘fitting’.

So again, P-Law is procedurally identical to mathematics in that there are a limited (very limited) set of rules of construction: first principles. Where first principle, again, means irreducible and therefore causal. All first principles at all scales (physical, individua, group, and evolutionary) are but expressions of (derivations of) the first principle of the universe: stable relations produced by the capture of energy.

Now, this is the reason why P-Law can be taught just as say geometry can be taught, and by the same method of teaching: problem solving and repetition until the rules are intuitive. It’s also the reason it’s difficult for people who have already been WRONGLY TAUGHT. The reason is that those who have not been wrongly taught are indoctrinated into ‘fitting’, and so the cost of retraining is far higher.

Furthermore. for the people who have been wrongly taught, they often have malinvested in historicism, theology, philosophy, ideology, pseudoscience, or sophistry in order to justify some self interest or prior, instead of seeking the truth before face at all costs.

I. WHAT ARE WE CREATING?

A universal system of measurement, producing universal decidability, or the science of decidability, Consisting of:
… A Paradigm
… … Consisting of A first principle
… … … Subsequent first principles
… A Vocabulary
… … consisting of a set of series of terms
… … each of which names a qualitative position in an order
… … for all Dimensions of Human Faculties
… … Including the sensory (physical), intuitionistic (perceptive), valuative (emotional), rational.
… .. … Including human sense, perception, prediction, attention, reason, calculation, computation, and Action.
… A Logic (testes of hierarchies of constant relations)
… A Grammar of that logic (Rules of continuous Recursive Disambiguation)
Sufficient for the measurement, description, testing, and falsification of human expressions including claims, assertions, descriptions.
… Where Operational Grammar, consisting of a sequence of actions, is the most unambiguous, complete, testable, and falsifiable logic possible for man, because operations test identity, consistency, possibility, rationality, limits, completeness, and correspondence which are the full set of consistencies open to human experience, and reducible to analogies to experience, which are in turn testable by man. In other words, that is the full set of dimensions possible to test, and therefore possible to testify: the geometry of testimony.

This universal system of measurement, science of decidability, completes the Wilsonian Synthesis of uniting the formal, physical, behavioral, and evolutionary science into a single testable unambiguous, internally consistent, and externally correspondent paradigm.

This universal system of measurement can then be used as the foundation for Law, and a constitution of scientific political, economics, social, and familial order, we call ‘Natural Law”.

As such the output of our work. is a constitution of natural law: scientific law, rule, government, economy, polity, commons, and family.

So is this logic, science, law, philosophy, morality, or theology?

Under Natural Law they are all the same – as long as they are not false. 😉

II. FIRST PRINCIPLES:

EXISTENCE

( … )

COMPUTATION

“Continous Recursive Disambiguation(sortition) of Disorder(entropy) into Order(organization) by ‘Cooperation’ that reduces costs of acquisition of energy into a stable relation we call mass.”

ACCUMULATION (PERSISTENCE BY ACCUMULATION)

LIFE (PERSISTENCE BY ADAPTATION) (CARBON-HYDROGEN BONDS)

SEXUAL COMPUTATION (EVOLUTIONARY ADAPTATION)

MOVEMENT (NEURAL COMPUTATION AND ADAPTATION)

BEHAVIORAL (NEURAL) COMPUTATION

ACQUISITION

Time
Acquire more resources than you expend in time.

Acquisition
Positiva: Gain, Preservation, Negativa: Consumption, Loss
(what gets your attention. is gain or loss)

Biological Economy
… The greatest return, in the shortest time, with the least effort at the greatest certainty, at the lowest risk … in competition with all other opportunities.

Neural Economy
… The least cost of computation of preference and wayfinding, maintain it, in competition with other preferences (opportunities) in the face of fear and uncertainty. (cognitive overconfidence) (success memory bias).

COGNITIVE BIASES IN COMPUTATION

( … )

PERSONALITY BIAS IN COMPUTATION (Before, During, After)

( … )

COGNITIVE CYCLE

( … )

PREY CYCLE (BIOLOGICAL)(INDIVIDUAL)

Rest, Awareness (variation in … ), patrol, hunt, stalk, chase, pounce-strike, kill, eat (feast), socialize, sex, decrease awareness, rest.

MINDFUL CYCLE (NEURAL) (SOCIAL) (NON AGGRESSION)

See also: Feast (Festival), Storytelling, Oath. Variation of Prey Cycle for Social animals. Naturally unequal, spiritual (running with the pack-herd), to create temporary equality, producing mindfulness despite status differences.

Pack (M:Predator) vs Herd (F:Prey)

COOPERATIVE COMPUTATION

COOPERATION

Perception: Division of temporal perception in space and time and population divides the labor of sensing, perceiving, discovering, and advocating opportunities.
Cooperation: Cooperation identifies opportunities of shared (common) rather than self-interest. (That’s the equals sign in a stable persistent constant relation)
Cooperation in a social group then provides individuals in a distribution of age, sex, ability, experience, and knowledge with access to a broader range of opportunities at a lower cost (greater discounts)
Same: Discounts on Time in exploiting an opportunity by reducing its costs.
Different: Division of Labor (discount on time plus switching costs) (adam smith pins)
Scope and Scale: Some opportunities cannot be seized without scale, which expands the opportunities for the group.
A multiplier of Opportunity: By saving time we create the opportunity to seize more opportunities.
General Rule: Increases in population increase opportunities, and increases in the density of population decrease opportunity costs.
General Rule: Every doubling of populations produces 20-25% more of everything (both good and bad).
General Rule: Power law of leadership will always emerge (Decidability). Pareto Distribution of influence will always emerge (Reciprocity). Nash Equilibrium of Returns will always seek to emerge to varying degrees (Proportionality).

TERNARY LAW OF COOPERATION

Preserve State (homeostasis) Preserve – Defend
Avoid Costs
Acquire Gains

Cooperate opportunistically, regularly, or consistently
Avoid, Boycott, or Defect
Conflict, Predation, Parasitism, Free Riding

When is Cooperation Rational?
When is Avoidance Rational?
When is Conflict Rational? (free riding, parasitism, predation, eradication)

LAWS OF DECIDABILITY OF COOPERATION (FIRST PRINCIPLES)

What is philosophy: a paradigm of choice. The light version of Decidability. Not on first principles but on some paradigm that permits (justifies) choice.

1. What is the first question of Philosophy? (Personal Philosophy) Why don’t I commit suicide?
2. What is the second question of philosophy? Why don’t I kill you and take your stuff? (Ethics)
3. What is the third question of philosophy? Why don’t I and mine kill you and yours and take your stuff? (Politics)
4. The Fourth Question a group must answer is: “How shall we organize our people with myths, arguments, and rules to survive and prosper in competition from nature and man?” That the question of Group Evolutionary Strategy,
5. The Fifth Question a group must answer is “What are the limits of tolerance for life, for ethics, for politics, and for group evolutionary strategy, before we resort to suicide, separation, free riding, parasitism, predation, and the condition of victimhood?” That is the Question of Limits.

LIMITS TO COOPERATION
You have to be able to cooperate. Some can’t.
How do you distinguish between inability (trying) and unwillingness (cheating)? So we create polities to maintain the maximum productivity limiting claims of inability in suppression of unwillingness (cheating).

Therefore the importance of a hierarchy of power distance: Family -> Church -> Polity -> Court -> Military.
Internal Defection: Reciprocity within the limits of proportionality.
External Retaliation: Reciprocity Within the limits of proportionality.

THE LAW OF RECIPROCITY (Morality). (Evil, Immoral < Unethical < Amoral > Ethical Moral > Virtuous)

The Preservation of Cooperation, (virtuous cycles)
And The Avoidance of Retaliation, (retaliation cycles)
By the requirement for:
… Productive (Not Unproductive),
… Exhaustively Informed (Not Selectively Informed),
… Warrantied (Not evading of Warranty),
… Voluntary transfer (Not involuntary transfer)
… … of Demonstrated Interests (Not undemonstrated interests, and no contribution to interests.)
… … … free of imposition of costs upon the demonstrated interests of others, and … … … … within the limits of liability and restitution.

What is the scope of Reciprocity? Reciprocity in Deed, Word, and Display.

TRUTH

DECIDABILITY

How do we decide if your words are True (truthful) vs false (ignorance, error, bias, or deceit)?

What does decidable mean?

Decidable: Testimony unambiguously sufficient for satisfication liability in the question at hand.”

Decidable: Satisfaction of demand for infallibility (liability) given the question at hand.

Criteria: It meets the expectations of those who would retaliate against you if you failed due diligence against ignorance, error, bias, deceit, fraud, and denial.

TRUTH …

Testimony that provides Satisfaction of Demand For Infallibility in the question at hand by those affected internally or externally by the speech, display, or action. “I promise, and warranty that …. ” is a performative truth: testimony.

Who? Is Such a Claim Sufficient For?

EPISTEMOLOGY

MEANING

DECEIT

THE GRAMMARS

THE LAW OF DEMONSTRATED INTEREST (Preserve-Defend, Gain-Acquire, Loss Aversion)

( … )

Existential (or Natural) Interests: (TIME)

1. Self:
Life, Body, Genes,
Memories, Mind, Attention
Time, and Action
Stimulation, Experience

2. Kin and Interpersonal (Relationship) Interests (Nepotistic, Genetic Distance interests)
Mates (access to sex/reproduction), and Marriage
Children (genetic reproduction)
Consanguineous Relations (family, kin, clan, tribal and national relations)

3. Reputation, Status, and Class (reputation, honor) (discounts on opportunities for cooperation)
Self-Image, Reputation, Status,
Social, Sexual, Economic, Political, and Military Market Value

4. Sustainable Patterns of Association, Cooperation, Insurance, Reproduction, Production, Distribution and Trade (Captured Discounts)
Friends, Acquaintances, Neighbors,
Cooperative Relations, Commercial Relations,
Political Relations, and Military Relations.

2. Obtained Interests include:

Obtained Interests Include:

6. Several (Personal, Monopoly) Interests
Several Property: Those things we claim a monopoly of control over.

7. Shareholder (Fractional) Interests
Shares in property: Recorded And Quantified Shareholder Property (claims for partial ownership).

8. Title Interests (Weights and Measures)
Trademarks and Brands (prohibitions on fraudulent transfers within a geography).

9. Artificial Interests (Privileges)
Letters of Marque, Patents, Copyrights, Grants of License.

COMMON INTERESTS

1. Common Physical (Fractional) Interests (WAS-Before)

(1) Formal (Physical) Commons: Territorial, Resources: natural resources. It’s waterways, improvements and infrastructure.

(2) Buildings, Halls, Markets, Squares, Parks

(3) Monuments (art and artifacts).
Monuments claim territory, demonstrate wealth, and provide one of the longest most invariable normative and economic returns that any culture can construct as a demonstration of conspicuous production (wealth), and as such, conspicuous excellence. (Hence why competing monuments represent an invasion. Temples, Churches, Museums, Sculptures being the most obvious examples of cultural claim or conquest.)

2. Common Institutional (Fractional) Interests (FUTURE-During)
“Those interests into which we have invested our forgone opportunities, our efforts, or our material assets, in order to aggregate capital from multiple individuals for mutual gain.”

(1) Formal (Procedural) Institutions: Our institutions: Religion, Education, Banking, Treasury, Government, Laws, Courts.

(2) Calculative (Strategic) Institutions: Strategy, Myths, Traditions, Grammars, Arguments, Face vs Truth

(3) Informal (Normative) Institutions: Norms, morals, ethics, manners, and habits.

(4) Informational Institutions: Knowledge. Information.

3. Common Human Capital (Fractional) Interests (NOW-After)

(1) Indoctrination (Tacit knowledge)
(2) Skills (Explicit Knowledge)
(3) Cooperative Commons: Trust
(4) Population and Distribution: The distribution of our classes
(5) Genetic Interests: Our Genome

4. Common Opportunity (Fractional) Interests

Definition:

Opportunities to homestead (convert by cost) an Advantage into a Demonstrated Interest.

Whereas;

When people come together in proximity, and suppress impositions of costs upon the interests of others through the incremental evolution of the law of reciprocity, they decrease the time and effort required to produce voluntary association, cooperation and exchange. As such polities decrease opportunity costs, and in doing so generate accessible opportunities. These opportunities are un-homesteaded (opportunities), lacking demonstrated interest, until invested in by individuals either by the expenditure of time effort, and resources or by forgoing opportunities for consumption. As such the proximity of people and the institution of reciprocity under law produce a commons of opportunities that we seize (homestead) by competition. As such no one may claim an interest in an opportunity without conducting a competitive exchange by which to seize it.

Therefore;

As such no one may claim interest in an opportunity without conducting a voluntary market exchange by which to seize it.

EVOLUTION OF DEMONSTRATED INTERESTS

1. Natural Interest: One bears costs of existing and persisting (Natural Interest).
2. Demonstrated Action: One bears costs of acting (Demonstrated Action). (Settlement, Homesteading, first use, or Originating)
3. Demonstrated Cost: One bears costs of acquiring goods, services, information, opportunity by action or forgone opportunity for action.(Demonstrated Cost)
4. Demonstrated Interest: One demonstrates an interest by bearing a cost on that which no other has born a cost to demonstrate an interest (Demonstrated Interest).
5. Normative Demonstrated Interest: One consents to a portfolio of reciprocally insured property (normative property interest) with others.
6. Institutional Demonstrated Interest (Title Interest): One consents or is forced to comply with an institutional means of reciprocally insuring property with others (title interest).

Therefore;

Demonstrated interest without imposing upon others demonstrated interests is a fact. An interest has been demonstrated.

EVOLUTION OF DEFENSE OF DEMONSTRATED INTERESTS

Expansion. of the limits of cooperation:

– Possession is a fact. (Self Defend It, Self Insurance)
– Consensual Possesion (Reciprocity) (In-Family, In-Clan)
– Property requires an an agreement (Reciprocal Insurance, Family, Clan, Community Insurance) for insurance of demonstrated inerests.
– Property Rights require an institutional means of enforcement. A means of resolution of disputes.

This is the disambiguation of the term “Property“.

A Problem of Scale of Defense of Demonstrated Interests.

So, we face a cost of expanding the scale of defense of dmonstrated intersets

THE ATOMIZATION (EVOLUTION) OF CONTROL (DECIDABILITY) OVER DEMONSRATED INTERESTS

Who Depends on this asset for suvival?
(Personal items > family items = trivial)
EVOLUTION: Tribe(Land) > Family(Land) > Individual(Land).

( … ) (Quick narrative of the increasing individualization of control over assets in relation to the complexity of the division of labor.)

WHO IS THE TARGET OF THE COMMONS OF PROPERTY, DECIDABILITY, RESPONSIBILITY?

The Tribe > The Clan > The Extended Family > The Nuclear Family > The Individual

The target of commons production is one of the above. So Norms, Manners, ethics, morals, laws, Traditions are dependent upon the state of development. Because the state of development determines the atomizatino of responsibility for property.

So when people say moral relativism, its not that reciprocity isn’t universal, or morality is relative, it’s that the conditions for moral rules vary by the degreee of development – the degree of cooperation and trust.

DEFINITION OF A “RIGHT” OF DEFENSE OF DEMONSTRATED INTERESTS

( … ) (claim on community of insurers for defense of a demonstraed interest) vs (being in the ‘right’)

DISAMBIGUATION OF “RIGHTS” BY THE EVOLUTION OF “RIGHTS”

1. Wanted or Needed Rights (Insurance):

– A Natural (Necessary Right) (“Human Rights”) (Laws of cooperation)
– A Desired Natural “Contract of: Right+Obligation+Inalienation”

All Existential Rights Are Contract Rights.
We may need rights, we may want them (or not) but they must constructed by TRADE (contract), and Defended by real costs.

….. Inalienation(=)
Right(-)……….Obligation(+)

Decidability In any Conflict is always by Reciprocity. (In practice it’s the most dishonest loses)

Any Natural Right Has To Be Negativa – and is naturally reciprocal- that someone won’t do something.
Any Contractual Right Has To Be Reciprocal and Inalienable.
Any Positive, Via Positiva, “Rights” don’t exist – only Privileges.

2. Existential Rights: (via negativa) (“negative freedom”)
A Right is an Asset.
– A Produced Natural Right: A Consensual > Normative > Institutional -Natural Right. (Sovereignty, Reciprocity, Truth, Duty…etc)
– An Institutional Right of Due Process (exception, procedural right.)
– An Institutional Right of Defense (Police, Fire)
– An Institutional Right to a Commons (parks, roads, air, etc)

3. Existential Privileges (via positiva) (“positive freedom”)
– An Institutional Privilege (good, social security, health care, or education)
– An Institution Rent (bad)
– An Institutionalized Crime (corruption)
– An Institutional Evil (Camps)

PRESERVATION OF COOPERATION BY INSTITUTIONAL INSURANCE OF DEMONSTRATED INTERESTS

(Evolution of Institutions: order, law, institutions of preservation of cooperation (law) meaning decidability, need for means of decidability, morality)

How do groups resolve conflicts (disagreements) such that we preserve cooperation – You solve for reciprocity … “Fairness”

( … ).

THE MEANS OF DECIDABILITY IN THE INSURANCE OF DEMONSTRATED INTERESTS

What Knowledge Do I Use in Reconciling Conflicts – What means of decidability?

1. Knowledge Generates Demand for Via Positiva: Meaning Authority. How Evolutionary Computation, but high intentional adaptation.
and;
2. Ignorance Generates Demand for Via Negativa: Meaning Rule of Law: Markets, Markets Calculate Knowledge and Distribute It via Prices and Incentives. Hight Evolutionary Computation
And;
3. Results Generate Demand for Via (Discounts) Utility: values, tradition, norms, habits etc: Normalize and systematize calculations of reciprocity. As such you reduce the need for knowledge and can rely on habit, using neural parsimony (cheap neural economy which in turn produces mindfulness, where mindfulness is the absence of anxiety and it’s amplification by neuroticism, which inhibit action and trust. We have created a discount on cooperation that we call trust – and trust produces mindfulness.

What Causes These Disagreements and Disputes? (Scope under the triangle) Differences in our biases given our age, sex, ability, class, knowledge, experience, relationships, dependents, allies, and assets. What does that mean? The area under the triangle. Networks of sustainable production, distribution and trade.

In other words we generate demand for rules – terms of cooperation – framed in the via positiva or via negativa so that we know what to do and what not to do, and the distribution of positiva and negativa is determined by the scale of cooperation.

The group evolutionary strategy determines the limit of … first princples of decidability. Most cultures. donot know those, because they do not know their group evolutionary strateigies.

So societies evolve the incremental suppression of via-negativas into laws, and via positivas into habits, norms, traditinos, values and institutions – and institusioni persist both the existential formal and universal law, as well as the normative, informal, and flexible laws we call norms. Where laws are deliberately modified, and norms are evolved by demonstrated behavior that is not irreciprocal.

Then we need means of – people who- can resolve disputes?

And what institutions to resolve them?

INCREMENTAL SUPPRESSION OF VIOLATION OF DEMONSTRATED INTERESTS

(CD: ADD: ( …UNDONE…) map to male female triangle with incremental suppression the scope of cooperation. … the value added by the suppression. Reduction of Opportunity costs by density and scale of cooperation in a division of labor are equally amplified by reduction of transaction costs – risk. ) (CD: add explanation of ev calc and econ velocity by inc supression as vertical axis of triangle.)

THREE METHODS OF HUMAN INFLUENCE (COERCION)

( … )

COERCIVE INSTITUTIONS OF INCREMENTAL SUPPRESSION (VIA-NEGATIVA)

Institutions: Just as there are only three means of coercion, there are only three possible institutions of coercion:

Seduction: Religion, Care, Equality
Remuneration: Trade(Law), Cooperation, Reciprocity
and Force: State, Military, Hierarchy, Duty

Important: Equality vs Reciprocity vs Duty

A POLITY’S INSTITUTIONS: ARE ALWAYS TRIFUCTIONAL

1. State,(Military, Government),
2. Law (Court, Contract, (money-banking)), Techne(writing, reading, arithmetic) (Recipes-Explicity) (Commercial), (Family).. (Civic, Civil Organizations) …
3. Religion *Habit*, Norm (tacit), Convention, Tradition.

( … CD INSERT TRIANGLE HERE – with family in the center … )

THE PROBLEM OF HUMAN NEURAL ECONOMY: AMBIGUITY

( … ) (neural economy)

The search for simplicity produces ambiguity, incommensurability, and degredation of evolutionary computation, and therefore rate of evolution.

1. All People Seek Conflation (monopoly) by Neural Economy
Always creating computational fragility, and devolutionary cognition.

( … )

2. All Institutions Seek seek to impose their Conflation (monopoly) by Neural Economy
Always creating computational fragility, and devolutionary cognition.

( … )

3. All Civilizations Seek Conflation (ambiguity, Monopoly) Gravitate towards neural economy (simplicity)
Always creating computational fragility.

(But are they disambiguated?) Neural Economy. Priority of State, Law, Religion for neural economy – because of our indoctrination (family, society, polity) or beause of utility.

( … )

ALL THREE FORCES ARE COMPETING TO PRODUCE DECIDABILITY – RULES THAT WE CALL ‘LAW’. …. CREATE AMBIGUITY

( … )

Only law as the first institution preserves evolutionary computation. Ergo, it’s not an option, because the results are determnistic.

Reglion: stability over the long term for the bottom.
State: you get stability for the top over the long term.
Law: you get stability for the middle over the medium term.

Unfortuntately we all want stability, because narrow the predictive field to those those we can capture cheaply with the cooperation of larg numbers.

So it’s counter-intuitive to maximize markets for adversarial competition.
Except those markets determine prosperity that results from adaptive (evolutionary) velocity.

WHAT IS A LAW? DISAMBIGUATING THE TERM

Limit on behavior, either in the via positiva (must do) or negativa (must not do).

Physical, Natural, Evolutionary, Logical(Formal).

To Enumerate a Law you need all three dimensions:

Postivia is an obligation(duty),
Negativa is a right (duty from others),
Inalienability means you can’t escape either one. (reciprocity)

Etymology

Indo-European words for “a law” are most commonly from verbs for “to put, place, set, lay,” such as Greek thesmos (from tithemi “to put, place“), Old English dom (from PIE *dhe- “to put, place, set“), Lithuanian ?statymas (from statyti “cause to stand, set up, establish“), Polish ustawa (from sta? “stand“). Also compare Old English gesetnes (above), statute, from Latin statuere; German Gesetz “law,” from Old High German gisatzida “a fixing, determination, assessment,” with sezzen (modern German setzen) “to make sit, set, put.“

This is reconstructed to be from Proto-Germanic *lagam “put, lay” (from PIE root *legh- “to lie down, lay“). The modern word is thus a twin of lay (n.2) as “that which is set or established.”

From Old Norse *lagu “law,” collective plural of lag “layer, measure, stroke,” literally “something laid down, that which is fixed or set.“

What they mean: “To bring into existence for all to see, and to have been in existence for all to see.”

It is more common for Indo-European languages to use different words for “a specific law” and for “law” in the general sense of “institution or body of laws,” for example Latin lex “a law,” ius “a right,” especially “legal right, law.”

Words for “law” in the general sense mostly mean etymologically “what is right” and often are connected with adjectives for “right” (themselves often figurative uses of words for “straight,” “upright,” “true,” “fitting,” or “usage, custom.” Such are Greek nomos (as in numismatic); French droit, Spanish derecho, from Latin directus; Polish prawo, Russian pravo (from Old Church Slavonic prav? “straight,” in the daughter languages “right”); also Old Norse rettr, Old English riht, Dutch recht, German Recht (see right (adj.1)).

A Rule that limits our behavior positive or negative

|PreExisting vs Created| That has been in existence by nature < discovered in existence by man, < Existence > been in brought into existence by man > is being brought into existence by man.

But why does ‘existence’ of a law matter?

(no harm no foul, no law no crime) where we remember the distinction between tort-responsibility-restitution, and crime-responsibility(blame)-punishment.

“A Law Must Be Laid Down” It must be in public … it must exist.

“Laws may not be retroactive”

THE EVOLUTION OF AMBIGUITY IN THE TERM “LAW”

Disambiguation of Law by Serialization and Operationalization:

Universe

Laws Of Nature:
1. Physical (Before State)
2. Behavioral (During(Acting) State)
3. Evolutionary (After(Consequence) State
4. Logical Laws with which we describe 1,2,3
… And the Grammars(logics) that depend on the Logical Laws for the transfer of meaning, resulting in uncertainty, agreement, or disagreement.

Agreements

Types of Agreements. (P-LAW= LAW FORMAL OPERATIONAL LOGIC OF DECIDABILITY) = “Formal Natural Law” = A Law of Nature (The Universe)

1. Natural Law (Science) Contract of Reciprocity within the limits of proportionality, for the production of a commons, that cannot be produced by the private sector – because of incentives. Private=Consumable, and Public=Usable. Usus=Use. Path, part. Fructus=Meadow, Grazing, Water. Abusus (consumption or destruction). Mancipio = Transfer.
Private = specific ownership, wiether common or proportional or cardinal. Common is always common. Commons are hopefully manged by those with demonstrated intersts. (and those without don’t manage). (Elenor Ostrom) Commons = Increase in Capital. Why? Discount on need for indiviual income.

Privileges

2. Rights Law = Enumerated rights. “French Cathlic Church, Socialist, Wishful Thinking.” Right(via negativa+viapositiva) vs Privilege. This is not law it’s privilegs. (Continental law = Both what you must and must not do.) Rights law can be legitimate becvause they function and survive, but they may not be POSSIBLE.

Justifications (Excuses)

3. Procedure Law = Positive Law. “Democracy” (what can I get away with by social construction of irreciprocities.) This is not law. It’s command.

Commands

4. Command Law = Authority. This is not law. It’s command.

Therefore:

Before: |Origins| Physical(God) -> Natural(negativa) -> Rights(positiva) -> Procedural(Process) -> Authority(Man) { -> During}

During: |Legitimacy Claimed| Authoritarian Pretense < Individual Preference < Market Evidence {-> After}

After: |Consequence of Legitimacy Claimed| (Resistance) Force < Polity < Authority > Polity > Legitimacy. (Adaptation)

|Summary| Monopoly (Maladaption – Stagnation) <-> (Adaptation-Velocity) Markets

SCOPE OF LAWS

(a) The Law (Formal Science of Decidability),
(b) Constitution (Terms),
(c) Legislation (Proscription),
(d) Jurisprudence (Decidability),
(e) and Lawyering(adversarial),
(f) and possibly Attorneying (clerical)
(g) and possibly Paralegal
(h) and possibly Licensing of Specific Disciplines.
(i) And possibly those who are regulatory enforcers and adminstrators.

(CD: Move this upward and show pyramid of complexity of how difficult it is to maintain internal coherence and consistency)

LEGITIMACY – WHAT MAKES A LAW LEGITIMATE IN ITS ORIGIN AND SURVIVAL

( … )

LEGITIMACY OF MAN MADE LAWS

What does legitimacy mean and why does legitimacy matter?

( … ) Etymology Legitimate child, (Genuine or Real),

Issue a political product called a law, and claim it’s legitimacy, but does the market buy the legitimacy of the law? Settled Law. Survies in the marketplace for decidability.

Authority, Polity, Market between authority and polity, and Legitimacy?

The claim of legitimacy vs the evidence of legitimacy as demonstrated by market adaptation.

Leglitimacy Authoritarian Pretense, Is it Individual Preference, or is it Market Evidence.
For the market to be forced, it reqires force, and force de-legitimizes.

( .. ) Someone in authority, an act that is legitimate? (legal, Leg, in legitimate)

LEGALITY VS LEGITIMACY

( … ) Follows process (authority) vs Whether it’s immoral-unethical-criminal and evaded vs whether is’ moral, ethical, and beneficial, because it’s adhered to.

What is sovereign? What determines legitimacy despite Legality?

– Dictator (force authority)
– The Monarchy (kinship authority)
– Parliament (procedure, authority)
– The Bureaucracy (process, authority)
– Surival in the market for cooperation. (people)

Sovereign means what is the decider of last resort?

In common law countries it’s (a) monarch < (b) common law < (c) parliament.
– In the UK it’s parliament
– In Canada it’s parliament
– In Australia it’s parliament
– In the USA …. it’s the law. The is the big difference. -> The science of law

Rule of Law – that means nothing unless you know what’s sovereign

Legality is a Theory, and Legitimacy is Empirically Evidential.

In the military they talk about lawful orders…

MORAL LEGLITIMACY

( … )

Disambiguation by Serialization and Operationalization:

Amoral: No negative affect on the demonstrated intersts of others.

Ethical vs Unethical: Gain or Forgoing Gain by assymetry of information at the cost of others.

Moral vs Immoral: Gain, Evasion of cost, imposition of cost, indirectly, by assymetry of information, upon the demonstrated intersts of others.

Virtuous vs Evil: Contribution to or Harm against the demonstrated interests of others regardless of gain.

Dimensions:

Indirect-vs-Direct Symmetry-vs-Asymmetry of information, Cost vs Gains vs Contributions

Morality:

Evil <- Immoral <- Unethical <- Criminal <- Amoral -> Reciprocal -> Ethical -> Moral -> Virtuous

Variation:

Natural Law(recprocity) > My wants(Genetic Variation) -> Evolved Norms(Social Variation) > Evolved Traditions (cultural Variation)> Evolved Institutions (political variation) = Another market Process: another process of calculation: another repetition of epistemology: survival.

Again, reciprocity within the limits of proportionality: being left behind, incentivizing resistance, rebellion, or defection.
General rule of cooperation fully explained.

Individual needs for proportionality vary. (chldhood, ability, etc)
Individual neuroticism (fear of being left behind) varies.
Sex Differences are largely in neuroticism
Neuroticism + Self Image + Status + Capital-in-toto increases your defection(resistance, rebellion, defection)
Calm(confidence)+Self Image + Status + Capital-in-toto decrease your loyalty.
Temporal and Population cost of loyalty vs Devotion? Sex differences. Men loyal women devoted. Male: loyalty to many over time, Female: devotion to few in time

WHAT MAKES LAW LEGITIMATE IN ITS CONTENT AND CONSTRUCTION?

( … ) Legitimate in origin, constitution, and consequence?

All acts shall conform to the following:

Objectives

1. Maintain The Individual, Group, Organization, Community’s ability to act.

2. Regulate Behavior in the via positiva and the via negativa

3. within the limites of the individuals’ abilty to act.

4. Some period of time… laws should expire if they are not univeral and eternal. A descriptive law and a policy law. Becasue ignored laws devalue laws.

Preconditions

1. Nomocratic: All Acts shall descend from, the demand for, the premise of, the logical necessity of, the Natural law of Self Determination by Sovereignty and Reciprocity.

2. Algorithmic: All Acts shall be strictly constructed from a logical, sequential, test of reciprocity.

3. Isonomic: All Acts shall be general rules, universally applicable to all or all within a Class, and specific Rules not applicable to all within a Class are prohibited.

( Counsel: there is a long history of prohibiting legislation in the service of, or in the constraint of, individuals, special intersets, and intrest groups.)

6. Internally consistent: stare decisis

– To preserve the abilty of the individual to act – to plan. (Production cycles)
– To prevent entrapment
– To prevent juridical undecidability.
– To prevent delegitimizing the law, and the legislature or it’s equivalent.

7. Non Retroactivity (no law no crime)

(a) Grandfathering
(b) Natural Law, Tort(regardless of intent), Does not require articulation (existence)
-VS-
Crime (intent,lack of due diligence) Requires articulation (existence)
-VS_
Violation (legslative – ignorance), Violation (regulatory), Violation (procedural), Requires articulation (existence)

Goals of A Law are Five criteria:

Procedural
… 0. Disambiguation (clarification) – its possible to decide it. Includes often, LISTS. (what we do)
Individual:
… 1. Restitution, ( it worked becuase public pressure is punishment, but anonymity elimiates the power of resitution.)
… 2. Punishment(your prevention) and
Social:
… 3. Prevention (Inhibition of imitators)
… 4. Adaptation (Social Coercion)

ASIDE: “Departments(Bureaucracies) and Projects(Self Limiting)”. But what do projects cause? Continuous recursive adaptation instead of stagnation and calcification, and ossification. So becasue humans (quite logically) want to devote their energies to consumption (satisfaction) they resist all costs of adapation. …. Projects (programs). Job Uncerainty. Employeee Rotion. Gig Economies. WIch leads to more uncertainty, Which to continuous education, that force continuous adaptation, at the cost of consumption, which means that as we increase economic velocity only those most able to adapt will remain employable and the number that cannot continuously adapt will decline in employability. This is why capitalist economiese really fail, vs why socialist economies always fail, and only mixed economies succeed, and only german style mixed economies CAN succeed. The reason is that the state maintains responsibilty for contiinuous adaptation of the population – calling it employment is evading responsibilty for continuous assistance in adaptation. Other states (america in particular) create a false promise of employment. What we have to do instead create growth by fictional rather than innovative means.

5. Contingent: What does this depend upon – specifically waht other laws. We are trying to create a dependency chain, so that if something it depends upon fails, then this fails too.

4. Complete Content (Decidability, Unambiguous): Throw it over the wall. Written by special intersets, promoted by special interests, thrown over the wall, to regulators to figure out, and the public to falseify by the cost of judicial deciion, where in may cases, the … legislation woudlnt have passed. If it’s not complete it can’t pass. Include regulatory input (how will do it), have to include judicial decidabilty.

What we need for completeness:

Popular Approval(consent),
Leglislative decision,
Regulator methods,
Judicial possibility(legality).

8. Understandable: Simple laws. NL. Simple Law. Really close to morality.

9. Adherable

8. Enforcible:

8. Enforced: Not selectively enforced (a duty to enforce). See Legitimacy.

The Cycle: The Individual, The Parties Involved, The Community, the Legislature, the Bureaucracy, The Police, the Judiciary … *The Sheriff*, the Militia, The Military, The Monarchy. So the problem with most intuition on the law is that doesn’t follow an epistemic cycle but is instead, constant (always decided settled, law)

8. Transactional and Transactions (transaction structure, stated as a trade. and Bound, conditions of the transaction…. force TRADES, converting the legislature back into a marketplace IF you have via-positiva legislatures ( parliaments) )

8. Severable And Severed ( No Riders )

8. Durable (except in court)

9. Perishable: In “Project, and Program” law rather than “Perpetual Law” criteria for perishing (ending). Time frame. (99 yrs). And goals (end points).

8. Specifically Stated Measurable Goals: And that all Acts must state the purpose, scope, and limits of the demands they impose such that the act cannot be expanded through political, prosecutorial, judicial or other activism. And that such expansions shall be attributable to the jurist that issues them. (Laws like bureaucracies like cancer metastasize-uncontrolled growth the the point of harming the cellular cooperation organism to which it is part.)

7. Limited: (all laws should be treated as projects with an objective and test of completion of that objective – prevents devalution the law in general, manipulation by acane laws, and judicial legistlation from the bench. ).

8 . Failure Criteria

11. Reversible and Restitutable. Since all legislatin (law) is theoretical, it must be reversible and restitutable. If this doesn’t work… then this how we fix it, or reverse it,a nd pay compensation for harms (damages).

10. Warrantied and Warrantable, and within the limits of restitution (Accountable, with consequences). “Equivalent of Directors and Board”

RULE VS GOVERN

Rule is to Decide, And We Decide by Via Negativa Limits. By instrumentation of decidability. Not an opinion.
-Vs-
Govern: Produce commons, we Agree by via-positiva good and consent.

TRANSACTIONAL LAW VS ARBITRARY LAW = ADAPTATION VS NON

( … ) Core Insight

EPISTEMOLOGY OF LAW = EVOLUTION OF LAW

There is no difference between the epistemic cycle, and the legal cycle. We do not know if any of the laws are true+reciprocal until they have survived market (experiment in application) competition including thoughts, ideas, habits, norms, traditions, institutions group strategy.

We only know that we are running an experiment, by applying the theory, until we discover it is legitimate or not. As such all legislation is a theory that is either more or less correspondent with the laws of nature.

The natural law is the test of whether any theory deviates from the laws of nature. However, like all experiments in applied science (experimentation) we may not forsee all the potential consequences and externalities of our theory, and may have to refine or replace it.

One universal law of continuous recursive disambiguation by adversarial competition, resulting in surivial as a stable relation which we call ‘existence’ by ‘persistence’.

“All legal propositions are theories until they are settled science by evidence of adaptation of the public that is free of negative externalities masking maladaption (corruption etc).”

WHERE ARE WE SO FAR IN THE PROCESS?

BEFORE: Process what is law? > What are it’s requirements for a law > how is it constructed > contents of it’s construction > and the process of it’s assent >
DURING: the process of regulation, the process of enforcement >
AFTER: the process of conflict, adjudication etc.

INTRODUCTORY NARRATIVE
(Explaining the goals of this section: limiting the legislature to responsible actions, that constitute trades).
( … )

THE PURPOSE OF OUR SYSTEM OF LAW IS TO FORCE DELIBERATE CHOICES BY THE PUBLIC SO THEY TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR CONTINUOUS ADAPTATION.
( …) To prohibit the production of dependency, and enforce the production of agency and responsibility necessary for the preservation of self determination of the people.
In other words, we parent into maturity rather than mother into dependency

Because our group strategy, our government under it, depends on the production of mutual insurers of self determination by self determined means, under sovereignty in demonstrated interset and reciprocity in display word and deed.. We have to manufacture PEERS. Fellow shareholders, for whom the monarchy is just the chairman of the board (decider of last resort).

ERGO: we are trying to fight the natural human tendency, to obtain discounts on neural economy, by selecting for monoply instead of trifunctinoalism, and for dependency instead of responsibility, and for parasitism over production. And the WEST is the only system which defeatead those instincts because of the accidenal need for peers, in the aristocracy that preserves self determination, and as a consequence, the advantage of a minority population (europeans, aristocratic europeans, middle class aristocratic europeans) to compete and compute by smaller numbers by faster maneurver and adaptation than all other civilizations combined. Thus defeating Quantity with Quality. VELOCITY. IN. TIME.

CLASS: LAW (LEGISLATION)

INSIDE (BEFORE)
CLASS

Inputs
– We … (who)
– On Behalf of (Whom)
– Before The Court of ( … Court with Jurisdiction )
– With These Definitions (Definitions – Types)
– With These References (Imports, Functions)

Proposition
– Whereas We Have Observed … (causes definition of state )

actor, incentive, action, upon noun, change in state, results, externalities, violation

– And Whereas We Desire ( Effects … Goals. definition of desired state)
– Therefore We propose …. (series of actions to change state)

Propositions are enumerated covering all three.

1. Obligations (Negativa) others demand of you.
2. Rights (Positiva) to demand
3. Inalienations (Negativa) Inescapable.

– Such that We Produce (direct and external consequences)

Justification (warranty)
– And We Argue in Our Defense …. (how the desired state, the propositions, do not violate the one law of reciprocity.)
– Where Our Argument Depends Upon … (prior Law and Acts)
– And success or failure measured by … (tests)
– And would be reversed if (prior laws or acts were falsified, or conditions had changed),
– And otherwise shall expire (date of expiration),
– And we warranty this argument by ( skin in the game ).
– Signed (by submitted)
…. – Juried (by Peers)
…. …. – Adjudicated. (by Court)
…. …. …. – Ascendened (by Judge of Last Resort)
…. …. …. …. -Recorded. (by Secretary of the Law)

OUTSIDE

IMPORTS (INCLUDES)
( … )

FUNCTIONS (repeated)
( … ) Things we Call (a party) (pass variables to the function)

TYPES
( … ). Definitions. (The Disambiguations)

DEPENDENCIES
( … ) Dependencies (Prior law etc)

CLASS REGULATION (DURING)

Including CONSTRUCTION ( … )
Including OPERATION ( … )
…. Responsibilties ( … )
Including CESSATION ( … ) (reversability)

( … )

CLASS ENFORCEMENT (DURING)

( … )

CLASS RESTITUTION, PUNISHMENT, PREVENTION (AFTER)

( … )

AVOIDABLE MALINCENTIVES (SUPPRESSION OF CORRUPTION)

( … ) List.

CONTENT OF THE NATURAL LAW (UNIVERSAL) (APPLIED LAW IS PARTICULAR)

BEFORE

“The Law of The Insurers of Self Determination of Self Determined Means”

|Hierarchy of Insurers| Self Determination > Indivictual Sovereignty => Capacity (self insured) > Group Sovereignty Sovereignty and Reciprocity insured (group insured) > National Sovereignty => Federation (alliance Insured).

|Hierarchy of Federations of Insurers: Individual > America > Anglosophere > Europe > Nato > Federations that insure one another thereby eliminating the need for authoritarianism at risk of defection out of self interest (Today’s Germany).

Rule of Law of the Insurers > Democracy of the Insurers > Federation of the Insurers = the RESPONSIBILITY hierarchy that makes self determination by self determined means possible, and as a consequence evolutionary velocity possible because it is the most hyperadaptive order available to man.

Its the whole responsibility problem…. who CAN, and who WILL, and who DOES insure others?

Who insures the rights, obligations, and inalienations of children? of pregnant woment and mothers? Of the unable, the infirmed, or the aged? Who is CAPABLE of insuring their rights, obligatinos and inalienations?

So who CAN, and who WILL, and who DOES insure self and others? Those who demonstrate capability, willinness and sucess at insuring self and others self determination, by self determined means.

Disambiguation of Inequality of The Insured.

There is a difference between:

(a) those who are insurers and insured, and;
(b) those who are only insured, and;
(c) those who are outside the law, and uninsured.

The Law: Reciprocal Insurance of One Another’s Self Determination by self Determined means. The people are the insurers of one another. So one can be insured, or uninsured. Meaning under protection (insurance) by others, or outside protection (insurance) of others.

Non-Universalism (Particular, and National, and Civilizational): this demarcates those under the law from those not under the law, and demarcates the group from the outgroup.

Those Under Defense of the Law (Define)

( … ) (choice, ward, visitors) (oath, evidence, cost)

Those Outside the Law “Outlaw” (define)

( … )

HIERARCHY OF INSURANCE OF RETURNS OF COOPERATION

The family(reproduction) is the result of cooperation between men and women
The society( production ) is the result of cooperation between men, on behalf of their families
The polity(state) is the restult of the institutionalization of cooperation betwen men, on behalf of their families.

What Went Wrong

We have extended the franchise to from insurers, to taxpayers, to all, regardless of capacity to act as an insurer – this is caused the failure of social institutions, then the failure of democracy, and is now causing the failure of federation. Because only a minority are capable, willing, and do, insure one another’s self determination by self determined means, by sovereigtny in demonstrated interests, reciprocity in display word and deed, the evolutionary velocity in all aspects of life that result, and the conditionof prosperity that results from that evolutionary velocity we call innovation and cooperation in markets in all aspects of life.

Justification of the violation of responsibility for reciprocity by conflating insured with insurers.

How does the state justify taxation of the working, laboring, female, and underclasses? And as a consequence how can the those who do not insure others self determination, but undermine demand for self determination, to organize politically against those who do insure self determination, sovereignty, reciprocity, markets, innovation, adpatation, and prosperity that results – therefore making us incrementally less competitive, poorer, dysgenic, disorganized, consuming or destroying accumlated cultural, institutional, territorial, and genetic capital. (Women are a bad thing in politics.)

However, the general intuition would be to remove women from political participation, rather than expand the law to suppress the female methods of irressponsibility, evasion, rent seeing, corruption, undermining, and destruction of institutions of the demand for and production of responsibility for the insurance of self determination by self determined means.

Our recommendation is a separate ‘house’ of parliaments for women, to limit particpation to those women equal to limiting participation to those men, who demonstrate responsibility in the sexual distribution of perception, cognition, advocacy, labor, and PRODUCTION (childcare).

“Truth is.”

How do men insure the polity? By force and productivity. How do women insure the polity? By care and reproduction. This is an unavoidable law of nature. Period. End of story. Every attempt to circumvent it is simply an attempt at theft by free riding, evasion, corruption or fraud.

The primary error of the 20th century was the inclusion of women into economy and polity without equal suppression of the female method of anti-social, anti-political, anti-civilization behavior that we had accumulated over milennia in the suppression of male anti-social, political, civilizational behavior.

In other words our law was insufficient for the expansion of the franchise to women, since the destruction of our civilization has been achieved in the modern world as in the ancient world, by the means of female antisocial behavior and antipolitical warfare by destruction of the institutions of cultural production of competitiion that we call responsibilty for market computation of innovation, adaptation, application, evolution at the cost of emotional stress of that continuous adaptation.

As such it’s a relatively simple fix: fix the law. We have done so. Here.

WHAT WE HAVE TO CONSTRUCT TO INSURE RETURNS OF COOPERATION?

From First Principles, the Rights, Obligations, Inalienabilties, and INSTITUTIONS that make possible and UNAVOIDABLE and INALIENABLE the production of Insurers of Self Determination of Self Determined Means.

QUESTION:

What is necessary for all of us to insure one another’s self determination by self determined means by sovereignty in demonstrated interests, and reciprocity in display word and deed?

We’d need to define and explain the production of:

Reciprocial Insurance (insurance of one another)
Insurer (who insures whom?)
Self Determination
Sovereignty
Demonstrated Interests
Reciprocity
Deed, Word, and Display
Obligations, Rights, and Inalienations

And

the institutions necessary to bring each of them into being.

INSURANCE

How Do We Operationally Construct the Terms by Which We Insure Returns of Cooperation?

(0) Requirements

Obligations (define)

Definition: Your military duty, legal obligation, moral responsibilty to reciprocally insure the rights, obligations and inalienations of yourself and any and all insurers, necessary by any and every insurer, for the production of reciprocal insurance of self determination by self determined means by sovereignty in demonstrated interests and reciprocity in display word and deed.

Rights (define)

Definitions: Your right to reciprocal insurance by any and all insurers, of self determination by self determined means, by sovereignty in demonstrated interests, and reciprocity in display word and deed, and to the restitution, punishment and prevention of any such violation of your self determination by self determined means, by sovereignty in demonstrated interests, and reciprocity in display word and deed.

Inalienability (define)

Definitions: A prohibition on the violation by means of evasion of, or deprivation of, the rights, obligations and inalienations of yourself and others. Meaning you cannot by display word or deed attempt to escape the obligations, rights, and inalienations necessary for any and every insurer, for the production of reciprocal insurance of self determination by self determined means by sovereignty in demonstrated interests and reciprocity in display word and deed.

(1) The Production of Insurance:

Definition: ( … )

The Contract for Reciprocal insurance of self determination by self determined means.

(1) HOW:

a) Individual Force Of Arms (Obligation),
b) Oath to the use of those arms (Warranty),
c) Punishment for Abuse (violation),
d) Punishment for Alienation (Defection, Flight, Cowardice).

The Obligation, Right, and Inalienation of Owning, Bearing, And Applying Arms

“Reciprocal Insurance Can Only Be Produced by Individual ownership bearing and application of arms.”

Obligation: (To Others, “military duty, legal obligation, moral responsibilty”)
An obigation to reciprocally insure all other insurers, of self determination by self determined means.
An obligation to own, and bear, those arms necessary to provide insurance to yourself and all other insurers against the entire field of opportunities to deprive yourself and others of self determination by self determined means.
An obligation to use those arms necessary to provide insurance to yourself and all other insurers against the entire field of opportunities to deprive yourself and others of self determination by self determined means, to provide insurance, restitution, punishment prevention of those who violate yours and others right to self determination by self determiend means.
The obligation of all insurers to (…)

Right: (from others)
A right to the reciprocal insurance by all other insurers, of self determination by self determined means .
A right to those arms necessary to provide insurance to yourself and all other insurers against the entire field of opportunities to deprive yourself and others of self determination by self determined means.
A right to apply those arms to provide insurance, restitution, punishment, and prevention of those who violate yours and others’ self determination by self determined means.
( … the insured )

Inalienation: (That is inescapable)
The inalienability of the reciprocal insurance of of all other insurers. of self determination by self determiend means.
The inalienability of the obligation to own and bear those arms necessary to provide insurance ot yourself and all other insurers against the entire field of opportunities to deprive yourself and others of self determination by self determined means.
The inalienability of the obligation to use those arms necessary to provide insurance to yourself and all other insurers against the entire field of opportunities to deprive yourself and others of self determination by self determined means, to provide insurance, restitution, punishment prevention of those who violate yours and others right to self determination by self determiend means.

(??? do we separate the final inalienation???)
The inalienability of restitution, punishment, and prevention for any violation, by display, word or deed, of the rights, obligations, and inalienations of the reciprocal insurance of all other insurers of self determination by self determined means, by tests of sovereignty in demonstrated interests, and reciprocity in display word and deed, by the ownership of, bearing of, application of arms necessary to perform insurance, restitution, punishment, and prevention of further such violations (thereof).

Counsel: “The burdens of defense and reproduction are non-substitutable costs.”

(2) Test of Self Determination by Self Determined Means (Objective)

Definition: ( … ). Sovereignty, Liberty, Freedom.

Law: Life’s function seeks the maximization of innovative, adaptive, and evolutionary agency within the limits of responsibility. This is the optimum evolutionary algorithm for all life.

HOW:
(a) Act to: invest, acquire, preserve, maintain, use, consume, trade
(b) Act to: Cooperate to invest, acquire, preserve, maintain, use, consume, trade.

Via Positiva: “I require control of my own life, body, actions, deeds, words, displays, and no other may extert control over my life, limiting my opportunities for acquisition, preservation, maintainance, use, consumption, and trade of my demonstrated interests.”

Via Negativa: “The absence of incentive to retaliate against the imposition of costs on one’s maximization of opportunities for acquisition, retention, consumption, trade, production, and reproduction.”

The Left (female) wants to claim a right to the time, labor, productivity and resources of others (Theft, Parasitism, Consumption).

The Right (male) wants to prevent claims on the time, labor, productivity, and resources of others (Productivity, Exclusion, Capitalization).

WHAT PARASITISM SPECTRUM?

( … ) incentive to escalate from icremental suppression to war against parasites.

WHAT IS DEMAND FOR SELF DETERMINATION?

(a) Degree of Agency and Autonomy in Life (+ vs -): You may have or lack ability and agency.
(b) Utility of Cooperation With Others (+): Others may provide opportunity or not.
(c) Utility of Cost of Others (-): Others may impose costs or not.
(d) Risk and Danger of others (- -): Others are likely to impose costs.

“Everyone makes a pragmatic analysis and then justifies it.” The squirrel can tell the difference between the caloric content of foods. People can tell the difference between the benefit and cost of others.

While morality is absolute in the sense of sovereignty in demonstrated interests, and reciprocity within the limits of proportionality, we each intuit that morality consists of our moral bias in our favor. So all of us walk around with an advertisement on our foreheads (Habitus: facial expression, behavior, dress, signals, speech) for our terms of cooperation, given our moral bias.

This does not mean we are moral. It means that we are advertising the terms under which we deem cooperation moral (or at least advantageous). The disconnect between our intuition, our advertisement and the results that we find in practice, determines our correct ‘pricing’ of our sexual, social, economic, and political market value.

We exist in a competition between the need for survival, status, and reproduction on the one end, and the utility of cooperation for survival, status, and reproduction on the other.

Our moral instinct, is just a social accounting system given our needs and wants. (Our internal social credit system)

Why do we have that accounting system: TO SUPPRESS PARASITISM. Cooperation is only possible with suppression of interpersonal, social, political, extra-political parasitism.

Suppression of parasitism, including Altruistic Punishment, is the means by which we maintain the utilty of cooperation without devolving back to the behavior of our ape ancestors – who are unable to conduct intertemporal debits, credits, and trades.

So this need for an equilibrium between self interest, cooperation, and intertemporal exchanges, leads to the law that Cooperation requires Self Determinatino, by Sovereignty, Reciprocity, within the Limits of Proportionality (defection).

The universe can’t remember so it can’t trade or invest. We can remember, so we can trade and invest in future trades – at the cost of preserving a positive balance (non-parasitism).

( INSERT GRAPH HERE (…) Supply of cooperation vs parasitism )

The problem is that we are hypersensitive to every act of parasitism (defection) – males more so. And females are hypersensitive to every act of disproportionality (defection). So we work constantly at trust development.

So, each of us negotiates within some small area of the triangle of moral biases, and we seek people with who we share means and ends to cooperate as frequently as possible. However there is a maximum range of tolerable differences under which we can cooperate on both means and ends. Therefore we produce markets where we can cooperate on shared means even if we pursue unshared ends.

Markets for goods, services, and information, allow for the cooperation between people who are otherwise intolerant of one another’s moral biases. Markets for polities allow for cooperation in the production of commons between people whose moral biases are opposed to one another.

In other words there will always and everywhere exist the need for markets so that people with shared moral terms (wants), means, and ends can cooperate toward shared ends – and this determines the scale (maximum population) of the polity. And conversely a corresponding need for polities so that we can cooperate on shared means (goods, services, and information) despite our different demand for different ends (commons).

The higher the competency (agency) of the median of the polity the greater the demand for a a smaller polity (pack). The lower the competency (agency) of the median of the polity the greater the demand for a larger polity (herd).

What’s forever happening is the competent seek to leave behind the dead weight of the incompetent, and the incompeted seek to yoke the competent by parasitism.

SUBJECTIVE DIFFERENCES IN INTERDEPENDENCE

The subjective difference in value to one another.

(a) Independence From ,
vs:
(b) Dependence Upon

What’s The Test of Utility of Others? (The Proof)

The first question is: “Why not commit suicide?” This question is that of Personal philosophy. (opportunity to acquire)
The second question is: “Why engage in cooperation rather than free-riding, parasitism, and predation?” This question is that of Ethics.
The third question – and one that a group must answer – is: “Why engage in cooperation with others, rather than free-riding, parasitism, and predation?” This question is that of Politics.
The Fourth Question a group must answer is: “How shall we organize our people with myths, arguments, and rules to survive and prosper in competition from nature and man?” That the question of Group Evolutionary Strategy,
The Fifth Question a group must answer is “What are the limits of tolerance for life, for ethics, for politics, and for group evolutionary strategy, before we resort to suicide, separation, free riding, parasitism, predation, and the condition of victimhood?” That is the Question of Limits.

The answer to all five questions is that persistence of the opportunities of existence, of the returns on cooperation, and of the returns on the production of commons, are preferable to suicide, separation, free-riding, parasitism, predation, and the condition of victimhood. Conversely, resistance, violence, feud, insurrection, revolution, civil war, warfare, and genocide are preferable to submission to undermining of cooperation, hindering of cooperation, parasitism, and predation.

For these reasons:

(a) humans organize into alliances of various kinds,
(b) including families, clans, tribes, nations; and territories, villages, cities, and polities;
(c) to cooperate in the defense, preservation, persistence, reproduction, satisfaction, and advancement of all.

And in doing so:

BEFORE
(a) we produce and preserve the returns on cooperation,
(b) where those returns result from increasing proximity and number,
(c) and dividing our labors,
DURING
(d) whereby we produce habits and rules of order, consisting of norms, traditions, processes, rights, and obligations, and institutions of preservation and enforcement, (commons)
(e) by accident of circumstance, dictate, or choice,
AFTER (SUCCESS)
(f) resulting in the incremental suppression of free riding, parasitism, and predation, both internal and external to the alliance, thereby defending and advancing demonstrated interests of those within,
(g) by creating the requirement for survival and reproduction by the voluntary service of others
(h) in the resulting market for goods, services, and information.
LIMIT (FAILURE)
(i) All organizations will consist of members trying to maximize their take, while minimizing their cost, which leads to the maximization of free riding and rent seeking, and the minimization of investment (cost) until such organization cannot adapt to change or shock. (Ossification, Calcification, Corruption)
(j) Leading to Conquest, Defection, or Collapse.

(3) The Test of Sovereignty (…). (Via Positiva: Rights)

Definition: ( … ) “Exclusive Control or Monopoly of Control”, “Exclude”, “Self Government, Every man is his own legislature”, “every man is his own state”, “all political orders are voluntary federations”, “all human organizations are voluntary corporations producing commons of common interests”, “The absence of authority”. There Are No Parents of Sovereigns. Sovereignty is aquired through reciprocal insurance.

Exclusive control over what? “Demonstrated interests” (See Demonstrated Interests)

Violations of exclusive control: Exclusive control over demonstrated interests requires others refrain from imposition of costs upon one’s demonstrated interests.

First Principles

The Ternary Logic of Cooperation

EXISTENCE

( … )

TIME

Relative Rate of Change of Physical Processes at Given Pressure, where the universe contains pressure, and gravity increases pressure, and velocity increases pressure.

Assuming the quantum background pressure (energy) is constant in the universe (dunno), the

It appears that at least some physicists have finally begun to accept that our failure to understand gravity, dark matter, and dark energy are caused by the same underlying problem in that gravity is not a constant any more than time is a constant or expansion a constant.

Time is the first cause of action. We act(move) to increase opportunities in time. Ergo time is the resource necessary to maintain life (persist).

ACTION

Action increases the possibilty of opportunity (opportunities in time) in time – thus action ‘increases time’ relative to the relative rate of backgroud processes.

BEHAVIOR (ACQUISITION)

3. Man Acquires: All all human cognition, emotion, and demonstrated behavior can be described as the acquisition of, and loss aversion to, life, time, material, cooperative, and common capital.

Demonstrated Interest ( … )

COOPERATION

4. Man Cooperates To Decrease Cost of Acquisition:

5: Cooperation Requires Reciprocity to test Evolutionary Computation:

Reciprocity ( … )

Proportionality ( … )

And;

These Choices Individually, Ingroup, or Outgroup:

0 – Avoidance (non-cooperation, ethical and moral)
… … … +1 – Cooperation (cooperation amoral, ethical, or moral)

Within Cooperation There are states of Ethics in the Ethical Spectrum

-3. Evil (Negative)
-2. … Immoral
-1. … … Unethical
0. … … … Amoral (Neutral)
+1. … … Ethical,
+2. … Moral,
+3. Virtuous (Positive)

-1 – Predation (non-cooperation), unethical and immoral

DISTRIBUTION OF COOPERATION

There are only three states of cooperation

1. Irreciprocity: parasitism– to predation (conflict) Logically False
… 2. Reciprocity: exchange – to integration(cooperation) Logically True
3. Boycott: avoidance – to separation (ostracization) Logically Undecidable

NEGOTIATION

H0w do we determine whether to avoid, cooperate, or predate?

Man Negotiates … ( … )

Netgotiate
Choose to Cooprate, Evade(boycott) or predate?

And;
We are unfortunately indoctrinated into the logic of inference used in verbal and textual interpretation, rather than the logic of operations – a sequence of human operations first, and then the logic of verbal and textual communication and interpretation of those operations. So, we find in the logic of operations, instead of just True and False:

There are three states of logic, in order from more certainty to less:

1. False certainty (Negative)
… 2. Truth candidate (actionable) (Positive)
3. Undecidable (In-actionable) (Collapse)

There are States of Truth in the Spectrum of Demand for Truth

1. Incoherent – Meaningless
2. … Coherent but inconsistent with satisfying the demand for decidability
3. … … Coherent and Consistent but Insufficient to satisfy the demand for decidability
4. … … … Coherent, Consistent, Correspondent and Sufficient to satisfy the demand for decidability (TRUE)
5. … … Ideal Truth (unknowable)
6. … Analytic Truth (internally consistent)
7. Tautological – Meaningless, Redundant, Violates continuous recursive disambiguation.

There is a spectrum of Testimony

1. Dishonesty
… 2. Honesty – Surviving Due Diligence against deceit
… … 3. Performative Truth – Due diligence against inference bias: loading, framing, obscuring…) – surviving due diligence by self-testing. (TRUE)
… 4. Untestifiable Ideal Truth – If one had perfect knowledge, paradigm, vocabulary – surviving application in the market – surviving market due-diligence against ignorance and error.
5. Analytic Truth
6. Tautology.

There are states of Knowledge in the Spectrum of Knowledge

0. Ignorance
… 1. Auto-Association > Survive Rational Self-Test > Hypothesis
… … 2. Survive Empirical Demonstration Test > Theory
… … … 3. Survive Empirical Applied Market Test > Settled Science
… … … … 4. Survive Reduction to First Principles > Law (No term of behavioral equivalency)
… … … 5. Surviving but increasing in causal precision
… 6. False

ORGANIZATION OF COOPERATION

5. Man Organizes: All human organizational differences evolve from the three possible means of interpersonal, social, political influence, coercion, and power,

a) female undermining-seductive-caretaking,
b) male forceful-defense-producing, or neutral,
c) neutral reciprocally beneficial, exchanges (trades).

And;
Interestingly enough there are only three corresponding methods of influence, persuasion, and coercion available to man, by rate of effect:

1. Force vs Defense (imposition of harm, defense from harm)
… 2. Remuneration vs Boycott (deprivation of trade, or benefit from trade), and;
3. Ostracization from and Insurance for membership vs Seduction: opportunity or loss of opportunity for cooperation, and the discounts on the opportunities that arise from membership.

And;
We can Scale each of the three-axis of coercion by the three degrees of coercion:

1. Influence – informing others in their interests
… 2. Coercion – coercing others to follow your interests
… … 3. Power – organized coercion of others for your or collective interests

And;
We can scale each axis of coercion by degree of certainty:

1. Undecidability
… 2. Possibility
… … 3. Potential
… … … 4. Probability
… … … … 5. Likelihood
… … … … … 6. Certainty

Giving us:

Axis(Force, Remuneration, Undermining)
… > Coerciveness
… … > Certainty

And;
Interestingly, these reflect human specialization in the evolutionary sexual division of labor:

1. Force and Political Construction by the Dominant Males that hold territory using physical super predation
… 2. Trade and Productive Construction by the ascendant males that use cunning and opportunity and economic super-predation
3. Undermining and Social Construction by females that raise children using social super predation.

THEREFORE;

ORGANIZING BIASES (… CD: REORDER THESE …)

And

These reflect reproductive strategies

Male Reciprocity and Proportionality (Merit) = Eugenic: adversarial competition maintaining natural selection. Necessary for clan, tribe, nation, survival.
-vs-
Female Reciprocity and Equality (Non-Merit) = Dysgenic: social conformity maintaining stasis. Rise and Fall All.
-vs-
Male-Female Compatibilism: an equilibrium of Reciprocity between proportionality and equality wherein females agitate for male production of goods, services, and information (commons) in order to satisfy their want for consumption – in exchange for costly reproduction – while preserving competitive advantage and not surrendering competitive advantage, given that females are devoted to children but not loyal to males.

And
These reflect moral biases (Haidt)

Feminine Care-Fairness,
… Young Male Fairness-Liberty,
Masculine Conservative care-fairness, liberty, and Purity, Hierarchy, Loyalty

And their intensity as the second dimensions.

And
These reflect personality biases (General Factor of Personality), Personalities cluster in four common archetypes.

Self-centered, (ego)
… Reserved, (Paternal, Father)
… Average
Other-Centered (Mentor, Mother)

And
These reflect expressed political biases

1. Feminine Socialist,
… 2. Young Male Libertarian,
3. Masculine Conservative (Haidt)

And their intensity as the second dimensions.

( … CD: Add Intensity Here .. )

INSTITUTIONS

6. Man Organizes Institutions: All human political organizations evolve from the three methods of influence, coercion, and power: Feminine Seductive Social Constriction and Religion, Neutral Trade and Contract Law, or Masculine Forceful State and Military.

AND;
As such we develop elites and elite institutions in each method of coercion:

1. Force by State and Command (Commands) – serving interests of upper classes
… 2. Remuneration by Commerce within the limits of reciprocity as it approches the Natural Law (Exchanges) – serving interests of middle classes: ”
3. Religion by Priesthood, and Tradition (Demands) – serving interests of lower classes

AND;
And the elites naturally gravitate to servicing clientele:

1. State->Military or Military->State (Top Down) -> Upper Classes -> Formal Institutions
… 2. Trade (Natural Law) ->Commerce (Center out) -> Middle Classes -> Financing -> Networks
3. Religion->Peasantry (Bottom up) -> Lower Classes -> Words, Rallying – informal to formal insitutins.

Regardless of beneficial intentions, solutions(policy), and institutions each instrument, organization, or institutions seeks to produce, over time, it will exhaust the opportunity for benefit it sought to create, reach a status quo possible under its incentives, and convert to diverting resources to self interest, devolve into stagnation, calcification, rent seeking, corruption: maladaption, and inability to adapt to change or shock.

AND;

POLITIES

7. Man Forms Polities …
As such, we organize by the scale of polity:

1. Kin (Tribe) : Aristocracy – Law (Law, Economic) – Loyalty to Kin.
… 2. State (Nation) : Bureaucracy – Force (Military, Political) – Loyalty to State
3. Cult (Civilisation) : Theocracy – Ostracizaton (Mythology, Social) – Loyalty to Cult

How do we obtain both legitimacy and loyalty so that the people ‘obey’ or ‘adhere’ or ‘conform’ to manners, norms, institutions, procedures, and laws?

THEREFORE;

INSTITUTIONAL CONSEQUENCES

8. With A Founding Institution: All human civilizations develop these institutions in different orders, either rule of religion, rule of state, or rule of law.

( … )

9. Institutions Create Path Dependence: All human civilizations produce institutions that are path-dependent upon the order of their development. The first institution is strongest, the second less so and the third weakest or a failed institution.

10. Founding Institutions Vary In Rates of Evolutionary Computation: Of these institutions, Religion is negatively (Devolutionarily) computational. The state is statically (Stagnatingly) computational, and Law is Positively (Evolutionarily) computational.

11. The Order of Institutions Determines Rates of Evolutionary Computation: The rate of evolutionary computation, the rate of innovation, adaptation, evolution, and the condition of the population during that devolution, stagnation, or evolution is determined by the order of, and path dependency of, founding institutions.

12. (What institutions Solve-for determines rate of evolutionary computation)

General Rule: the rate of evolutionary adaptation must exceed the rate of opportunity exhaustion in order to prevent devolution, degeneration, decline, collapse, and poverty. This is the experiential version of “You cannot defeat the red queen, by taking a pause, slowing down, resting on your laurels, or well sitting. Time is always ticking.”

General Rule: “Continuously adaptive behavior is expensive and irritating.” And that’s the cost of prosperity.

General Rule: “Alteration of your accidental metaphysics (logical rules of your group evolutionary strategy) is REALLY hard, costly, and REALLY irritating. Unbearably expensive. And by expensive we mean, to neural economy, and the emotional cost of paying for alteration of neural economy.”

Thankfully division of labor across time frames will solve this for MOST of the population. So this gets back to Christianity, which the greatest virtue is to do no harm to markets of evolutionary computation.

And
Evolution is limited by Path Dependency in a Group Strategy

Path dependence is when the decisions presented to people are dependent on prior decisions or experiences made in the past. So whether the information is genetic and invisible to us, metaphysical (a paradigmatic interpretation of the universe, world, man and our societies, presumptive habit

Adaptivity by The sequence of the development of State, Law, and Religion, like the foundation of any evolutionary structure, is anchored by the first institution the people develop, and the strategy, mythology, wisdom literature, method of argument, institutions that evolve in that series. Thereafter the civilization is somewhat a prisoner of that initial choice just as all alliances, organizations, technologies, and ideas are bound by previous decisions.

First Institution Strong Foundation	Second Institution Supportive to Foundation	Third Institution Weak or Failed Foundation
Religion	State	Law
Religion	Law	State
State	Religion (or Philosophy)	Law
State	Law	Religion
Law	State	Religion
Law	Religion	State

And this order dominates all thought throughout each civilization and throughout history.

Examples:

State -> Law -> Religion ==> (China)
State-> Religion(Confucian) -> Law ==> (China – Failed Law)

Law > Religion > State ==> (no one)
Law > State > Religion(Philosophy) ==> (Europe)

Religion(Theology) -> State > Law ==> (Middle east)
Religion(Mythology) -> Law -> State ==> (India)

AND;
Political power originates in the ability of humans to organize by individual influence, group coercion, and institutional power.

Influence: Individual Influence > Group Coercion > Institutional Power

1. It just so happens that we use gossip to rally and shame and ostracize people from production and opportunity for consumption: Religion. But then we scale.

2. It just so happens that you need to use violence to suppress parasitism sufficiently for a market to form, at that scale: State. But then we scale further.

3. And then to use law to suppress cheating, fraud, and to impose performance, and restitution, and if necessary, punishment: Law. But then we scale further.

4. And then we use wealth created by the application of violence and law and to force market participation rather than parasitism, to pay off those who cannot be forced.

5. And then, we hit the novel inflection point, and scale further:

6. And so we then use force, law and gossip to suppress the suppressors, and rely entirely upon rule of law, without a group of elites or institutions that exercises power.

So the sooner one develops rule of law, the sooner one starts suppressing the parasitism of the monopoly.

Regardless of the accidents of history that have produced your existing group strategy and social, political and economic order, Natural Law is a technology of incremental suppression of irreciprocity that will at the very least allow you and your people to sieze the maximum opportunities available to you whether you discover them or others do.

AND GIVEN;
The disproportionate returns on increasing scales of cooperation in a division of sensation, perception, cognition, prediction, memory, wants, advocacy, negotiation, and labor.

AND;
The Competitive Value of Marginal Increases in the Rate of Adaptation by Physical and Caloric, Social and institutional, Cognitive and Technological means.

AND;
A Group’s Founding Relationships with the universe:

Metaphysical Presumptions (Logic) of any given civiliztion depends upon:

A Relationship to the Natural World,(Geography)
A Means of Production
A Relationship between the rulers and the ruled
A Relationship toward Others,
And An Organizational Model to facilitate cooperation,

Resulting in:

A Means of Mythology, and Paradigms
A Means of Persuasion and Negotiation,
and
A Grammar of Communication

AND;
The Spectrum of Relationships with The Natural World

– Peers, Ascendants, Transformers, Conquerors of Nature (Europeans)
– In Harmony with Nature – bias mankind (East Asians)
– Interwoven Supernatural and Natural — bias supernatural (Hindu)
– Subjects of the Supernatural (Semitic)

AND;
The Spectrum Three Axes of Choices Toward Others:

– Predation, Parasitism, Rent Seeking, Free Riding, Undermining
– Competition by the degree of Non-imposition, Cooperation, and Trade
– Boycotting Avoidance of con?ict or cooperation

AND;
The Spectrum of Three Axes of Organizing Order and Elites Internally

– Force/Defense: Military/Judiciary — Authority (positive)
– Remuneration/Deprivation: Finance/industry – Markets (exchange)
– Undermining/Inclusion: Priesthood/intellectuals – Resistance (negative)

AND;
Rule by Spectrum of Three Axes of Decidability

1. Reason andCommand (China India) – Requires Justification
2. Empiricism(science) and Law (Europe) – Requires Truth
3. Sophistry and Propaganda (Semitia) – Requires Sophistry

AND;
The Spectrum of Mythologies

– History (truth), Essay, Science
– Literature (analogy), Mythology
– Deceit (fraud), Scripture, Theology

THEREFORE;

All civilizations produce these elements of group evolutionary strategy:

(a) A Group Evolutionary (competitive) Strategy,
(b) A Group Organizing Strategy to Pursue it
(c) A Mythology to explain and justify it,
(d) A Wisdom Literature (or hierarchy of) to communicate it,
(e) A System of Argument to persuade and defend it, and;
(f) A set of Institutions to persist it.
(f) A set of Elites to Regulate it (Govern)
(g) A set of Traditions, Values, Norms, Habits to Act within it.
(h) A Continous Stream Of Cooperation and Competition and Conflict.
(i) Survival (Persistence)
(j) At different Rates of Adaptation, stagnation, decline.

|STRATEGY|Strategy > Organizing Strategy > Mythology > Wisdom Literature > System of Argument > Institutions > Traditions, Values, Norms, Habits > Actions.

AND;

11. Human Nature Is Counter To (Competing In) Evolutionary Computation: Human nature drives to minimize costs, to seek the least work, to seek the least thought, to seek the least adaptation, and therefore, genetically, cognitively, socially, and politically regress to the mean of the ability of the population.

12. Organizing Humans into Evolutionary Computation is Difficult, Rare, and Unfortunately, Unique: It is contrary to human nature to seek to maximize costs of physical, behavioral, cognitive, adaptation, duty to the commons before the self, truth before face to the self, family, or dominance hierarchy – despite that this produces the most commons, with the highest trust, highest risk tolerance, highest economic velocity, highest investment, and fastest innovation, adaptation, and evolution.

Part II – Group Evolutionary Strategies

Civilizational Context

All proto civilizations, in order to unify larger numbers for larger scales of defense, trade, and cooperation, develop a group competitive evolutionary strategy dependent upon geography, climate, available means of production, present technological development, method of warfare, demographic composition, heterogeneity of, and number of competitors. The strategy is institutionalized by a mythology that provides a paradigm, vocabulary, logic within that paradigm, method of arguing for it, and a set of rituals (debts of loyalty) to reinforce it, including the relation between man and nature, between one another, between the classes, and the authorization of the legitimacy of elites, the hierarchical organization of the polity, and the status signals both good and bad that we call virtues, that demand, justify, and reinforce cooperative behavior at increasing scales.

We Don’t Know Our Group Strategies

We call these ‘metaphysics’ or values as if they are arbitrary – and they aren’t.

Within each strategy, classes develop sub-strategies

There are a limited Number of Strategies – and we can Enumerate Them

There are only so many human strategies – and we discovered and exploited all of them.

The Conflict of Civilizations

All Surviving Strategies Succeed, Some are Moral or Immoral, and advance man, hinder, or regress man – They Aren’t Equal or Relative or Subjective but Physics at Scale

The Axial Age (Civilization Formation) Anchored Our Strategies

—“Axial Age (also Axis Age, from German: Achsenzeit) is a term coined by German philosopher Karl Jaspers in the sense of a “pivotal age”, characterizing the period of ancient history from about the 8th to the 3rd century BCE. During this period, according to Jaspers’ concept, new ways of thinking appeared in Persia, India, China and the Greco-Roman world in religion and philosophy, in a striking parallel development, without any obvious direct cultural contact between all of the participating Eurasian cultures.”— Wiki

We are Midway through a new Axial age, Failed, and are entering a New Dark Age

( … )

The Value of Cooperation within Group and their Strategies

( … )

Part III – A Comparison of Group Strategies

The Evolution of Man

( …. )

The Evolution of Groups

( …)

The Problems of Scale

The Neural Economy

The Neural Economy, Uncertainty, and Worry (neuroticism)

The Demand for “Meaning”

The Demand For Agency (Will to Power, or control, or survival)

The Demand for Mindfulness

I mean the physical, cognitive and emotional discipline to control the subject of attention on the present intent, insulated from distractions whether personal, environmental, or interpersonal.

—“People are not evolved for producing statements of secular epistemic purity but rather for survival through cooperation negotiated by language.”–

Decidability and mindfulness are market goods. We require these goods to compensate for a complex unpredictable (kaleidic) world.

Traits Agreeableness, Extraversion, and Neuroticism

Personal: The market demand for personal mindfulness (Spiritualism) whether empathic-feminine (theological), moral-masculine(rational), or analytic-masculine(scientific) exists, and all three demands exist for most of us.
Interpersonal: The Market Demand for interpersonal mindfulness by creating a standard dialog, set of signals, and manners that are costly to learn and practice, but that by practicing display to others you are worthy of honest cooperation on the same terms.
Social: The market demand for social mindfulness (limitation of fear and comfort in the ethical, and moral. These are moral rules that serve the group’s competitive strategy – and all reflect the environmental challenges of the age of transformation in which men invented religions.,
Political: The market demand for political mindfulness (limits on political action and on rulers actions). I won’t cover each of them here.
Strategic: The Market Demand for a group strategy – gypsy parasitism, Jewish parasitism, Muslim parasitism, predation and conquest, Christian undermining of the truth, knowledge, reason, law, property, aristocracy by rallying the peasantry and women and slaves against all and being as expansionary as islam – to counter islam. Buddhist submission and obedience Hindu class duty and function in the ‘harmony’. Chinese hierarchical family (bureaucracy). Anglo aristocratic egalitarianism (entrepreneurship and corporation).

( … title … )

1. Dominance (Real, Techne-Science, Materialism, Action)
Statism Nationalism (Tribalism) Achieves mindfulness because of participation in state
Soldiery Achieves mindfulness through military fraternity
Agency Achieves Mindfulness because of achievement or success

2. Utility( Idealism, Philosophy, Reason, Choice, Mind)
Aristotelian-Anglo Philosophy
Continental and Platonic European Philosophy
Confucian–Daoist Philosophy

3. Insulation (Accommodation, Ritualization, Thought, Intuition )
Stoicism achieves mindfulness through small daily task completion in a virtuous manner.
Shinto achieves mindfulness through the precise repetition of ritual in a respectful manner.
Buddhism achieves mindfulness through meditation and escape from reality.

4. Submission (Supernatural, Theology, Empathy, Feeling)
Christianity achieves mindfulness by personal and collective prayer (and song).
Islam achieves mindfulness by many memorizations and ritual prayers during every single day.
Judaism achieves mindfulness by separatism and deep indoctrination

The question is, given how the various religions solved mindfulness (Stoicism-epicureanism, Buddhism, Hinduism, Abrahamism) which produces agency (stoicism), which produces optimism (Hinduism), which produces withdrawal from reality (Buddhism) and which denies and escapes reality (Abrahamism).

The Geographic Origin of Group Strategies

- Hostilelands: African Ethics (pre-Christian). Africa is akin to the Desertlands because of the sheer number of competitors, the hostility of the disease gradient, the plethora of wildlife, combined with the primitiveness of the available technologies. This is the only possible strategy until one or more core states can evolve, and create suffcient stability in some regions. (this is occurring now).
- Desertlands: Muslim Ethics: (I am still working on this one because I don’t get that it’s casual – but opportunistic.) What can I justify now in order to make this minor advance now? And thereby accumulate wins by wearing down opponents over long periods. The ethics of opportunism. As far as i can tell Islam is just an excuse for justifying opportunism. We can consider this the combination of religion and justifying opportunism – a long term very successful strategy because it’s very low cost
- Steppelands: Russian(0rthodox) Ethics: What can I get away with now by negotiation and subterfuge, and hold by force later? (steppe raiders) The ethics of steppe people surrounded by competitors, always hostile and unpredictable. This is a difficult and expensive but only possible strategy, when one is surrounded by hostile opportunity seekers. While seemingly expansive, it’s actually a fearful one, aggression as the only possible means of controlling defensive positions across open territory.
- Borderlands: Cosmopolitanerish) Ethics: What will someone consent to Regardless of future resentment and retaliation? (borderland/subculture/ deontological ethics: rules) The ethics of diasporic, migrating traders, or herding peoples who can prey upon the locals who hold territory. This is a very low-cost (parasitic) ethics that avoids all contribution to the host commons, but requires preserving the ability to exit (migrate). it is the raider strategy by systemic and verbal rather than physical means.
- Forestlands: Family, Clan Farms, Villages. Transportation expensive. Forests are dark and scary places full of brigands. Aristocratic Ethics: What will someone not retaliate against even if we agree to it?(rulers/teleological ethics: outcomes) The ethics of warriors who must hold territory. This is a very high-cost strategy because while professional warrior aristocracy is militarily superior, smaller numbers mean threats must be constantly suppressed when small, as soon as identi?ed. (Pro?ting from the domestication of man)
- Riverlands: Riverlands strategy defends against Steppland and Desertland strategies. (Profiting from the domestication of man) Chinese Ethics: What can I get away with now, but over time make it impossible to change later? The ethics of long-term ruling bureaucratic class. Sun Tzu strategy, and Confucian hyper familism. This is an exceptionally cost-effective strategy if one possesses a territorial resource (heartland), and can fortify that heartland.
- Fertile River Land: (Pro?t from the subjugation of man) (Cyrus was lost). Bias to Empire.
- Coastal-Island Lands – Athens, Scandinavia Bias to Trade
- Island Lands – Cyprus, Crete, BRITAIN, Naval bias to Trade.
- Diasporic People – Gypsies, Travellers, Jews

AND THEREFORE;
We All Evolved Through Wisdom Literature and Systems of Argument

Burial …
… Ancestor ….
… Animism ….
… Seasons (Agrarianism)
… … Sun Tzu Realism ( Martial Realism)
… … … Confucianism (harmony)
… … … … Daoism (Tolerance)
… … Proto IE Religion
… … … Proto Vedic
… … … … Hinduism
… … … … … Buddhism (stoic)
… … … … … … Buddhism (supernatural)
… … … … Zoroastrianism
… … … European Sky Father (martial realism)
… … … … European Common Law (legal realism)
… … … … … Platonism (idealism)
… … … … … … Aristotelianism (Epicureanism) (realism naturalism)
… … … … … … … Roman History, Law and Administration
… … … … … … … … (The Dark Ages)
… … … … Germanic Common Law
… … … … … English Common Law
… … … … … … The Aristotelian (Classical) Restoration (Italy, England)
… … … … … … … The Aesthetic Restoration (Renaissance)
… … … … … … … The Empirical Restoration (England)
… … … … … … … … The First Scientific Revolution (Theoretic)
… … … … … … … … … Agrarian, Commerical, Financial, Industrial Revolutions (Applied)
… … … … … … … … … … The Second Scientific Revolution
… … … … … … … … … … … The Technological (Applied) Revolution
… … … … … … … … The French Counter-Empirical Revolution (Enlightenment)
… … … … … … … … The German Counter-Empirical Revolution (Phenomenalism)
… … Proto Semitic (Animism)
… … … Proto Judaism
… … … … … Abrahamism <- Zoroastrianism (Authoritarianism)
… … … … … … Rabbinical Judaism (Justificationism)
… … … … … … … … The Ashkenazi Rationalization (Mendelsohn)
… … … … … … … … … The Ashkenazi Pseudoscientific Counter-Revolution
… … … … … … … … … … Boaz, Freud, Marx, Gould Marxism (Science Denial)
… … … … … … … … … … … NeoMarxism (Cultural Marxism)
… … … … … … … … … … … … Postmodernism > PC > Woke > Cancel Culture > Deplatforming
… … … … … … … … … … … … … Anti-Colonialism >Anti Whiteness > White Replacement
… … … … … … … … … … … … Anti-Male Feminism > Mysandry
… … … … … … Christianity (resistance)
… … … … … … … The Augustinian Conflation (compromise)
… … … … … … … … Orthodoxy – Catholicism, (settlement)
… … … … … … … … … Protestantism, (reformation)
… … … … … … … … … … Evangelicalism (folk-religion restoration)
… … … … … … … Islam (7th c+)
… … … … … … … … Fundamentalist Islam (11-12th c+)
… … … … … … … … … Wahabi Fundamentalist Islam (20th c+)

AND;
Adaptability Of Wisdom Literature Response Times

Just as methods of influence produce different response times (effect rates) so does wisdom literature.

Natural Law instantly and continuously evolves with each court finding.	Continuous Adaptation Least Prescriptive. Most Chance of Rotation. Most personal and social stress.	Truth-before-face
State Command responds slowly by necessity, but fast.	Selective (crisis) Adaptation Selectively prescriptive. Selectively adaptive – usually by shocks. Life of Stasis and infrequent Shocks.	Face-before-Truth
Philosophy requires generational revision or replacement, but slowly.	General (Great Change) Adaptation	Truth Before Face
Wisdom Literature requires intergenerational reinterpretation to changes. But very slowly.	Consistency regardless of a change	Contingent
Scripture requires frequent re-justification in response to change, but never changes.	Stagnation or prohibition on change. Most Prescriptive. No Chance of Rotation. Least personal and social stress.	Face Regardless of Truth

AND;
THEREFORE:

1. China (Northeast Asia) developed the State, and institutionalized philosophy, but failed at law, limiting adversarial competition in commerce and invention, but succeeded by mastery of statecraft – using a rational basis of thought – at the cost of slow evolution in technology.

China: Military -> State -> Religion (Philosophy) -> Failed at Law
Imported reformed Hinduism in the form of Buddhism.
Strategy: Delay, Deceive, And Trickery to Overwhelm, Assimilate, by Incremental Expansion, applying overwhelming numbers to push forward the walls of the fortress with cultural, institutional, and genetic conquest. The China myth is just that, and the longest it’s been a unified empire was a century. China has better demographic trait distribution than India but to some degree – as the Great Khan learned – her numbers make her unconquerable, only temporarily governable.

Lao Tzu, Sun Tzu, and Confucius, (Wisdom: What should be) All 6th-5th C BC wrote Philosophical Wisdom Literature. Lao Tzu crossed the line into the questionable. Note that Buddhism was developed in India in the 5th Century BC, but did not succeed there. Buddhism succeeded where the people still retained “Natural Religion“: Ancestor, spirit, and nature worship.

2. Japan (Northeast Asia) is perhaps the world’s most successful state and second only to England and Germany because of her distance from the empirical revolution. To some degree, adaptive Japan is to authoritarian China as adaptive England was to authoritarian and backward France.

Japan: Miliary Success -> State Success -> Law Success -> Religion Unnecessary, Limited Buddhism imposed.

3. India (South Asia) adopted Religion, failed at state, and failed at law, succeeded by numbers that despite numbers demographics and poverty produced a nearly idyllic civilization – using a practical basis of thought – at the cost of castes to prevent dysgenia at the top, failing to shrink the bottom, and making the evolution of the civilization next to impossible.

India: Military Failure -> Religion -> State Failure -> Law Failure
Imported UK Law, State, Education. (Unfortunately, French Socialism)
Strategy: The Immovable Object: Use the massive population and deeply ingrained culture to resist them with kindness, at the cost of tolerating frustration and extractive rule.

Indians (WISDOM, RITUAL, PRAYER, What should be) Wrote both mythology and wisdom literature, bordering on political science, from 1500 to 500 bc, then developed gods through 500AD, and continued to evolve through contributions of ‘saints’ through 1500AD despite Islamic conquest and interference.

4. Iranic Persia ( …. )

The Persians (INDIVIDUAL UTOPIAN UNIVERSALISM) wrote supernormal and supernatural wisdom literature. Zoroastrianism 6th C BC. They did not make the full leap from religion to philosophy.

5. Semitia (South Eurasia) adopted religion, then religious law, then failed at the state, and civilizationally succeeded by religion – using a supernatural basis of thought, at the cost of generating demand for superstition and resistance to change.

Semitia: Transient Military (State Failure) -> Religion -> Law (Religious) -> State Failure
Importing State (failed) Importing Law (failed)
Competition between kritarchic Priest Law vs State Law.
Strategy: Continuous insurrection by non-adaptation and zero tolerance for adaptation at the cost of non-productivity.

The Semitic Abrahamists , from 6th c BC, to 6th c AD, evolved traditional Semitic polytheistic religion into monolatry, then monotheism, then branched into Christianity, rabbinical Judaism, and Islam (and others). (Wrote Mythology, Resistance, Rebellion, Separatism, and Lie and Destruction of all of the above. (COMMAND, UTOPIAN LIE) They conflated theology, philosophy, and law into authoritarian religion.

The Egyptians (Lost Civilization ) wrote no systemic text for their natural religion (mythology, animism, polytheism, They practiced traditional trade: RITUAL AND SACRIFICE Supernatural (Animism, Anthropomorphism, heathenism ) Doctrine and Ritual.

7. Europeans (West Eurasia) developed law, then the state, and failed at religion, succeeded by law – using the empirical basis of thought – generating the fastest culture of innovation and adaptation humanly possible at the cost of the necessity of market suppression of reproduction continuing human domestication, and importing a foreign religion for the masses. Unfortunately the combination of overextension, immigration, religious conversion,

Europe: Military -> Law -> State -> Religion Failure (Philosophy)
Imported Religion (Christianity)
Strategy: Quality over Quantity: small numbers on the edge of the bronze age must maneuver, innovate, and adapt rapidly, to pressure from hordes of superior numbers.

Aristotle, Epicurus, Democritus; (TRUTH, What is.) Wrote Proto Empiricism: Reason, Naturalism, Proto-empiricism, Law, Calculation. So the greeks and romans crossed from tradition into philosophy and then empiricism (science). Truth Regardless of Cost.

7. Russian Europeans (Eastern Europe and North Eurasia) were following the general European technical and intellectual dispersal eastward but were interrupted by the Mongol invasion, their reconquest of their territories, their successful expansion, rapid Europeanization, but exhaustion from the Jewish Bolshevik Revolution, resulting terrors and the enormous sacrifice fighting the Germans. So Russia’s national myth is excessively one of world war two, not their series of triumphs over adversity, despite being on the edge of European civilization and surrounded by hostiles to south and east – and unfortunately west.

Russia: Military -> Weak State -> Religion (Orthodoxy) -> Now Law
Russia imported orthodoxy deliberately (almost Islam) just as did Japan Buddhism, in order to educate, govern, and tax the peasantry.
Strategy:

8. Africa, or at least west Africa, given her remoteness, was on the cusp of her first empires when interrupted by colonialism. The same is true for North America.

Africa: (Military and State Formation Interrupted)
Christianity imported, and Islam enforced. Experimental but hopeful.

9. Mesoamerican early civilization, again remote, and perhaps the most brutal and gruesome in history, was terminated by colonialism. As was Stone Age north Amerindian proto-civilization.

Americas: Military -> Religion -> State Failure, Law Failure
Exterminated by Europeans and Neighbors

10. Gypsies, Jews, Arabs, and Turks ( … )

Gypsy
(Under Suppression)
While the list of disaspora is long, only the various gypsies and jews completely gave up territorial holding and state formation. The gypsy strategy is low-level parasitic specializing in begging, black market, petty crime, gambling, prostitution, entertainment (music, dancing, singing), fortune telling, . And resorting to manual labor when necessary.

—“They pool resources to start and operate fortune-telling businesses. They work together in teams, tarmacking, tinning, and roofing houses. To restrict competition in their fields of work, Gypsies also collude. Kumpaniyi carve up geographic territories, each receiving the exclusive right to operate in a given area. For example, in Gypsies’ most lucrative economic activity—fortune telling—kumpaniyi divide economic territories into three-block areas.

In non-Gypsies’ eyes, Gypsies are thieves. Gypsies have contributed to this stereotype by stealing from and/or defrauding opportunistically. gadjo (non-romani, like Jews use Goy for non-jews or as we Europeans call barbarians, primitives, or even animamls’) For Gypsies, using one’s cleverness to relieve a gadjo of his money or property is a virtue, not a vice. Thus Gypsies don’t scruple at defrauding fortune-telling customers or engaging outsiders in other confidence games. Abusing and defrauding government welfare programs is also a popular and important economic activity for modern Roma.”— Peter Leeson, Economics, George Mason University 2012

As such gypsies function as a low-level infection, and since they are rarely a threat to the state or economy they are only persecuted for excesses.

Gypsies practice various religions but they also practice supernatural customs, particularly of cleanliness and sexuality – the most dramatic of which is that outsiders are unclean. The severity of this superstition is as demanding as most formal religions.

- - Nepotism (Sustaining Judaism and Jewish People)
  - Separatism (a state within a state), (Buiding Support for Israel)
  - Parasitism (avoidance of broader commons, privatizing commons)
  - Manual or Craft, Construction Labor
  - Moral Crime
  - Petty Crime

Jewish
(Undermined England, Germany, France, Ukraine, and Russia)
The Jewish religion was the first to require literacy. While philosophy required literacy, religion came to literacy late and last. Literacy both prohibited a bottom class, and gave access to higher-paying administrative jobs. By the second century, nearly all jews had given up farming – or given up on the religion. The Jewish “Avoidance of work” has remained an enduring feature of Jewish civilization.

The resulting diaspora, selection for ingroup bias, the exit of failures, upward redistribution of reproduction to Rabbis, and frequent retaliatory prosecutions and bottlenecks produced expected results.

AND;

Differences In Civilizational Colonization (Expansion)

Chinese
(Formal Institutional intentions of conquering: Burma, Laos, Northern India, Vietnam, Nepal, Bhutan, Thailand, Malaysia, Singapore, the Ryukyu Islands, 300 islands of the South China, East China and Yellow Seas, as well as Kyrgyzstan, Mongolia, Taiwan, South Kazakhstan, the Afghan province of Bahdashan, Transbaikalia and the Far East to South Okhotsk.)

Islamic
(Destroyed and reduced to dysgenia and ashes all the civilizations of North Africa, Egypt, Levant, Mesopotamia, Persia, Indus-India, Anatolia, Caucuses, Byzantium, Old Europe (Balkans). Then Turkey Lost back to Islamism. Islam is now destroying Europe through immigration, reproduction, parasitism, undermining, and conversion once again.)

Orthodox-Russian
( Conquered Golden Horde, Conquered Siberia, Lost SE Europe, Lost East Europe, Lost Uzbekistan )

AND;
Creating Macro Competition between Civilizations: A Vicious Cycle of Civilizational Warfare

( … )

1. Anatolian Hittites versus Egypt enabling the bronze age collapse
2. South Eurasian Iranic Persians versus European Greek Anatolians
3. Alexander Crossing the Bosphorus versus Persia resulting in infection of the west with oriental authoritarian mysticism while spreading Greek Reason, Langauge, High Culture, and Monetary systems across south Eurasia
4. Rome versus Semitic Judea resulting in the Diaspora and the infection of Europe by Jewish seditious mysticism
5. Jewish Christians versus Rome resulting in the Fall of Rome and the Semitic Abrahamic Dark Age
7. Muslims vs the world, and against West Europe in Spain, and Old Europe in the Balkans, and European Anatolia.
6. (Jews Versus Spain)(slavery)
7. (Jewish Facilitation of European Warfare)
8. Jewish
6. Jews versus Russia resulting in the horrors of the Soviet Union – Maoism and Cambodia by imitation.
7. Fascists versus Jews resulting in the Fall of European Empires
8. Postwar Jews versus the EU and USA leading to the present collapse – and the present beginning of the second Semitic Dark Age

( … CD: RELOCATE:

1500 BC-Collapse of Indus Valley and Minoans
1200 BC-Collapse of Bronze Age System
550 BC-Warring States Period, Collapses in Greece and Italy, collapse of Babylon and Egypt to Persia
50 BC-Collapse of Rome and Han
200 AD-Collapse of Rome and Han.
600 AD-Plague of Justinian, Byzantium-Persian Wars, Collapse of Sui
900 AD-Collapse of Franks, Abbasids, T’Ang
1350 AD-Black Death, Hundred Years War, Collapse of Yuan, Tamerlane, Ottoman pillaging
1650 AD-30 Years War, Manchu conquest of China, Time of Troubles, EnglishCivil War
1900 AD-WW1 in Eastern Europe, Taiping Rebellion, Famines of 1871

… LIST OF WORLD CRISIS IN RECORDED HISTORY … )

AND;
Normative competitions within civilizations: The Enlightenment Failure

( … )

More Evidence that Every Bad Idea Begins In France

( … )

AND;
Micro Competitions within Nations

( … )

AND;
Classes

( … )

AND;
Minorities

( … )

In the modern world, Europeans alone are tolerant of hostiles.

PART IV – EUROPEAN GROUP EVOLUTIONARY STRATEGY

In Contrast with the European Group Evolutionary Strategy

European Group strategy is consistent across European Steppe Herders practicing entrepreneurial cattle raiding and warfare; European mixed herder agrarians practicing conquest of Europe – killing the men and keeping the women as they had captured cattle and women on the steppe; With the only example in written memory being the Spartans, who for all intents and purposes retained the strategy by which the European steppe herders conquered the European continent for profit. As such, they commercialized with the other Greeks conquering locals and overextending; Romans conquering locals and overextending; Franks conquering Europe and overextending. Conquering the Levant and overextending. Conquering the new world and overextending; the British restoring the Roman Empire an overextending – all in the greatest commercial enterprise in history: the domestication of animal man for profit. And by overextension, collapsing, as did Rome, out of unwillingness to use middle eastern or far eastern brutality ‘on their inventory’.

The West’s Group strategy is a universal militia maximizing speed, maneuver, adaptation, innovation, by the continuous domestication (farming) of agency, through self-determination, sovereignty and reciprocity, oath and truth before face, dependent on meritocracy, absent authority, leaving only adversarialism as a means of decidability, voting for production of commons, rule of law for dispute resolution, and markets for the production of goods services and information, and the necessity governing those with less agency, and culling those who lack agency, by natural and market selection, producing the civilization with the greatest conformity to and discovery of, adaptation to and application of the formal, physical, natural, and evolutionary laws of the universe.

The European group strategy is consistent whether steppe raiders, continental conquerors, Greeks, Romans, Nordics, Vikings, English, pirates, and American settlers: democracy rule of law, and empiricism, is the only method of governing a militia of voluntary entrepreneurial warriors. And that tradition has survived five thousand years – including the dark ages. The critics were right. And this is why the Americans most, Australians next, and British least maintain that ethic. And why the American constitution differs little from that of their pre-literate ancestors.

“An army of all, of a universal militia, of universal entrepreneurs, self-governed by the Natural Law of self-determination, by self-determined means, by the reciprocal grant of, the defense of, the inalienability of, and insurance of, individual sovereignty in all demonstrated interests, and reciprocity in all display, word, and deed, to all members of the polity that are demonstrably able, willing, worthy, and sworn to exchange them, producing adversarial markets in all aspects of life: association, cooperation, production, reproduction, commons, polities, and war – and as a consequence, the fastest innovation and adaptation of knowledge, technology, economy, polity, war, and man, by the continuous evolution of human agency, producing the greatest transcendence of man, in the shortest time, under the greatest prosperity, with the greatest certainty – and the continuation of natural selection by suppression of the reproduction of those demonstrating unfitness for those markets – an aristocracy, holding to the primacy of man, profiting from the incremental domestication of the human-animal into peers. And as a consequence, institutionalizing and industrializing the production of human agency – rapidly evolving man from animal, to slave, to serf, to freeman, to citizen, to sovereign and into the gods they imagined.”

(See The Economics of Pirates” )

While that’s a formal description in legal prose, our law of sovereignty and reciprocity says only ‘Do no harm to private or common’. And it does not limit such harm to the person or physical goods. It includes the personal, physical, familial, shared, common, normative, traditional, and civilizational assets upon which all of us depend for our disproportionate wealth and choice compared to the rest of the world: demonstrated interests. That’s not an opinion on, or theory of, human behavior. The evidence of human behavior.

The Importance of Great Ambitions for European People

( … ) An army requires risk action and material costs and is a higher cost than organized religion and is most rapid and influential; an organized religion requires social and psychological costs and is a higher cost than an ideology and is more durable, and an ideology requires political advocacy and is a higher cost and more actionable than a philosophy.

The Importance of trifunctionalism to the European People

The Importance of Truth To European People

( … )

14. European group strategy consists in the One law:

Commons-ism (capitalization) not Communism (consumption).

PART VI – JEWISH GROUP EVOLUTIONARY STRATEGY

Understanding Jewish Group Strategy

Legend: … Normal = Via MacDonald … Italic* = Via Doolittle	European Cultural Origins (Territorial and Political Control)	Jewish Cultural Origins (Lack of Territorial and Political Control)
Evolutionary History	Northern Hunter-Gatherers + Anatolian Farmers + European Steppe Herders Via Militial Entrepreneurialism: Low Clannishness Via Metalsmithing: Technology Via Domestication of Horse and Man: Primacy of Man.	Middle Old World Pastoralists (Herders) South EurasiansVia Long Poverty: High Clannishness Via Writing (Egyptians): Theology Via State Failure: Resentment: Primacy of Gods
Kinship System	Bilateral; Weakly Patricentric (Share Capital In Security)*	Unilineal; Strongly Patricentric (maintain capital b/c insecurity)*
Family System	Simple Household;	Extended Family; Joint Household
Marriage Practices	Exogamous Monogamous	Endogamous, Consanguineous Polygynous
Marriage Psychology	Companionate; Based on Mutual Consent and Affection	Utilitarian; Based on Family Strategizing and Control of Kinship Group
Position of Women	Relatively High	Relatively Low
Social Structure (Social Organization)	Individualistic; (Self Determination, Merit) Republican; (Aristocratic Egalitarian, Merit) Democratic; (Militial, Merit)Maintain Adaptivity and Maneuver, to maintain military and political success.	Collectivistic; (Survival not merit) Authoritarian; (Intolerant) Charismatic LeadersMaintain Group Coherence despite political and military failure.
Socialization	Stresses: Independence, Self-Reliance	Stresses: Ingroup Identification, Obligations to Kinship Group
Self Direction	Deliberate Choice in Political Marketplace	Social Construction in Social Marketplace
Self Correction	Altruistic Punishment	Threat of Ostracization (No altruistic Punishment)
Intellectual Stance	Reason; Science	Dogmatism; Submission to Ingroup Authority and Charismatic Leaders
Legal Organization*	Neutral Judiciary between Military, Economy, and Faith	Rule by Judiciary (priesthood)
Legal Interpretation*	Scientific and Transactional Forcing Continuous Adaptation; Adaptive, Evolutionary Promoting Eugenia	Sophistic, and Reinterpreted (Pilpul) Prohibiting Adaptation Maladaptive; Devolutionary Promoting Dysgenia
Institutional Evolution	Military > Empirical Law > Philosophy > (Religious Failure)	Priesthood (religion) > Theological Law > State Failure > Landholding Failure
Argumentative Evolution	Military-Technical > Legal > Mathematical- Philosophical (rational) > Historical-Empirical > Scientific > Operational > Computational	Priestly-Social > Theological > Theo-Legal (mendelsohn) > Pseudoscience (marx,boaz, freud, frankfurt) > Sophistry(pomo) > denial (woke-pc) > hate (anti-whiteness)
Political Organization*	Trifunctionalism; Military, Legal Neutral, Faith	Monopoly; Combined Religion, Law, and Politics
Economic Organization	Productivity	Parasitism Upon Hosts
Military Organization	Physical Warfare (Political, Material)	Sedition Warfare (Social, Informational)
Military Alliances	Military Alliances	Political, social, economic clientelism
Border Signaling	Physical Borders, Flags, Uniforms	Signal Borders: Hair, Hats, Clothing
Moral Stance	Moral Universalism: Morality is Independent of Group Affiliation	Moral Particularism; Ingroup/Outgroup Morality; “Good is what is good for the Jews”
Ethnocentrism	Relatively Low	Relatively High: “Hyperethnocentrism”
Xenophobia	Relatively Low	Relatively High: “Hyperxenophobia”

Understanding Jewish Mythology and Cohesion

( The Problem of Confronting Reality: physical natural evolutionary laws)

(The Importance of Social Construction for Jews)

(The difficulty in maintaining the illusion of virtue in crime)

(The importance of Enemies for Jews to Prey Upon )

(The Importance of Access To Enemy Territory)

(The Limite Number of Enemies They Can Prey Upon) – Soros and the open society.

The most racist of peoples, Jews can claim they aren’t because they aren’t responsible for the consequences.

The Blacksmith and the Demon

( … )

Understanding Jewish Group Tactics, by Curt Doolittle

Technically speaking the Jews (and Muslims) hide behind special pleading (pretense of innocence, pretense of victimhood) – and plausible deniabilty for race, for religion, and for past (justified) persecution, while they practice warfare from within by treason (priority of external loyalty), sedition (undermining from within) rather than warfare by physical violence, to conduct their war against informational, social, political, economic institutions by evasion “gossiping, shaming, outraging, rallying, moralizing, psychologizing, loading, framing, false and exaggerated accusation” ) to undermine rather than offer (“trutful, reciprocal, possible, survivable and beneficial”) competing alternatives, and using critique (criticism to undermine a proposition rather than advocating an equally criticizable competing solution), social construction (false narratives), pilpul (sophistry), fictionalism (pseudoscience, idealism, supernaturaalism), baiting into hazard (seduction, enticement, entrapment) using historical obscurantism and revisionism (disinformation), false promise (freedom from probability, determinism, scarcity, and self interest, reciprocity, kin selection, and regresson to the mean, genetic load, and natural selection), and financial warfare (concentration of incentives to produce concentration of force), legal contrivance (abuse of juridical defense) exploiting our unique european tolerance for adversarial ideals *within the law*, and using conspiracy (ethnocentrism, separatism), to profit from war from within against european peoples who uniquely (falsely) concieve of warfare as limited to physical conflict – because of the western indo european founding principles of self determination by self determined means, by adversarial(scientific) resolution of disputes, under the rules of reciprocity in display word and deed, including testimonial speech ( truthful, empirical, warrantied, liable) including trifunctional adversarial conflict between elites in military, law and faith, with military limiting it’s dominance expression to returns on the commons, the law holding to the oath of neturality, the faith holding to the oath of non-aggression under the law, and all three eliets to the oath of ‘do no harm’ within the polity.

( jewish nepotism etc here)

A Long History of Profiting From Harm (And reveling in it)

( … )

Baiting Into Hazard

( … )

Defining a Hazard – “In old English law an unlawful game at dice, those who play at it being called ‘hazardors’. In modern law, any game of chance or wagering.”

Creating a Hazard – A failure of due diligence in defending others against a hazard you are either aware of or have created. i.e. a failure to cover a well-hole that a child can fall into. Old but common one: refrigerators with locking doors left at junkyards with the door on, so that children can get inside, suffocate, or starve, and die.

Moral Hazard – When a party with more information about its actions or intentions has a tendency or incentive to behave against the interests of the other party with less information. Usury, Prostitution, and Drugs are the most common moral hazards. The most common topic on law involves insurance schemes, where one is incentivized to commit arson or murder simply because one has insurance on the building or person.

Defining A Moral Hazard

The lack of incentive to guard against risk where one is protected from its consequences, lack of incentive to guard against risk where one is protected from its consequences
In Insurance. The risk, danger, or probability that the event insured against may happen, varying with the circumstances of the particular case.
In Fire Insurance. The risk or danger of the destruction of the insured property by fire, as measured by the character and interest of the insured owner, his habits as a prudent and careful man or the reverse, his known integrity or his bad reputation, and the amount of loss he would suffer by the destruction of the property or the gain he would make by suffering it to burn and collecting the insurance.
In Economics. Moral hazard occurs when an entity has an incentive to increase its exposure to risk because it does not bear the full costs of that risk.
In Tort Law – “A tiger trap presents a hazard not only to the tiger, but to man.”
In Politics …

Examples of Moral Hazard

1) If I entice you into buying drugs, I’m baiting you into a hazard, since addiction is a spiral. (Pushers)
2) If I lend you money or extend you credit to buy alcohol or drugs, creating a vicious cycle of debt and addiction.
3) If I suggest you might win at gambling (you can’t), that’s baiting you into hazard. (Gambling houses)
4) If I lend you money or extend you credit to gamble. (Bookies)
5) If I lend you money at usurious prices that will entrap you in debt cycles. (Loan Sharking)
6) If I offer you a loan to get what you want under impulse or duress, but I can extract interest from you, and then seize your property in restitution.
7) If a woman implies access to friendship, affection, or sex, in exchange for goods services favors opportunity – which she will never deliver.
8) If I promise you life after death if you obey and undermine the upper classes. (Abrahamism)
9) If I promise you salvation in heaven if you rebel against the government that is trying to create order and prosperity over the next few decades, that is baiting you into a hazard.
10) If I promise you power and equality if you undermine the political system (Marx)
11) If I promise you equality if you undermine men (feminism)
12) If I promise you status if you undermine the status hierarchy (postmodernism)
13) If I appeal to your morality and pass the hart cellar immigration act. (frankfurt school)
14) If I promise you equality or socialism when it’s genetics that cause our differences, and you act to destroy your civilization, then that’s all baiting into hazard.
15) If I promise you the end of whiteness and whites will improve your condition when it is only under whiteness – meaning sciences – and their rule that has improved your condition, and that your condition reflects that of your ancestors.

In other words, you are entering into a voluntary exchange that is not in your interests, simply because for whatever reason you are vulnerable to the trap. These are all lies that bait you into hazard (risk and loss).

Using False Promise, Pilpul, and Critique

That should cover Hazard. Now let’s deal with False Promise, Pilpul to ‘sell’ it, and Critique to undermine opposition to it:

Denial

1. Dismissal of the Evidence, History, Argument, Incentives, Norm, or Tradition

2. Evading providing a competitive, equally criticizable and testable alternative.

3. Equating Desirability-Undesirability and Approval-Disapproval or Denial with Truth and Falsehood

4. Face-Before-Truth rather than European truth-before-face, or threat to the dominance or competence hierarchy.

4. NAXALT – “Not All X Are Like That” – Denying a general rule describing a distribution is false because there are some cases at the tails.

Undermining by Ad Hominem

Outraging, Shaming, Moralizing, Psychologizing, Ridiculing, Rallying,

False Promise – The most common type are psychological false promises: Life after death as Freedom from Death, followed by freedom from knowledge of one’s value to others: Marxism as Freedom from Competition for Production in the Market between Classes, Feminism as freedom from the compromise between the genders, Postmodernism as freedom from sexual, social, economic, political, and military market value, freedom from paying the costs of conformity to high trust norms, traditions, institutions, and laws, and even freedom from Truth, Reason, and Science.

Pilpul – Using sophism and overloading to make excuses that convince you (sell you), baiting you into the hazard. Where sophism is a fallacious argument used deliberately to deceive. Among the sophisms are the ‘big lies” that involve the three techniques of constructing big lies that we call fictionalisms.

Why does pilpul work so effectively? Because all speech functions by incremental suggestion using continuous recursive disambiguation.

Suggestion: Using suggestion or partial information letting the audience fill in, and not
Sophistry: Conflation, Incremental Conflation, into Overloading
Loading: Adding emotional context or value judgments to influence the audience.
Framing: Adding information or incentives or narrative structure to influence the audience.
Obscuring:
Fictions: (Storytelling or Fictionalizing) into Suspension of Disbelief, Suggestion, and Overloading
Fictionalisms: Using Magic to Pseudoscience, Surrealism to Idealism, or Supernatural to Theological examples or claims.

Critique – Using undermining and sophism and deceits – particularly straw man false arguments – to undermine your due diligence or falsify the experience and evidence.

Heaping Undue Praise or Fabricated Criticism

Social Construction – Using numbers of people, propaganda, information, symbols to overload your reason and cause you to fall prey to false promise, pilpul, and critique so that our primary means of defense from falsehood – competition in a market for information with others who might disagree – is impossible.

Asymmetric Nepotism:

Nepotistic Conspiracy:

Nepotistic Supremacy:

Secrecy and Motive Secrecy:

Specializing in Distrust

Inability form productive organizations

Inability to innovate materially

The Importance of Asymmetry of Knowledge in Baiting Into Hazard
( … )

The Importance of Secrecy in Baiting into Hazard
( …)

Specialization in Baiting Into Hazard by False Promise of Freedom From The Laws of the Universe

So how does one or a group increase the scale of baiting into hazard from prostitution, gambling, drugs and alcohol, loansharking, black market trade, as an organized crime family, into an organized crime industry such as credit and finance, to an organized crime Nation State within a State? One shifts from baiting individuals into hazard by freedom from determinism and probability of one’s personal environment, to baiting classes and polities into hazard by freedom from the determinism of the universe itself. But what is the bait? Freedom from the Laws of The Universe.

Given the immutable Constraints of the Formal (logical), Physical (realism, naturalism, determinism, probability, scarcity), Natural (self-interest, amorality, reciprocity, kin selection), Evolutionary (genetic load, regression to the mean, natural selection, differences in group evolutionary neoteny, differences in aggression and intelligence ) Laws of the Universe, the Jews and Muslims specialize, institutionalize, and mass-produce a counter-revolution against the European, Asian, and Hindu civilizations’ spectrum of levels of success in discovering, adapting to, apply, and institutionalizing the inescapable laws of the universe – and this explains the hierarchy of civilization achievements by Europeans, East Asians, Hindustanis, and the failure of the Islamic civilization to convert it’s capture of the arts and sciences of european, north African, iranic, and Hindu civilizations, into an equally evolutionary civilization, and instead, restored fundamentalism and destroyed every civilization it had conquered, reducing it to ignorance, poverty, and dysgenia from which it cannot – because of its Abrahamic religion – seem to escape.

The Formal Laws (Mind, Logic, and Language)	Words: Measurements of bodily(physical, sensory, cognitive, emotional) relations Logic: Constant Semantic Relations, Math: Constant Physical Relations, Operations: Constant Transformal Relations Simulations: Continuous Transform Relations
The Physical Laws (The Physical Universe)	Primary Physics (Unsolved), Wave Density(particle) Physics, Atomic Physics, Chemistry, Biochemistry, Biology, Genetics, And most importantly: scarcity.
The Natural Laws (Behavioral Laws Within The Limits of the Physical)	Sentience, Awareness, Consciousness, Psychology(Acquisition), Sociology(Cooperation), Economics (Cooperative Production), Politics, Warfare, Group Evolutionary Strategy And most importantly: the self-interest of man, the amorality of man, the kin selection of man, the higher value of the ingroup to man, the difference in neoteny and rates of adaptivity, the genetic distribution of rates of adaptivity between groups.
The Evolutionary Laws (The consequence of our behavior over time)	Entropy, Efficiency, competitive reproduction; Genetic Load, Regression to the Mean, Rate of Mutation; Rate of Adaptation, Natural Selection, The Red Queen, The Window of Opportunity before a Great Filter.

Creating Plausible Deniability

( … ) How does one or a group hide from plausible deniability, and why are Europeans the only people vulnerable to it?

Hiding Behind Moral Pretense
Hiding behind Voluntary Choice
Hiding behind Sympathy for Hyper consumption (experiences)
Hiding Behind (Selective) Evasion of Responsibility
Heaping Undue Criticism (Persecution) and Undue Praise (Einstein, Holocaust industry)

Specialization in Organized Crimes Using False Promise and Baiting into Hazard

Similarly, the Jews, desperate to retain their parasitic means of existence, and incompetence at productivity, innovation, producing commons, or polities, doubled down on their production of sources of ignorance, deceit, and parasitism and producing nothing other than an organized crime family for two thousand years – until tolerated by the Europeans in the industrial revolution, at which point they immediately invented a counter-revolution against the evolutionary superiority of western civilization just as they had in the Jewish, Christian, and Muslim revolutions against the superior and evolutionary civilizations of the ancient world, specialize in industries of unaccountable, unproductive, parasitic, baiting into hazard, profiting from other’s loss, profiting from the destruction of our high trust commons, under the pretense of plausible deniability:

Selling signal goods (trinkets), gambling, prostitution, alcohol, drugs all on credit, organized black market crime, moneychanging, entrapment in loansharking, entrapment by usurious credit, entrapment into default and takings, entrapment into slavery, slaving, slaving host peoples, entrapment into political policy, entrapment into service of the state, entrapment by the alliance with the state against the people, fraudulent tax farming, the purchase of productive institutions and converting them to rent-seeking institutions, nepotistic conspiracy against the people in all of the above; seeking opportunities for unproductive, unwarrantied, positions in entertainment, media, press, advertising, marketing, and the academy from which to promote their false promises and baiting into hazard; and the ultimate means of exploiting trust and profiting from others hardship by unaccountability in finance, and law – with medicine alone a virtuous pursuit.

Specialization in Construction of False Promise (Hazarding)

Specialization in Construction of False Promise by using the three fictionalisms of Magic to Pseudoscience (Physical), Sophistry to Idealism (verbal), Occult(Supernatural) to Theology (intuitionistic: imaginary and emotional).

The Four Dimensions of False Promise

For each of the four sciences: The formal or logical, the physical or material, the natural or behavioral, and the evolutionary or survival, the Jews produced a set of false promises that undermine ‘sensemaking’ by undermining each of these universal laws.

1. False Promise of Freedom from Formal Laws (logic, truth) by the use of social construction of repetitive feedback of information counter to formal, physical, natural, and evolutionary laws.
2. False Promise of Freedom from Physical Laws (scarcity, false promise of endless growth). by the false promise of endless growth, an end to scarcity, and an end to human competition by demonstrated acquisition.
3. False Promise of Freedom Natural Laws (of self-interest, rational choice, amorality, reciprocity, competitive organization), by the false promise of an end to kin selection, koinophillia, ethnocentrism, sex, class, subrace, and racial differences, and the sexual, social, economic, and political value of organization by ethnocentrism given the class, subrace, and subrace differences in sexual, social, economic, and political value to one another, given the substantial evolutionary difference between the races and subraces.
4. False Promise of Freedom from Evolutionary Laws ( ending natural, and market selection, accumulating mutation and regulation, the impossibility of isolation, inescapable regression, accumulated genetic load, dysgenia, and the red queen of resources, competitors, biological, climatological, geological, solar, and galactic risks. ).

They industrialize the sale and distribution of these false promises by the tactics of:

1. Faith Healing, delaying into hazard. Faith Healing consists of providing temporary psychological relief while allowing the cause to persist, grow, and evolve.
2. False Story Telling, baiting you into empathy, loading, framing, obscurantism, suggestion, suspension of disbelief and overloading.
3. False Promise, baiting into hazard. Baiting into hazard consists of making false promises of freedom from the laws of the universe. arguing them with sophistry to idealism, magic to pseudoscience, or occult to theology.
4. False Criticism, undermining into hazard.
5. Duplicitous, Double Standard, Irreciprocal, and Poly Logical Ethics, like their polylogical unequal laws,

They escalate from the least burdensome to the most burdensome tactic:

1. Faith healing at every opportunity (lie and deny)
2. Selling false promise if they can (fraud)
3. Evading or silencing at every necessity (shaming, moralizing, psychologizing)
4. Undermining if they have opportunity to (sedition)
5. Attack if they can get away with it (de-platforming, conspiracy)
6. Hiding behind plausible deniability of freedom of choice (non-coercion)

Jewish Warfare Methodology

Given low numbers, inability to hold territory, failure at state-building, cultural disposition for avoidance of productivity, and history of parasitism, the Jewish Group Strategy consists of Total War from Within, using:

“Delay, Deceive, Undermine, Sow Discord, and destroy genetic, normative, cultural, institutional capital, by disinformation, deceit, defamation, sedition, and treason, using Baiting Into Hazard, by False Promise of freedom from constraints of formal, physical, natural, and evolutionary law, Advocated by Pilpul, Defended by Critique, Escaping Liability and Warranty, by Pretense of Plausible Deniability, Despite Deliberate Avoidance of Due Diligence, And Deliberate Evasion of Warranty, Deliberate Escape From Liability, Given the Asymmetry of Knowledge, the dependence on instincts, the Presence of Malincentives by both Agent(s) and Victim(s) – And Pursued for the Purpose of Attention, Reward (pro?t), Influence(power), Undermining (Power), of the Trust and Cooperation, of a Population in Normal Distribution, Thereby Generating accelerating Cycles of Internal Con?ict, Generating Demand for Authority to Control by the Hazard Maker.” In other words, they function as did the ancient fertile crescent priesthoods, faith healers, and usurers: parasitic rather than productive citizens.”

It takes a little effort to remember each of these terms, tactics, and strategy, but with a little practice you’ll find you can identify their use, and once aware of it, you’ll see that you are, we are, saturated in as much sophistry, pseudoscience, deceit, fraud and parasitism, as medieval Christians and today’s Muslims are saturated in superstition that is contrary to all evidence before them in observable reality. Because the power of social construction takes advantage of our dependence upon one another for providing commensurable, coherent, actionable explanations to the world around us. And the more empathic one’s personality traits, the more vulnerable one is to social construction because the more one’s intuition seek cooperation, consensus, conformity and non-conflict. That’s why religions survive. It’s why natural religions survive. Why theological religions survive among the less sophisticated. Why philosophical wisdom literature survives is the educated classes, and why scientific, economic, legal, and military wisdom literature survives in the most capable.

Their Method of Argument, Persuasion, Advocacy, and Propaganda.

Just as we refer to the structure of thought in Confucianism(reasonableness), Platonism (idealism), Aristotelianism (Empiricism), and Epicureanism (realism) we refer to “Abrahamism” for the argumentative technique of using Pilpul (via-positiva), and Critique (via-negativa) to construct sophisms (the argumentative equivalent of numerology and astrology) via use of loading, framing, suggestion, obscurantism, overloading, the Fictionalisms, appeals to reasonableness, and false promise, to create and bait high trust people into hazards.

All three Abrahamic Religions, Kantian philosophy, Marxist argument, and Postmodern thought all make use of this technique of argument, often stated as “Dialectic” but operationally consisting of Social Construction via Overloading of human reason with False Promise advanced by Pilpul (sophistry) and defended by Critique (undermining and disapproval rather than falsification).

Abrahamism: consists of undermining truth reason probability and evidence by use of False Promise, Baiting into Hazard, Pilpul (positive), Critique (negative), straw-manning, and heaping of undue praise, and propagation into social construction, to use suggestion and overloading to force individuals, groups, and polities, to appeal to your intuition rather than reason and evidence. it’s the same technique used by faith healers, priests, and con artists. And the higher a group’s trust the more susceptible they are to it.

War Against Every Single Institution of Cooperation

( … classes etc …)

Makets of Cooperation ( … )

The Marxists

Marxism

Bolshevism

Leninism

Trotskyism

The Neo Marxists (Cultural Marxists)

Gramsci – politics is downstream from culture and culture is downstream from education and religion is just education. countries resisted becaue they had deep culture and institutinos.

Leninism

The Postmodernists

The Neocons

The Feminists

The Libertarians and Anarchists

As we see in evidence by their specialization in the production of authoritarian religion, pseudoscience, sophistries, deceits, and frauds that falsely and unaccountably promise freedom from physical, natural, and evolutionary laws, again, profiting from the destruction of our high trust commons under the pretense of plausible deniability:

Cantor-Bohr in mathematical re-platonization (sophistry), Gould-Boaz-Freud in behavioral sciences (pseudoscience and historical revisionism), Marx-Lenin in political economy (the possibility of authoritarian underclass rule and violation of evolutionary law), Trotsky-Strauss-Kristol in neoconservatism to convert the USA to advance Jewish globalism, Adorno-Marcuse-Fromm (Frankfurt school) in cultural marxism to undermine European aesthetics and values, Gramsci-Derrida in postmodernism to undermine truth itself, Friedan-Steinem in anti-male, anti-familial feminism, Rand-Rothbard in anti-rule of law anti-nationalist libertarianism, and perhaps the most insidious in Raz-Kelsen-Dworkin-Hartt in positive or pseudoscientific law, in order to make European evolutionary, scientific, and neutral law devolve into Jewish pilpul (sophistry) law, relativism, and interpretation and kritarchy (rule by judges). And that’s before we address their intentional destruction of the architectural, monumental, visual, literary, and entertainment arts.

War Against Every Single Discipline: Europeans vs Jews: The Pattern of Engineers (Scientists) vs Sophists (“Hucksters”)

Legend: *= Substantial Damage to Group Cognition, ( ) = Opposite Position

Discipline	European vs	Jewish
Engineering Computation and Science	Many vs Babbage vs (Wolfram), Turing Galileo to Maxwell vs	? ? ? ?
Economic Philosophy Economic Science And And	Smith vs Menger, (Keynes*) vs Marshall, Hayek, Jevons vs Mankiw, Taylor, and Cochrane vs	Ricardo, Marx*, Simmel (Friedman), Krugman, Stiglitz, Samuelson, Picketty, Goolsbee, Sayer
Mathematics Mathematical Physics And	Euler, Boole, Poincare vs Schrodinger vs Hilbert vs	Cantor* Bohr* Einstein*
Linguistic Philosophy Logic Logical Limits	Russell vs Frege vs Godel vs	Wittgenstein ???? Kripke
History Evolution Genetics Anthropology Sociology Psychology	Durant, Toynbee, Gibbon Darwin, Dawkins vs Watson and Crick vs Darwin, Spencer vs Weber, Spencer, Pareto vs Jung vs	Zinn, Harari Gould, Lewontin ?? Boaz, (Reich) Durkheim Freud
Law and Politics Military History War	Hayek, Scalia, (Rawls*) vs and Machiavelli vs Keegan vs Clausewitz, Liddel-Hart vs	Rez, Kelsey, Hart, Dworkin, (Epstein) ???? ???? (Van Creveld) ????
Metaphysics Communication Representation Organizing Bias Scale Bias Persuasive Bias Blame Bias Confrontation Bias	Physical vs Reporting, Testimony, Fact vs Empirical vs Political vs National vs Truth (adaptation) vs Consideration, Acceptance vs Truth, Decidability vs	Verbal Storytelling, Loading, and Framing Ideal Social Universal Reasonableness (non-adaptation) Evasion, Denial Delay, Evade, Excuse, Justify
Conflict Strategy Bias	Argument, Duel, War vs	Social Predation and Undermining
Cognitive Bias Developmental Strategy	Male Paternal Hierarchical vs Paternal Independence (Autonomy) vs	Female Maternal Egalitarian Female Maternal Infantilization (Dependence)

Evolution Of Three Generations Of Jewish Warfare
The restatement of reformed Judaism (Christianity) from supernatural to Marxist pseudoscientific:

‘Yahweh	Dialectical Materialism	Pomo/Woke/PC/HB-Denial
The Messiah	Marx	Democratic Party
The Elect	The Proletariat	The Oppressed (Non-Whites)
The Church	The Communist Party	The Woke Academy
The Second Coming	The Revolution	White Replacement / Genocide
Hell	Punishment of the Capitalists	Punishment of Whites
The Millennium	The Communist Commonwealth	Globalism / White Minority
Mesopotamian Slavery	Centuries of Oppression	Colonialism
Conquest of Judea-Diaspora	Bolshevism USSR – Holocaust	( ??? ) – To Be Determined

– Original by Bertrand Russell

Summary of the Jewish Strategy

(a) Preservation of separatism (non-integration) (Tribalism)
(b) Intolerance, maladaption, non-integration
(c) Evasion of payment for the cost of the commons (manners, ethics, morals, traditions, institutions, common property) (Free Riding);
(d) Evasion of production or productivity, and therefore contribution to the world. (free- riding)
(e) Preference for Parasitism: Pro?t from baiting into hazard (usury, alcohol, prostitution, slave trading, gambling, organized crime); (Parasitism)
(f) Pro?ting from (Undermining)
(g) Specializing in use of the state against the people (tax collection, money changing)(Corruption)
(h) Investing assets from these criminal activities into rent-seeking (non-productive parasitic returns) (Rent-Seeking);
(i) Undermining Moral and Ethical Markets and Trade: Slowly migrating capital into mixed criminal, black market, grey market, and open market industries (Undermining Markets)
(j) Undermining the information system (Propaganda)
(k) Undermining the state, the law, their knowledge, their traditions, their culture, the institutions, and their norms in order to convert the state from suppression of local rents to maximization of rents (Undermining Political Cohesion).

Producing Jewish Goals Consisting of:

Racism and Identitarianism
Separatism (state within a state), (Buiding Support for Israel)
Supremacy
Nepotism (Sustaining Judaism and Jewish People)
Serial Monogamy until Late.
Poly Logicalism (Asymmetric) Ethics
Fictionalism Loading-Framing->Storytelling-> Fictionalism( occult->supernaturalism, magic->psueudoscience, Sophistry->idealsm, )
Parasitism (avoidance of braoder commons, privatizing comons)
- Specialize in free riding or rent-seeking (avoid production, concentrate extracted capital)
- Concentrate capital in nepotistic networks (concentration of forces)
Hazarding
- Physical Degeneracy ( avoiding integration )
- Financialiaztion, Gabmgling, Usury, Baiting into Hazard, Unproductivity.
- Marketing and Consumerism (Propaganda, False Promise, Hyperconsumption,)
- Propagandism (social construction )
Undermining
- Prevent adaptation, innovation, and evolution so that parasitic extraction can be maintained by approval-disapproval, undermining-heaping of undue praise, and – this is the strategy fo the unregulated female to her children rather than producing generations capable of independent adaptation, innovation, and evolution of self economy, society, polity, knowledge and mankind.
Sedition
- Propaganda, Disinformation, pseudoscience, sophstry, historical revisionism, social construction of mythology.
- Fomenting destruction – like the female, utter destruction, of information, norms, tradition, values: organization that they call power.
- Use all of the above to create a parasitic ‘priesthood’ caste producing nothing other than a continuous system of propaganda and deceit to maintain a slave underclass with nothing but false promise of freedom from the laws of the universe – a promise that can never be fulfilled, but for which they can infinitely claim they are pursuing.
Insurrection
Rebellion (Tikkun Olam – Repairing the world (making it safe for jews))
Revolution
Murder and Destruction
Civilizational Destruction and Degeneracy
Globalism (making the world safe for rebellion, parasitism, separatism, nepotism, by eradicating other’s choice of self determination)

Framing in Political Science

In terms familiar in political science, the technical framing of Jewish Group Strategy is an attempt to rotate Out productive elites and rotate in their own parasitic elites by means of “Parasitic Clientelism” consisting of building coalitions of false promise, parasitism, dysgenia, and decline, by consuming and redistributing others accumulated capital whether genetic, civilizational, institutional, national, cultural, or normative, and generating demand for their authority as a redistributive priesthood that increases the burden of demand for individual income (ergo our present condition under global financialism). In this sense, it is no different from traditional organized crime in goods, services, and information, other than an additional degree of abstraction so that the civilizational capital is being stolen less so than private or public goods.

This ancient Jewish strategy is the very opposite of the equally ancient European group strategy of “Entrepreneurial Clientelism” of the rapid evolution of knowledge, technology, organizations, institutions, societies, markets, and man, through adversarial innovation and adaptation by the production of competitive information, services, goods, monuments, arts, and letters – all of which increases the capital of the commons, thereby performing indirect redistribution of goods, services, information, and opportunity, that reduces the burden of income of the individuals of the polity. Ergo, European innovators, producers, and the protestant work ethic, vs Jewish (Semitic) consumption of the commons by parasitism and the avoidance of all productive work, their specialization in parasitic industries.

Jewish backing of the Hart-Cellar act, reversing the centuries of European, British and American market eugenics, and the Darwinian limitation of immigration especially from 24 to 65, and sponsorship of massive third world immigration despite Ethnic European promises that wouldn’t be the case, serves the Jewish strategy of Parasitic Clientelism after Marxist clientelism failed in its competition with rule of law consumer capitalism. What was unexpected was the ability of Jews to turn young American women into equally parasitic clients with the invention of the pill, and subsequent no fault divorce, with the predictable consequences of the destruction of the family, family capital, and rates of reproduction.

Note the use of economic and legal analysis that eliminates the possibility of moral relativism, and the possibility of moral justification. These are crimes, and acts of war by sedition from within host populations. They are not moral opinions. They are facts that explain the depth of the thefts from host peoples, and the long chain of harms that result.

Framing In Economics and Political Economy – Explaining the 2oth Century Hyper-consumption – Civilizational Baiting Into Hazard

( … )

The banking crisis as baiting into moral hazard

Socialism as baiting into moral hazard

Social Security as baiting into moral hazard

Medicare Medicaid as not baiting into moral hazard

Slow Deceptive Jewish War vs Fast Declarative European War: War is Still War No Matter The Speed

We see evidence of their strategy of Incremental Undermining by Delay and Deceive. Where the Chinese rely on their cultural institution of the ancient method of “Accumulate Forces by Delay and Deceive from Without” the Jews likewise rely on their cultural and religious institution of the ancient female method of “Accumulate Clients(dependents) and Assets and Undermine Incrementally by using Delay and Deceive From Within.” (The “boil the frog” strategy). This is why zero tolerance must be a constitutional requirement.

So it’s a mistake to label either Judaism or Islam as primitive. It’s as advanced a system of Deception and Harm as Greek Reason And Mathematics and Roman Institutions. It’s the ultimate end of female warfare, just as Europeans – at least until the postwar period – practice the ultimate end of male warfare.

Jewish Warfare in the Context of Semitic Civilization’s Method of Warfare

The three stages of Abrahamic Semitic method of conquest of the evolutionary peoples by conversion and conquest of women and underclasses (those yet not ‘domesticated into agency’).

Stage 1 – Small external population (vanguard) undermines the main by straw man criticism and ridicule of the organization and its categories relations and values The purpose of Judaism is subjugation (submission). (Judaism – GOSSIP: Reputation Destruction)
Stage 2 – The population is undermined into submission by sale of a false promise – the verbal equivalent of a physical drug. The purpose of Christianity is subjugation (submission). (Christianity – FRAUD: Selling a false promise ).
Stage 3 – The major external population conquers the submitted through raiding the trade routes, immigration, conversion, and conquest and population replacement. The purpose of Islam is subjugation (submission). (Islam – FORCE).

“Judaism to undermine, Christianity to weaken, and Islam to destroy.”
“Judaism to undermine, Marxism, Postmodernism, Woke/PC to weaken, and Declared Anti-Whiteness, and Immigration to destroy”

The consequence is the reversal of civilization of the hierarchical pack and the restoration of primitivism of the equalitarian herd. Producing a genetic, cultural, and institutional race to the bottom.

Abrahamic grammars of pilpul and critique are simply well-constructed lies that through repeated use produce an addiction response, the same way that membership in (submission to) the pack or tribe produces an addiction response.

Women are the most vulnerable because they evolved to be irrationally dependent upon the ‘cover’ of the herd. The underclass as well. the less capable classes out of utility. The middle class out of profit from it, and the upper class replaced by a priesthood (frauds) rather than a military (science).

It’s a Very Simple Process once understood. Evil. Brilliant. There is a reason throughout history, and until the Victorian age, women were considered the root of all evil – disloyalty, and sedition, gossiping and undermining, shrills. And there is a reason that historically the number of women in asylums was similar to the number of men in prison: because the sexes demonstrate warfare, conflict, cooperation, and cognition, by female verbal emotional and social versus male physical political and military means.

It’s Not Money Alone But Dominance Expression

heroism in cheating

It’s not Dominance alone but Warfare

( … )

It’s Not Just War but the Total War of the Semites, Not the Martial War of the Europeans

The Culture of War – A Product of Group Strategy

Rock Paper Scissors of Civlizational Differences in war: Endure (India), Trade (europe), Conquest (China), Undermining (Semitia) … Notice I rely on ternary logic at all times, whether it be undecidable, truth candidate, or false, the three

“You must fight wars on your terms, not the enemy’s but you must defeat the enemy on his terms not yours.”

The Laws of Nature, and the Natural Law and the Organized application of science, law, and violence to force correspondence with them, in order to complete the transformation of man in to the immortal gods mastering nature that he imagined.

Chinese Total War by Comparison

( … )

PART VII – THE CURRENT CONDITION

Thousands Of Years of Revolt Against Aristocratic Meritocratic Productive and Evolutionary Peoples

All of these techniques of Jews and Muslims consist of thousands of years of revolts against the laws of the universe, (of the indo European Persians, Anatolians and Europeans) and the European institutions that discover, adapt to, apply and institutionalize them, and the unique and extraordinary ability of European civilization to drag mankind kicking and screaming out of ignorance superstition, hard labor, poverty, starvation, disease, suffering, child mortality, early death, the tyranny of man, and the vicissitudes of a nature all but hostile to advanced life, in a few centuries in the prehistoric bronze, ancient iron, and modern steel ages.

We face over 2000 years of systemized hatred of European people, our history, heroes, literature, arts, culture, institutions, for suppression of non-productivity, poly-logical asymmetric ethics, and their specialization in parasitism from within by profiting from baiting into hazard, hedonism, hyper-consumption, discord, conflict, and dysgenia, and hiding behind plausible deniability because of our fundamental right to self-determination, freedom of speech, and truthful, reciprocal, adversarial competition in markets for ideas.

Anti-Whiteness, Critical Race Theory, Anti-Aristocracy, Anti-Military, Anti-Colonialism, Anti-Christianity, Freud-Boaz-Gould pseudoscience, Marxism, Neocon, Pomo, Libertarian, Anti-Family Feminism, Anti-Rule of Law Positive Law, Anti Democratic Judicial Activism, Anti-Testimonial Truth, PC/Woke

So for ‘emancipation’ (freedom from suppression), it’s not enough for a group to abandon its religion, or to secularize its religion, or language, but it must abandon its group strategy, mythology, judgment of history, their method of influence, persuasion, argument, and laws. It must abandon all but its foods.

Marx and Braun, in the debate over the emancipation of the Jews, in Marx’s “The Jewish Question”, attracted the attention Isaac Deutscher who answers in similar terms, “that idea of socialism and of the classless and stateless society expressed in the essay is as universal as Spinoza’s ethics and God”. A less technical than the present analytic and operational, description of the same observations I’ve made here.

Benjamin Ginsberg’s “Fatal Embrace” takes a defensive position explaining how Jews seek protection from the people by alliance with the state against the interests of the people – but fails to account for either Marx and Deutscher’s observations, that (a) the people need an incentive to despise them, (a) usurious and extractive 300% interest simply because the economy was dependent on hard money (money proper, commodity money) is enough incentive to produce that hatred, (b) but that European communities dependent on social cohesion are even more resentful of traitors among them (c) slaving, usury, alcohol and prostitution on credit bait the fragile into further suffering (d) specialization in parasitic and unaccountable occupations that require public trust, and (e) exploitation of the population, (D) and the universal treatment of just in every host country, and that this problem has resulted in persecutions everywhere in the world since at least the fourth century bc.

Solzhenitsyn’s 200 Years Together provides insight into the Jews of Russia and the pale, who despite being given land, multiple times, were considered lazy and unproductive and always reverted to the same parasitic criminal occupations that baited the people into hazards.

(I came to my understanding from prosecuting multiple Jewish families for various forms of racketeering, mortgage fraud, investment fraud, mail and wire fraud, tax fraud, criminal coercion, and legal and process abuses, and from my early work in the automation of (weak AI) legal arguments, documents, and docket management. But my later work in scientific method, legal and economic thought convinced me, like Deutscher, that the problem was universal, institutional, cultural, and possibly genetic – not religious, since every one of those I helped prosecute was secularized if not atheist.)

Jewish Warfare by Intention, Institutions and Culture, Consequence of Group Strategy, Or Evolutionary Instinct

It doesn’t have to be intentional. It’s the human female strategy of warfare against dominant males to control their reproductive choice. And the use of female means of conflict explains why in the roman age, Christianity spread among women and slaves, and only to men later once political power was available by making use of Christian organizations. And it explains the failure of marxism in the west by fomenting male class envy, and success under cultural marxism, postmodernism, and feminism, in turning enough women in the population that under democracy – an only turning men once political power was available through the defection of enough women to use the institutions to destroy the European civilization’s institutions, traditions, values, norms, history, rule of law, military culture, civil society, education, and Christian religion by the use of legal attacks on the constitution, and pseudoscientific religious conversion of the academy, media, and entertainment to the state.

For The Immoral And Unscrupulous it’s Profitable

( … ) henry ford quotes

But For Elites It’s Intentional – And We Can Take People At Their Word

While at most times, we practice our group strategy our of habit and repeat it through institutions, tradition, norm, and moral tropes. In any civilization, any society within it, in every great era of change within it, there emerge a few thought leaders that do understand a group’s mission and strategy and explain it. Burke … Spengler … and my technical expression of it. We have failed for the full scope of the twentieth century the question is why? ( darwin )

And for Some Jewish Elites It’s Intentional

And Jews don’t Constrain their Elites – Because They’re Not Moral, Only as moral as require to get away with it.

Evolutionary Context

Demale dysgenic strategy reversing evolutionary gains. ( … ) without providing female reproductive returns – just the opposite, limiting western reproduction.

Evolution provided women with verbal means of warfare just like it provided men with physical means of warfare. And in all statistics both criminal and mental illness, and in all forms of political speech, and even in all forms of argument and discourse, men bias to truth and falsehood under physical threat, and women bias to approval and disapproval under threat of undermining.

Men are Political and Military super predators but Women are Social and Political super predators. This is the reason for women’s disenfranchisement from political participation in history, and the reason for women‘s historical reputation as the root of all evil “discord”.

Europeans are productive male superpredators, and Jews are parasitic female superpredators, with the only difference being that Europeans dominated the production of bene?cial rewards for mankind, and jews and Arabs dominated the production of harms to mankind.

There is only one civilization open to internal competition between elites – the west. And so we see two competing elites from two different races. The Europeans function as the male cognitive and strategic elites maintaining adaptation and the Jews function as the female cognitive and strategic elites resisting adaptation. And the Muslims as the competing males in the adjacent territory, trying to expand their territory.

Technically, Ashkenazim – the European Jews – are partly European. With about one in two-hundred european introgression into the european jews. And originating in diasporic male Jews moving to Rome (ie: new york), marrying local european women, then returning to inbreeding (consanguninity). Genetically, Jews are indistinquishable from palestinians and other north semitic peoples in a spectrum between the north mesopotamian-levantine and the south arabic bedouin. Morovere jewish cognnitive exceptionalism is due to (a) european ingression, (b) Polygyny, and (c) upward redistribution of reproduction to Rabbis (d), and (e) bottlenecking from repeated retaliations against them (repressions) for their crimes against host peoples.

Genetics, Religion, Institutions, Culture or All Of The Above

Whether Jewish and Muslim behavior originates in culture, religion, or genetics or a mixture of all three is as yet unknown but will be uncovered within the next few decades. Long-Standing evidence suggests that regardless of origin it’s genetic – beginning with no less than Aesop in his fable of Hermes and the Cart of Lies, to the difference in average aesthetics, speech pattern, and verbal versus mechanical aptitude, to the difference between European intuitions that favor reciprocity and high trust commons (middle-class market ethics of assumed honor of warranty of freedom from externality), and Jewish intuitions that favor irreciprocity ( in ethics of the Bazaar under assumed virtue of cunning of gains by externality) in low trust commons – and the resulting inability of middle easterners, in general, to form large scale institutions without clientelistic incentives, including successful states, as is common in all of Europe and at least in bureaucratic China.

European People’s Unique Susceptibility to Jewish Warfare From Within and Without

Convincing Europeans of their own immorality, Falsely Positioning Jewish Ethics as Moral, Europeans Destroying themselves Through Altrustic Punishment, largely by women, by claiming oppression rather than continuing the domestication of man by baiting into the false promise of freedom from the laws of the universe, reversing european radical rapid evolution and the benefits to mankind.

Regarding Guilt Based Tolerance Because of Our Altruism

So in response to the opening question of our discussion, the guilt-based narrative can’t survive for a number of reasons:

1 – The World War Two generation is almost gone and with it their sentiments – reinforced by their many hard sacrifices.
2 – The technique of undermining and distracting from discourse and debate by accusations (shaming) of Racism, Colonialism, Slavery, and Nazis, has been exhausted through overuse.
3 – The accumulated evidence of the Jewish postwar repetition of 2000 years of their strategy is as undeniable today as it was at every other period, in every other country, throughout all of history – most blatantly in today’s DC-New York-LA, France, and Ukraine – that caused their repeated evictions from the country after country – and bloodshed when they weren’t – especially by their abuse of the people of Ukraine, Russia, their Bolshevism in Russia, their Communism in Germany and the Austro Hungarian Empire, and the consequences when their propaganda was imitated in every other country that suffered it.
4 – Centuries of work by multiple authors not the least of which include Marx, Nietzsche, Solzhenitzen, and most recently and thoroughly Kevin Macdonald.

MacDonald’s work is seminal – though he’s paid a high price for his efforts. So has Ricardo Duchesne whose epic explanation of European Group Strategy from philosophical and literary history. I’m loathe to mention Hick’s seminal work on Postmodernism, because while equal in value, I want to protect him from implication of intentional association that might impose equal costs upon him. My contribution to the subject is equal exposition of the group evolutionary strategy of europeans, comparative group evolutionary strategy, comparative methods of argument, and the primacy of economics, law, and warfare in group strategies rather than the literary tradition that Macdonald, Duchesne, and Hicks have covered in depth.

Because a people who hold territory must institutionalize behavior, norms, economies, and institutions, that construct sufficient commons for persistence and defense, and people who parasitically extract from those peoples can exploit that necessity to produce commons – by privatizing them.

European Failure of Self Defense Against False Promises Baiting Into Hazard

Unfortunately, as an army of a universal militia, our European excellence in Military warfare is offset by our European weaknesses in defense against Total War, whether by Jews internally, Muslims internally and externally, and now Chinese Externally. Why?

1 – Failure to defend Virtue signal spiraling by baiting into altruistic punishment – crossover from Christianity

2 – Failure to ( low ethnocentrism, homogeneity, church domestication, outbreeding, manorialism above the line ) – and failure to institutionalize this as the Russians have recently done.

3 – Failure to understand our unique high trust institutions and our unique underlying group strategy – as the only group strategy that didn’t fail to survive agrarianism without seeking to evade the physical, natural, and evolutionary laws.

(Note: Don’t underestimate the importance of that statement. It’s still possible that ‘the obsessive pursuit of Christian values in exchange for mindfulness from virtue signaling is nearly as bad as the Jewish and Muslim devolutionary values, and Christian universalist ethics without pairing with european aristocratic martial and nationalist adversarial competition, is equally likely to prevent mankind from passing through the Great Filter. By and large the aristocracy used Christianity as a *justification for* continued Steppe Aryanism.

Instead, the lesson we must take from our analysis of history is that Christianity made the drudgery of peasant agrarianism tolerable and inspirational, even while aristocratic adversarialism and rapid evolution continued in the upper classes.

In the ancient world men were treated like any other domesticated animal until they proved themselves worthy of freedom – meaning trust to do no harm. Just as the industrial revolution lifted the peasantry into the greater economy, Christianity made it possible to shift from a domesticated animal into citizen – not by achievement, but by non-aggression, and ‘doing no harm’. This was a technological innovation in social organization at the time – and remains so. Because Christianity solved the problem of the prisoners’ dilemma of cooperation – where the only solution is exhausting forgiveness. This solution is one of the reasons why Christian societies more easily transform into commercial modernity: their religion taught them to treat one another as we treat potential customers in every market of voluntary cooperation available to man.

Had Christianity integrated into the pagan cults preserving empirical european aristocracy and traditions rather than seeking to replace it with an oriental superstitious church as rulers, then it might not have lost a thousand years to a dark age, and as expected the industrial revolution would have occurred sometime before the Muslim destruction of the ancient world. In this sense, Judaism and the jewish invention of systemic deceit By false promise is the greatest crime in human history for both it’s catastrophes in the ancient world and the modern.)

4 – Failure to write down in ‘sacred’ text, our (complex) group strategy as law as have competitors.

(As I have partly outlined here and addressed more fully elsewhere, The works of aristotle, epicurus, hobbes, lock, smith hume, the federalist papters, and our british and american constitutions were good starts. They were only good starts. ).

5 – Our Presumption that other peoples of the world are willing and able to also adopt this strategy.

(They are demonstrably neither. The general understanding of the differences in the races as a series of at least for isolation events creating a series of speciation events, each of which increased neotenic evolution, exchanging decreases in aggression for increases in intelligence, and the resulting demographic composition of the civilizations, is continously evident in the relative ranking of world states by every single metric we are capable of gathering. As such even western civilization isn’t necessarily avvailable below our working classes – and we have the best most ethhica moral high trust working classes in the world. For the rest of the world, presuming education is their passport to advanced lifestyles, this is a false promise, since those achievers are held down not by their own abilities, but by the demographics of their own countries.)

6 – Failure to Reform the Christian or at least Catholic Churches toward Rational Natural Law and the Christian dogma and history as evolutoinary progress from faith to reason to science, and the evidence of christian ‘correctness’ and ‘approximate truth’ by the evidence of that progression, and legitimization of christianity over all other religion just as legitimization of reason and science over all the alternatives.

7 – Our Pre-Christian tolerance (Indo-Germanic, West Indo European, Aryan) because of our founding principles of self-determination and adversarialism producing competitive markets in all aspects of life. And our Christian Tolerance does not permit us the intolerance necessary to fight Total War across the spectrum of immigration, conversion, sedition, treason by informational, cultural, religious, financial, economic, and physical warfare.

(The Culture of War by Van-Creveld, and The History of Warfare by Keegan, and Trust by Fukuyama and Fourth Generation Wafare by Lind are necessary political literacy. However, only Lind correctly addresses urgency of the reality that van creveld explaind and predicted: that our culture ritualized warfare, and domesticated it incrementally through the Westphalian Peace that made states responsible for all actors within their realm thereby creating a monopoly of force in the central state, then domesticating war more so in the post world war era with the declaration of human rights – a benificent sounding bit of political theatre whose sole purpose was to limit states to existing borders, and the modernization of their own people, now that capture of territory for agrarian production was no longer the only method of improving a group’s condition. So westerners have ritualized warfare and narrowed it to wars of states. But this was a mistake. War can be conducted against any physical, institutional, religious, economic, cultural, normative, informational, asset upon which a people depend. And the age of the european domestication of warfare ended with the end of the American world redistribution of the civilizational miricale of the British Empire and vast European asymmetric demographic, human capital, institutional, and technological, advantages in empirical mind, empirical isntitutions, empirical law, and the agrarian, financial, commercial, trasportational, industrial, technolgical, medical, and informational sequence of revolutions. We are once again in an age of Total War with democracy a weakness under the burden of European populations full of marxst, postmodernist, feminist, woke-pc, anti-colonial, anti-whitness (empiricism), tolerance for judaism and islam and all else, and their false promise of freedom from the laws of the universe.)

8 – Our failure to understand and institutionalize in philosophy and law that religions, the mythology of those religions, the laws in those religions – all reflect a group evolutionary strategy – and that group evolutionary strategies are hostile to one another because that is their reason for existence. And that as such non-Christian (non-european) religions are methods of warfare. And that religions other than Christian, Germanic-Slavic pagan martial heroic, and Germanic-Slavic heathen-maternal nature) must not invade European civilization and undermine or compete from within.

Just as All Non-Natural (mand made) Religion is just as much of a means of warfare by sedition against a out group evolutionary strategy as it is a means of warfare to preserve group evolutionary strategy. And without a monarchy, or m ore rigorous constitution, westerners ahve no defense against devolutionary and dysgenic religions that are hostile to our unique discovery of rapid adaptation and evolution. Freedom of religion should have been instituted as freedom of Christian and pre-Christian European Religions, and religious tolerance is a greater mistake than tolerance for non-european non-upper-middle-class immigration. Any student of MacDonald’s trilogy, or my work on comparative group strategies, and means of perpetuating and arguing them, can no longer make the argument in favor of freedom of religion – only in favor of state mandate of doctrine.

9 – Our failure, especially during the 19th century, to code into law the evidentiary criteria for truthful, reciprocal, speech, in matters public, to the public – and to restore our Common Law Universal Standing in matters of the Commons, when combined with industrialization in all forms of communication, enabled the Jewish reformation of sophistry and false promise by the supernatural religion into sophistry and false promise by pseudoscience into a new secular pseudoscientific religion of even more virulent potential for another dark age.

(I’ve provided elsewhere the legal means, in legal form, for formal strict construction (from soveriegnty and reciprocity) of origionalist, textualist, legislation for outlawing all aspects of the jewish and muslim group strategies of total war in general, and in specific, by prevention of the techniques illustrated above that are juridical criteria for claims of truthful, testimonial, reciprocal speech, and enumerating the prohibitions on the imposition of costs by externality.).

10 – Our present failure to revolt and demand the restoration of our natural rights as European peoples – because there is no scientific, truthful, reciprocal moral reason to deny them that does not equally grant us the reciprocal scientific, truthful, reciprocal, and moral right of conquest of those who rebel against us.

Our country was founded by revolution and the founding documents provide the justification for revolution when necessary. There is no non-revolutionary means for redress of these grievances because (a) the public has no standing in matters of the commons without the gatekeeper of a senator or representative; (b) the total war against our people has been disproportionately successfy due to massive immigration; (c) Jewish clientelism has succeeded in controling the public discourse,by directing their parasitic gains to the control of commuication systems and media; and (d) the politicians, political parties, political activists, the federal bureaucracies, are demonstrably clientelle of the global and national financial sector. (d) the only solution is restoration of the constitution by the devolution of the centralization of the federal government to the several states, and the culling of the central bureaucracy, disempowering the unproductive sectors (politicians, political parties, political activists, federal buruacracies) and therefore the incomes and assets of those who pay for those clients at the expense of the people.

11 – Our relative inability to revolt, limited understanding of value of and limits of democracy, lack of the basic concept of political and revolutionary, strategy and tactics. Rebellion without specific actionable demands merely baits you into the hazard that they have created for you. Leadership must have a strategy of escalating demands, that are used to control the discourse, and are chanted with every action

(Why? Because of the demilitarization and demasculinization of the Post Eisenhower generations due to the postwar Jewish attack on our institutions from within. The prewar elimination of ‘looting’ as a means of compensation for troops. The emphasis on bureaucracy, techology, and combined arms rather than riflemen. The elimination of physical fitness in preparation for military service from our education system. The mixing of boys and girls and the ‘dubming down’ of boys by removal of adversarial competition to accomodate girls. The increase in uncompetitive verbal testing to ameliorate academic differences between boys and girls. The suppression by women in education of adversarial studies of geography, history, war, politics, ‘logic, grammar, and rhetoric’, or any semblance of the study of the long hard evolution of european empirical institutions; the relativism of institutional comparisons as if theyd idn’t matter rather than that institutional differences have overwhelming consequences. And in the absence of majority farmers and merchants for whom basic economics is a matter of daily life – the suppression of economic education and knoweldge to simplify the indoctrination of children into the false promise of democratic and state socialism. And the subsequent demonization of rule of law by the mislabeling it with the arbitrary Marxist term “capitalism”. The suppression by women in education of adversarialism in the classroom which is what causes males to invest in themselves and society.The dumbing down of education to obscure the genetic differences in rates of development and learning between grops. And our general ignorance and cowardice of youg men not evolved under adversarial conditions to traditional european aristocratic hyper competition.)

The Policy of Containment versus The Myth of Oppression

The Myth of Oppression And The Demand for Adaptation to Physical, Natural, and Evolutionary Laws within the limits of the group’s strategy.

Throughout history the myth of oppression is just that a myth. Instead, just as we contained Christianity and then failed, just as we contained Islam for 1400 years, just as we contained bolshevism, just as we contained fascism to resist bolshevism, and just as we contained the communist movement, just as we contained the soviets, just as we have tried to contain the Islamist movement, just as we are trying to contain the Chinese Imperial movement, just as we are now trying to contain the Turkish Muslim and Iranian Muslim movements, we contained the Jewish movement throughout history. And the bolsheviks and the soviets were the only time the jews gained access to power to implement their culture at scale. Most of our history consists of trying to contain authoritarian, non-market, anti-rational, anti-scientific and much larger populations to self-determination, markets, reason, and science. Despite the women and underclasses within, and the hordes without. And the simple reason is that we, the Japanese-Koreans, alone can trust one another, because of our defeat of tribalism, because of our homogeneity, and because of our empirical monarchies. The three outliers today are (a) the gypsies that practice organized petty crimes, (b) the jews that practice organized social and political crimes of undermining, ( c) the Muslims that practice organized crimes of psychological undermining. With the rest of the world practicing traditional warfare.

PART VIII – WHAT CAN BE DONE?

Lessons Learned

The painful truth we learn from this? We must organize our society, nations, and civilization for Total War, not just Military War as we practice between ourselves. Secondly, we must swallow the bitter medicine that the Fascists were right. And as the present example, the Chinese have adopted fascism – not communism or socialism. The Russians less so. And increasingly the Indians are hinting at this direction. And they have justly done so, to defend against ethnic Europeans who have been captured by and defeated by Jewish undermining, and to defend against Muslims and Jews and themselves.

However, unlike the positivist fascists who must proscribe positive legal rules (what must be done), we can now proscribe negative legal rules (what must not be done) of truth and reciprocity under the law, and eradicate these seditions from within, preserving our rapid evolutionary advantage and our great prosperity under it. (I’ve written most of the constitution over for those purposes). So it is possible to have a Fascism of the via-negativa law that preserves our civilization and its a unique strategy, rather than a Fascism of via-positiva authoritarian command that eventually equally weakens us stagnation has weakened others. Unfortunately, for historical reasons I have explained elsewhere, with their century of pseudoscience, the Jews innovated in dysgenic non-adaptive false promise and deceit faster than we innovated in eugenic adaptive, truth and reciprocity.

As far as I know, I understand the group evolutionary strategy of European Civilization (and at least Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, and Chinese) as well or better than anyone living today. And European civilization is unique, in that our civilizational strategy is most innovative, adaptive, and evolutionary – because our institutions are most innovative, adaptive, and evolutionary – because our founding principles are most tolerant of continuous adaptation – because our unconscious presumptions, language, norms, traditions, and institutions, are by far the least divergent from and most adherent to, the formal (logical), physical, natural(behavioral), and evolutionary laws of the universe. Conversely, except for the Chinese, who strangely choose to retrench rather than conquer the world, all other civilizations failed the criteria for passing the great filter: acceptance of the necessity for continuous evolution.

We must adapt, not demand enemies adapt to us. Judaism (parasitism), Islam (predation) systematically produce falsehood, ignorance, superstition, dysgenia, and decline, and have produced in and of themselves almost nothing that was not captured from Europeans, Iranics, or indo-Iranics, that they prey upon under the guise of religion that is nothing more than warfare against the laws of the universe – producing the expected results.

We have only these choices in order of escalation:

1 – Use the Law: Outlaw the many crimes possible by the Abrahamic method of false promise, baiting into hazard, hiding behind plausible deniability, and demand for Jewish religious legal and cultural reform, equally prohibiting the Abrahamic methods of parasitism and deceit.
2 – Legislate A Great Silence: ending Jewish public speech in all forms
3 – Restoration of the prohibition from institutional participation whether in state, academy, media, finance, law, and property ownership.
4 – Restoration of the bans on Jews and Judaism (And Islam) in western civilization.
5 – Forcible repatriation.
5 – War.

So my advice to Europeans is the most peaceful: to demand the Legislatures outlaw these techniques of organized crime, and that the first set of demands in the necessary series of reforms – and revolution if necessary – is to legislate political affiliation as a protected class, and political speech as protected speech. The issuing additional demands for prohibition of the crimes against our people and restitution and punishment for those crimes, until we have enough control to end the enemy’s strategy forever, by nationalizing consumer credit at zero interest, nationalizing insurance as a non-profit, and nationalizing pensions as non-profits, and as are the Chinese, nationalizing investment in the production of competitive capital intensive industries, retaining partial interest in those investments, funding the government more from its economic returns, while impoverishing the ancient enemy for eternity, and driving them either elsewhere or into productive work. And this would be in the interest of both parties, and the world. Because Israel, if populated by American and European Jews, would have a population, population density, and an economy equal to that of the Netherlands, and given the evidence of their conversation to technological excellence upon owning their own country, will, over generations, reform them out of parasitic diasporic separatism, and into nationalists like they rest of the world. And to function as the ‘germany’ of the Middle East – dragging their peers slowly into modernity. Especially if the crimes of the Jews are as well documented and taught as the consequences of european conquest of the world. So that the Jews have neither the opportunity nor incentive to continue their warfare against others.

First Demands: Freedom of Testimonial Speech

Europeans were the only people to succeed in developing truth-before-face regardless of cost, rule of law, reason, empiricism, science, technology, relatively uncorrupt government, and large scale private organizations – and these achievements require verbal reciprocity by truthful, testifiable, empirical speech.

1. All Political Preference, affiliation, and self-identification shall be Protected Class.
2. All Political Speech shall be Protected Speech.
3. The Restoration of Common Law Defamation for any falsehood whether intended or implied and regardless of harm.
4. The Restoration of Common Law requirement for testimonial (witnessed) speech in public to the public in matters public.
5. The Restoration of Common Law liability for Interference in commerce, records, marriage, or personal life, limiting us to honest market competition, and honest resolution of differences in court, producing continuous positive suppression of irreciprocity in all walks of life, and forcing our competition and dominance expression into the production of virtuous cycles of increasing the capital of the Commons.
6. The statute codification of Testimonial Speech as satisfying the criteria for testifiability (witness), and any truth claim to satisfy the criteria of the Physical Laws by (a) realism (b) naturalism, (c) operationalism, Formal Laws by (a) categorical and (b) internal consistency, Natural Laws by (a) rational self-interest, (b) reciprocity), Evolutionary (), Complete (), Warrantable (), and Restitutable ().

The result will be a profound restoration of our civilization by organic, market means as we use the common law courts and threat of court to profit from the suppression of sedition across the spectrum, immediately reforming (and economically collapsing) entertainment, media, reporting, political, academic, and educational speech.

That’s all we have to achieve, and it’s a position on the moral high ground, that by and large will disempower most of the strategy and tactics of sedition.

Second Demands: Nationalization of Consumer Credit, and Strategic Investment

Nationalizaton of consumer credit, and conversion to zero interest. Nationalization of pension funds. Nationalization of Insurance and insurance holdings. Nationalization of College and University Funds and Endowments. Use of those funds an endowments to pay down student loans – at least in STEM degrees. Nationalization of Black Rock. Nationalization of the Fed and all fed assets into the treasury. Establishment of independent national investment administration.

Third Demands:

Centralization of price negotiation for medicine, goods, and services. Centralized funding of hospitals construction and maintenance at zero interest. Conversion of hospitals to local ownership and administration. Central insurance of catastrophic care. (Half of medical costs are waste). Return staffing levels and customer service to local medical delivery staff.

Results

These three sets of demands, when coupled with radical education reform (which we’ve covered elsewhere) will increase national revenues by well over 1/3 and over time, double them, while at the same time restoring the possibility of one income families, multi-generational families, at the cost of the parasitic and predatory financial, insurance, pension, academic, and media industries, and restore truthful reciprocal speech in public discourse, so that rational democracy is possible for the common people of common means.

Alternative Demands

Separation

Alternative if Demands Fail

civil war

In Closing

There is no moral justification for the deprivation of others of self-determination by self-determined means free of negative externalities against the demonstrated interests of others. Conversely there is moral justification for ending the self determination of those whose self determined means is achieved by negative externalities against the demonstrated interests of others, and even more so for parasitism or predation.

If we cannot speak the truth, we cannot negotiate
If we cannot negotiate, we cannot settle
If we cannot settle we cannot share a polity
If we cannot share a polity we must separate
If we cannot separate we must fight a civil war

Nation Building and Multiculturalism are impossible because they are mutual exclusions.

I don’t advocate separation for separation’s sake.
I advocate separation because we do not and cannot negotiate.
I advocate separation because we will not and cannot settle.
I advocate separation because we cannot share a polity.
I advocate separation because I don’t want our children to face war.
And because no moral man tolerates sedition or treason against his people – even more so than war.

No More Lies.

APPENDIX

Summary Posters

Evolutionary Computation

(The Grammars and the Deceits)

Truth

Reciprocity

Demonstrated Interests (Capital In Toto)

The One Law

The One Perfect Government

The European Group Evolutionary Strategy

The Semitic Group Evolutionary Strategy

( … )

Common Tactics in Abrahamism

Civilizational Destruction from Within;
Instigating Construction of Internal Spirals of Capital Rivalry, Consumption, Destruction;
By Baiting into Hazard (certain risk);
Those who are ignorant, or lack agency;
By use of False Promise (circumvention of reality);
Under the persuasion by Sophism (pilpul);
Justified by Critique (lie, criticism, straw—manning)
Under the cover of Moral Pretense (lie);
Under the cover of Plausible Deniability (lie);
For the purpose of profiting (by harm)
From the consumption of accumulated capital (undermining): truth, reason, delay of gratification, manners, ethics, morals, traditions, cooperation between classes, organization of the classes,
By not specializing in,
… The production of innovation in goods services information, both private and common
Where one’s display word and deed is Warrantied
And instead by specialization in fields permitting Export of Risk And Absent Warranty
Including:
… Gossip for Undermining (Entertainment, Media, News, Opinion)
… Informational Destruction (Academy)
… Government (Facilitation of Conflict)
… Legislation
… … (Undermining by,
… … … Facilitation of Conflict,
… … … Facilitating Dissolution of norms, traditions, manners, ethics morals,
… … … Facilitation of Parasitism, Capital exhaustion)
… Rent—Seeking (special interests)
… Corruption (influence)
… Undermining the law (specialization in undermining the constitution via the courts)
… Law (specialization in coercion)
… Finance (Parasitism and entrapment)
… Tax and accounting (evasion)
… Marketing and Advertising (scams and undermining)
… Sales Scams
… Commercial Trade in Scams physical, service, and informational
… Black Market Goods, services, and Information.
… Check Cashing
… Loan Sharking
… Gambling
… Pornography
… Prostitution
… Drug Dealing
Thereby;
… creating conflict,
… destroying trust,
… generating demand for restitution
… generating demand for authority,
And authority that recursively issues another iteration of
… false promise,
… baiting into hazard
Causing a Continuous Conflict Spiral
And Tragedy of the Commons (Conflict for consumption)
until all accumulated assets, including:
… genetic,
… cultural,
… normative,
… artistic,
… economic,
… institutional and
… political;
have been consumed;
by the conflict between classes and interests;
and by the expansion of the underclasses;
whose numbers, invasion, reproduction, consumption, agitation, had been previously limited by;
… productivity, property, market, law, and natural aristocracy;
… And the surplus proceeds from production devoted to the production of commons;
… Providing the asymmetric returns on those commons.

Where Abrahamic Argument Consists of:

Stating or Implying a False Promise, (of escape from physical, natural, and evolutionary laws)
Without provision of Warranty, (skin in the game)
For the purpose of Baiting into Moral Hazard, (failure)
Where one can profit from others’ loss, by
1. Murder,
2. Violence,
3. Theft,
4. Fraud,
5. Free Riding,
6. Socialization of Losses,
7. Privatization of The Commons,
8. Conspiracy,
9. Statism,
10. Conversion,
11. Immigration,
12. Conquest
Persuaded or Argued by “Pilpul” consisting of the
1. Sophisms of:
  1. Loading,
  2. Framing,
  3. Suggestion,
  4. Conflation (!!)
  5. False Dichotomy
  6. False Equivalency
  7. Double Standards
  8. Cherry Picking
  9. Obscurantism,
  10. Overloading,
2. and the Fictionslisms of:
  1. Innumeracy
  2. Idealism,
  3. Pseudoscience
  4. “Magic”
  5. Supernaturalism, and
  6. Deceit,
Appealing to:
1. NAXALT (‘not all x are like that’)
2. Optimisms or Pessimisms as Medians (outliers)
3. Reasonableness (limiting to interpersonal)
4. Morality (limiting to global)
5. Face (Status, Reputation, Honor)
6. Norms (what others do)
7. Authority (scripture, law)
Instead of:
1. Truth or Falsehood
2. Rationality vs Irrationality (self interest)
3. Reciprocity or Irreciprocity
4. Probability or Improbability
5. Possibility or Impossibility
And defended by “Critique”, consisting of:
1. Heaping of Undue Praise on Straw Men (positive)
2. Criticism by Straw Manning (negative), and
3. Poisoning the Well (Polluting the Informational Commons)
4. and GSRRM (denial, disapproval, ridicule, shaming, reputation destruction), consisting of:
  1. denial
  2. disapproval,
  3. shaming
    1. outraging
    2. ridicule,
    3. shaming,
    4. moralizing,
    5. psychologizing,
  4. reputation Destruction
    1. rallying,
    2. gossiping,
    3. and reputation destruction –
Demonstrating
1. deceit,
2. distraction, and
3. disapproval
Instead of:
1. True of False argument,
2. Or Fully Informed Agreement or Disagreement
Thereby
1. Advancing a falsehood on one hand, and
2. Attacking the person rather than argument on the other.
In order to obscure:
1. lying,
2. cheating,
3. stealing, to directly lie, cheat, steal, or
4. baiting into hazards from which they can
  1. lie cheat and steal under cover of
    1. ambiguity and
    2. pretense of ignorance, and
    3. pretense of innocence for the harm done.
Includes:
1. Ridicule, Shaming, Moralizing, Psychologizing, Gossiping, Rallying,
2. Sophism, Pilpul, Critique, Pseudoscience, Supernaturalism,
3. Relativism, Straw-Manning, Misrepresentation, Cherry-Picking, Double-Standards, Half-Truth, False Equivalency,
4. False And Impossible Promise, Framing Moral Pretense, Baiting Into Hazard, Evasion From Warranty, Pro?ting From Resulting Hardship,
5. Nepotism, Privatization Of The Commons, Socialization Of Losses, Conspiracy, Organized-Crime, Rent-Seeking, Procedural-Abuse, False Accusation, Institutional Overloading, Intellectual Dishonesty, Coercion,
6. Endemic Lying, Shouting Down, Propagandizing, Poisoning The Discourse, Polluting The Informational Commons, Traitorousness, And Personal, Social, Political, Cultural, Religious, Aesthetic, Legal, Constitutional, And Institutional Undermining,
7. Thanklessness, Evading Introspection, Blame-Shifting, Avoidance Of Responsibility, And Cowering Under Plausible Deniability In Order To Avoid Any Semblance Of Truth, Reciprocity, Productivity, Duty, And Contribution To The Commons.
8. And scaling from the individual to the polity to the society to the civilization by Social Construction using:

Gossiping
Biased Reporting
Disinformation
Propaganda
Pseudo-Academic Publication
Entertainment

The Short Version

The Long Version

Part I – Evolutionary Computation

Analogy To Experience

The Universe’s Problem

First Principles

INSTITUTIONAL CONSEQUENCES

And Evolution is limited by Path Dependency in a Group Strategy

Part II – Group Evolutionary Strategies

We Don’t Know Our Group Strategies

There are a limited Number of Strategies – and we can Enumerate Them

All Surviving Strategies Succeed, Some are Moral or Immoral, and advance man, hinder, or regress man – They Aren’t Equal or Relative or Subjective but Physics at Scale

The Axial Age (Civilization Formation) Anchored Our Strategies

Part III – A Comparison of Group Strategies

The Geographic Origin of Group Strategies

Differences In Civilizational Colonization (Expansion)

PART IV – EUROPEAN GROUP EVOLUTIONARY STRATEGY

PART VI – JEWISH GROUP EVOLUTIONARY STRATEGY

Their Method of Argument, Persuasion, Advocacy, and Propaganda.

“You must fight wars on your terms, not the enemy’s but you must defeat the enemy on his terms not yours.”

PART VII – THE CURRENT CONDITION

PART VIII – WHAT CAN BE DONE?

APPENDIX

Summary Posters

Evolutionary Computation

Truth

Reciprocity

Demonstrated Interests (Capital In Toto)

The One Law

The One Perfect Government

The European Group Evolutionary Strategy

The Semitic Group Evolutionary Strategy

Common Tactics in Abrahamism

How can we improve this documentation?

. . .

And
Evolution is limited by Path Dependency in a Group Strategy