1 ) Simple version and fuller states it in the article above: Have I correctly identified the conflict between the left’s false promise of freedom from physical, logical, behavioral, cooperative, and evolutionary laws, and the rights’ (Aristotelian) promise that only by conformity to (rather than denying, ignoring, or lying about) those laws do we prosper.? Yes.
2) Have I correctly Identified that every culture has produced a counter-revolution against the anglo empirical restoration: the french (Moralism of Rousseau et al), then the germans (Rationalism of Kant et al), then the Jews (pseudoscience of boas, freud marx frankfurt postmodern anti-male feminism, pc-woke). Yes. Do any of these groups have the faintest idea what they’re doing? There are a tiny minority among the Jews who do. The English(anglosphere), French, and Germans don’t. They’re just following cultural indoctrination which they intuit as ‘good’ – but it’s just their group evolutionary strategy.
3) Is anything I argue false? No. It’s just uncomfortable because it demands you and all of us, pay the costs of truth (realism, naturalism, identity, consistency, operational possibility,
4) Are my proposed solutions irreciprocal? No. They are the greatest economic reforms since the Roman Reforms, and would rapidly repair the economic inequality that is a natural (Piketty) consequence of capitalism when unlimited by the constraint imposed by reciprocity. They are for everyone. (At the expense of eradicating lying – especially the social construction of lies).
5) Is P-Law fascist? (We humorously say so, because it’s intolerant – of lying). Only in the sense that like all scientific truths it is an anti-left (anti lying) because the left’s organizing strategy is lying about the laws of the universe. My work is an extension of the law of fraud from the commercial to the political sphere of discourse. It’s just Jeffersonian rule of law by natural law and the English and American Constitutions updated for the current century – accounting for the industrialization of lying made possible by the failure of western thought leadership in the 19th century, the vacuum created by their failure, and the success of Jewish thought leadership in reforming the Abrahamic religions from theology to pseudoscience. No cultural elites understand their group strategy they just intuit it and apply it. This is why civilizations never change without reformation.
I am no more fascist than Jefferson, or the universe. I’m just stating the truth so we stop the natural consequence of the left – everywhere it’s been able to capture political power: civilizational destruction from which it is nearly impossible to recover without the tyranny (ie: China, Russia).
6) Yes, I specifically ‘call out’ abrahamists (use of the female method of undermining, baiting into hazard, and social construction) whether Christian, Jewish, or Muslim or whether Marxist, pomo, or pc-woke. Because I want them to REFORM as Europeans reformed – and in doing so dragged mankind out of superstition and deceit. You can’t cause a reformation without incentives, and inescapable blame for dark ages, 100M dead in the 20th, and the destruction of advanced civilization from within, is a good incentive. You all don’t seem to mind that Christians and nazis hate me far more than you do for this reason.
7) You (collectively) want to sell ‘harmony’ not the truth. I want to sell truth so that we can achieve harmony despite the fact that truth is painful, and only ‘Christian Love’ makes the tragedy of the natural laws tolerable. This is the secret of western civilization. A military elite class, practicing military epistemology, bound by the only law possible for an elite military class: reciprocity – was unlimited by the dependence upon kin agrarian labor. So the west’s first institution after the military was natural law (tort). Every other civilization ‘failed’ because they tried to accommodate the underclasses, creating either religion or state as their first institution. In the west, we failed at religion, but Christianity provided a means of tolerating military, and juridical epistemology. Fundamentalist Christians today deny causes(anthropomorphism) but they DON”T deny the laws of the universe. The left denies the laws of the universe and claims man is god and can either ignore, deny, or evade them.
8) So in your ignorance you pitch gossip and harmony because you are unwilling to pay the high costs of the civilization that made your privilege – to deny those laws so that you don’t pay the cost of disharmony – possible.
Why do you want to do that? Because you are biologically evolved to put temporal harmony ahead of intertemporal consequence. And I am naturally evolved to put temporal consequence ahead of temporal harmony. (See Haidt). In the Big 5, you have high demand for agreeableness and gain your information and valuation from others. I have low demand for agreeableness and gain my information independent of the valuation of others.
You are at the high end of those who are predisposed to obtain mindfulness (reduction of uncertainty), and seek association, cooperation, by the exhaustion of the signal of non-aggression. (submission). I don’t know your Big 5/6 but you probably have higher levels of neuroticism (a poorly named psychological trait). (I don’t have any at all.) So I put myself at all forms of risk and have taken vast losses to save my people, my civilization, and mankind. But I do so because I am able to.
There is a reason that ‘foks like me’, despite the high personal costs, drag mankind out of ignorance, superstition, hard labor, poverty, starvation, disease, early death, tyranny, and the vicissitudes of nature, and people like you become essayists, “reporters”, priests, shamans, that sell comforting lies that circumvent the universe, deny reality, to create social construction of falsehoods so that you and others can deny those laws of the universe, and maintain superstition, sophistry, pseudoscience, and deceit by social construction.
9) So, which of us is more honest, truthful, ethical, moral, seeking the most good for the most of mankind?
I know the answer. And I pay the price. And you don’t.
The painful truth is that the most effective means of achieving good the most good for all is the reduction of the size of the underclass that is determined purely empirically, by market forces, continuing natural selection. You may not understand that this is just physics. It’s just a law of the universe. There is nothing we can do about it. So returning to ‘soft eugenics’ (one child policy) and insuring (taking care) of those who ‘have the birth defect’, is the only possible method (and it will get worse in the near future) by which we can produce relative equality of condition despite the natural hierarchy of competence, preserving the freedom and incentives necessary for the preservation of democracy, while at the same time maximizing redistribution.
If you disagree then you are either wrong, ignorant, a zealot for a religion of pseudoscience, or a liar, and a threat to the peace, prosperity, and evolution of mankind. And you are not, as you imagine, ‘a good person’. Just the opposite. You are a well-meaning fool, unfit for the severity of the subject matter upon which you opine out of ‘feelings’ rather than knowledge: ignorance.