Pick a Political Party

There is a guy I know, underground dude, well hidden from profane eyes, that has pretty succesfully found the markers for YOUR political ideology. You do have a political ideology.

  • Libertarians
  • Left-libertarians
  • Paleoconservatives
  • Principled progressives
  • Right-wing partisans
  • Left-wing partisans
  • Right-wing authoritarians
  • Left-wing authoritarians
  • Unclassified authoritarians
  • Non-political criminals

He did a knock out job finding the common identifying agents thru 100’s of case studies. Not a normie task. Robert Greene in his book “Laws of Human Nature” did a knock out job defining human archetypes. Behavior. Your job is to take that information and use it in life, in political matters, in finding the right dentist. Because certain ideologies aren’t ethical on that carries down to the individual level.

Here is what he discovered about the Conservative camp. the mainstream political Right may be a more diverse group than the mainstream Left. D-I-V-E-R-S-E

The different archetypes in conservative camp consist of.

Persons who are fiscal conservatives but who may be culturally liberal or conservative. Margaret Thatcher, for example, was a socially liberal fiscal conservative.

Cultural conservatives with a deep desire to defend what they perceive as being their national heritage, who may or may not be fiscally conservative. Ronald Reagan was culturally conservative but his massive expansion of the federal government was anything but fiscally conservative. Socialist as a matter of fact. People fail to point that out. That’s your political ideology at work. Not your objective ability to analyze events and actions.

The third camp is not particularly liberal or conservative on culture or economics, and aligns with the other conservatives by default. Clint Eastwood may belong to this camp. Trump is a real John Wayne. There is a new sheriff in town and I’m not establishment. That was the hook.

The fourth camp are left-wing infiltrators; there are many of these in politics. It seems far easier to find closet left-wingers among conservative leaders than it is to find right-wingers posing as liberal leaders.

Overall, the Right may be not so much an ideological camp as an informal alliance of factions aligning against the Left. My suspicion is that what we know as the Right might disperse and lose interest in politics altogether if they didn’t feel threatened by the incursions of the left.

And I can spot a conservative who acts like a leftist in a heartbeat. They double down. They use dogma to make a point.

The reality is, those are labels that no longer exist within our political structure. There are conservatives but NO party actually represents the true tenents of conservativism. And conservatism holds the same principles as the center. No government intervention. But when their authority violates those principles, they say ok. That NO longer makes them conservatives but only by their own self identification to make them feel better.

The Soviet Union only collapsed when in TIME, a Zeitgeist occurred. A golden Mean. See explanation on Grimm Fairy tales because it’s relevant to your predictions. And you all do have predictions. The proletariat voted NO CONFIDENCE. They moved to the center.

That wasn’t going to happen last two elections. The hatred of the left and fear, deservingly so, allowed someone to offer the solution. Soo the mindset was anything else but the left.

The next guy or AOC, whoever comes first, will offer you the anecdote to whatever ails you. Most will accept it. It’s not what they say, it’s what they done.

I can tell you as bad as Hunter Biden was, that the Trump children are making a fortune off the stock market!!! 100K for tweets. Getta outta here. Biden was just more fun. Crack, computers, prostitutes.

Until the proletariat casts a protest vote, nothing collapses. They will nudge you to the left, and they will nudge you to the right. Because they fear you moving to the center. Even if your candidate doesn’t have a chance in hell in winning, when they see a protest vote, they get worried. They know we’re coming after them.

But the hypnosis is too strong. That’s why Trump has attacked Ron Paul on multiple occaisions and MAGA influencers rant on about how libertarians will ruin this country.

It seems those influencers never read the literature or have any idea of the justice system when this country was founded.

There are only two parties. Those who are aligned with natural law, the origin of ALL law, common law included, or you’re aligned with anything else that will contribute to decline of society, culture and the empire. Because the consequence of ignoring these principles has been laid out by Richard Maybury for 50 years is Chaostan.

Prediction: The proletariat doesn’t really wake up for another few years. We haven’t reached the critical golden mean. Or as Scott Adams used to say, we humans are wet sponges. We believe anything we’re told. Disinformation is immediately passed around by government controlled, CIA created social media.

I ain’t saying it’s all bad. But if the medium is the message, then the medium consists of the information delivery system and the Hooman using it to deliver the message. It isn’t the technology. Technology is neutral. Can be used for good or evil. You can go on twitter and preach Peace to all Mankind. That’s not evil. Maybe you get some reach. Good luck with that project! It’s just it plays into our achilles heel of being receptors. It just means, you have to pick wisely. You don’t have to be the effect of mass thinking. You’ll know if you are, because you have alot of company.

1 Like

… World View is Primary. Political Ideologies are Derivative.

4 Likes

I didn’t see “anarchist” on the list…

Let’s try that…“Cast your vote for anarchy this next election”. “Let’s clean up this town”

T-shirt idea: “Don’t blame me…I voted for anarchy”

Or Sling 'Em! I’m not particular.

Semi-relevant quotation: "The truth will set you free…It will pi*s you off first, but then it will set you free.

3 Likes

Anarchists. Fair observation. All the anarchists on his list profiled under libertarian thinkers because anarchists are intensely political — they just reject elections and parties as the mechanism, favoring direct action, unions, mutual aid, or secession instead.

That’s a disagreement about means, not a withdrawal from politics. Most get lumped with libertarians because they share the defining commitment — opposition to coercing peaceful people — and he’s measuring that commitment, not party membership. If he’d sorted by party affiliation instead, the anarchists would have had nowhere to go, and neither would about half the other people on his list. Most anarchists that participate in politics have aligned with the libertarian party. I think it was John Rappaport who once said , Ok, no regulations on anything. That’s mad max world. Force needs to be applied in somethings and the question becomes who is gonna do it.

Libertarian Anarchists

  • Henry David Thoreau — “American thinker and anarchist”
  • Lysander Spooner — “American anarchist and slavery abolitionist”
  • Benjamin Tucker — American individualist anarchism
  • Voltairine de Cleyre — “American anarchist writer and feminist”
  • Murray Rothbard — coined “anarcho-capitalism”
  • Hans-Hermann Hoppe — “anarcho-capitalist scholar”
  • Walter Block — “well-known anarcho-capitalist scholar”
  • Brian Doherty — “anarcho-capitalist editor for Reason”
  • William Godwin — “first modern proponent of anarchism”
  • Gustave de Molinari — “first proponent of anarcho-capitalism”
  • J.R.R. Tolkien — “near-anarchist libertarian” (qualified)

And there are left libertarians that think we should share without a centralized government. That’s a fairy tale. Just go to a bar and ask a man if you can have a sip of his beer.

Separate from his analysis and criteria that he used to know a persons ideology.

The founders were limited government. No encroachment. They didn’t trust average man on the street. In a way, they were elitist. They wanted distance from the crowd and that’s why they made it a representational republic not a democracy which is two wolves and sheep deciding what’s for dinner.

Anarchy goes against the nature of the hive mind who will always look for an authority. If none exist, they will find one and put him in power. Authority in politics or even authorities on ancient history. People accept the first thing they hear without question.

My opposition to anarchy stems from conversations with anarchists inability to answer basic questions.

It’s 3 am in the morning and two people are attacking a person on the street. Who should I call for help? Ghostbusters?

Who here is going to volunteer to be part of a private police force, get para military training, training on the law and constitutional rights, and put themselves in harms way?

I was in a coffee shop when some wacked out dude walked in (I saw him in the street) and went to the ladies tip jar and took all the money. There were at least three dudes in the coffee shop including myself and not one stood up and said, give back the money.

So I assessed if I had to engage him physically, could I do it. I figured I could do it if it got to that. And I walked over to him and told him, very persuasively I might add, put the money back or I’ll re arrange your molecules. He said he wouldn’t want that to happen. I said fine. Put the money back but he kept walking away.

Now I had a choice, use physical force to get him to put the money back which in NYC, commie city, puts me in harms way or let him walk out because his pot wasn’t that big and tell the ladies to put their tips behind the counter. There was a dude in the kitchen and I didn’t see him come out.

The point being people are woosies. They can talk a good game maybe but when it comes down to acting, people turn the other way.

If you ever watched any of those police video’s, there is more people in the population that don’t know right from wrong than there are people who know right and wrong and consider actions deeply. Needs to be some mechanism in society that keeps people in check. Anarchists never get past the theory and have a plan to make the transition. I’m listening. I’m open. But ya gotta think out the whole plan first. Kind of like sending a ship to the moon and hoping you’ll figure re-entry before it gets back to earth.

“It’s 3 am in the morning and two people are attacking a person on the street. Who should I call for help? Ghostbusters?”

These are just trap questions in reality. Are you worried, as a citizen, what your responsibility would be in the situation? Or the outcome of the situation?

Ok, I’m going to back track to your question can I make a difference? Yeah.

Here’s how. Once I am elected as world leader and have dominion over millions of people, I’m going to make it illegal and a crime against humanity to write postulates/statements online that aren’t validated with some form of accepted reasoning. Conclusions that are congruent with some principle.

How are they trap questions? What fallacy did I commit? Correct it. And don’t turn the question to me before you answer it. And don’t deviate from the question.

My assertion is if this law was enacted most online activity would cease.

The answer is no. I’m not worried about my responsibility as a citizen. I’m the guy who keeps his word and attempts at providing reasoning to his conclusions.

If my responsibility as a citizen is supported with my right to carry and use, I’m good. I’ll dispense of my duties and hunt you down like a rabbit.

I didn’t use the word fallacy my man… You cannot just command people to do things brotha. No current governing body in this world gets an approval rating from me. I choose none. I just think you have incorrect preconceptions about what anarchy may or may not be, it’s not really a “political view or party”. The first principle of general anarchism/libertarians, is the non aggression principle. If they do not believe in that, they are not actually following what they claim to be.

I’m going to help you on this one. I once had a friend who was Macedonian. I don’t think he ever set foot in macedonia but that’s where his ma and pa were from. I used to live in a Greek Area.

I asked how we solve the problem of crime in an anarchist society. You replied it was a trap question. A trap or trick question is known as a complex question fallacy. Better known as a loaded question. I insert a presupposition that is untrue in my question. My question was a probing question. You mislabeled it a trick question which is considered a logical fallacy. You didn’t use the words and you might not recognize it, but that’s what you did.

Did I loose you? It is not a trap question neither is it loaded or complex. It’s a simple probe. If somebody is an anarchist, how do you deal with misbehavior at all levels without a higher authority? Nobody can or will answer the question without word salad.

Lastly, you interpreted my tongue in cheek as literal. It was hypothetical.

You didn’t read Scott Adams. This statement is called mind reading. After I gave an explanation of why the anarchists were put into the libertarian column and explained why that was done by defining an anarchist. You didn’t issue a question

. I just think you have incorrect preconceptions about what anarchy may or may not be, it’s not really a “political view or party”

Thus your reply was mostly postulates.

There would be one circumstance where you can command people what to do and it still be under natural law. A benevolent dictator. A wise elder. Star Wars. A wise elder who understands natural law better than all the citzenery and makes decisions in the best interest of all the individuals in the land. You know, big matters. Not who you are to marry. George Lucas who probably read Plato. It’s not power and control. The same way a parent doesn’t tell their children what to do simply to exert authority rather shows them the way to a productive responsible life. Yeah, to a kid, go clean your room sounds like an authoritarian but it’s not. It’s teaching something that he will carry the rest of your life.

Lastly, postulates are hypnosis. I can call anybody a rapists. Free speech you know. I can label anybody anything I want according to postulates. It’s a statement. That’s it. The world is flat, Global warming coming. 1200 bc all the cities burned.

Educating the public with an edict that they shouldn’t unconsciously use hypnotic patterns would hurt the collective or create a more just world?

What you say Socrates?

I’ll pay for you to take a course in basic reasoning and logical fallacies. And after you finish, and you pass, we can have this conversation again?

I don’t want to force you to do anything. I want you to voluntarily see that postulates aren’t a proper way to engage with New Yorkers.

On an average day, you encounter this 13 times an hour on message boards and social media.

1 Like

Alright man, if you say so. Good night.

Socrates Mourns the death of the west and the death of basic competency in the trivium. Logic, rhetoric and grammar. I suck at the last so I am somewhat a contributor to the destruction of an enlightened society.

… another favorite of mine (not to use of course)

The Fallacy of Four Terms - Quaternio Terminorum in which another nasty term plays a part – Equivocation. Equivocation is rampant in American discourse.

1 Like

Somebody that speaks my language. There might be hope. Then I woke up.

Nothing is better than eternal happiness.
A ham sandwich is better than nothing.
∴ A ham sandwich is better than eternal happiness.

All things are relative.

All relatives are things.

My relatives took all my things. :slight_smile:

@Scarmoge As the terrestrial god of sources and references… you might know where that one came from…

2 Likes

All my things are relative.
All my relatives are things.
Therefore I am owed a ham sandwich, on the merits.

Enjoy Every Sandwich - Warren Zevon
I miss Warren Zevon and Mitch Hedberg at least once a day.

2 Likes

A great text for the Autodidact in all of us …

Reasoning Text

2 Likes

Government run education system ripped out everything that was important and fundamental to good thinking and good living. A book like this is more important than 12 books on ancient continents that all contain informal fallacies.

1 Like

Thought of the day:

We better get to enjoying the (expletive) out of our sandwiches…

Past sandwich performance is NOT an indicator of future sandwich success. It’s going to be anarchy out there, and it’s hard to enjoy one’s sandwich when one’s been hit in the mouth -Mike Tyson?

Is that gasoline I smell?

Scene from “The Crow”

1 Like

… this is very well written and easy to understand. Was very much liked by students.

1 Like