Contra Libertoonianism: Liberty only exists inside the Group.

 

* Basic Libertarian Assertions * Government is just force. Force is ebil, and any good it does the market would do better, M'kay. ( note the pie in the sky assertions stated as if they are the most logical and historically sound things that could be stated ... but they are in fact based SOLELY on the IGNORANCE of the audience as the speaker is using RHETORIC not LOGIC to 'carry' his non-points ... Government is just a group of people acting as one; no person exists outside of or apart from these groups; rights and property are creations of these groups and DO NOT EXIST in nature, while the material needs of the members such as hunger, thirst and housing are very real and must be accommodated. thus where personal 'rights' conflict with the group the person loses in almost all real cases, since minus the minimum needs being meet 'rights' are meaningless  -- I will give the libertarians their 'freedom' and keep ALL the food, water and housing .... That should counter his absurd and silly 'definitions' which are really just dogmatic pronouncements about what ought to be rather than observations about what really is in being.) ...

And notice how it will all be just free and good .... But hold on what exactly are these libertarian 'defense companies' and these 'mutual contracts' that together give the 'community' the right to jail, fine, enslave, your person and take your items if you violate its norms? ( Sounds exactly like a state jailing one for breaking a law, NO?) What is the exact difference between the good old fashion states with their public functions and the libertarian 'alternative' with its purely for profit model except that the libertarian one is even more corrupted by lust for money?

And the 'community' to these dingbats equals exactly everyone who can pay for contract with these defense companies and the network of companies taken as a whole, as well as the network of 'people' that have contracts with each other to do business together; everyone else is outside the market/society/protection-of-law and presumably ipso facto outlaws or criminals.  Not even the NSDAP claimed quite this much power over its members much less society as a whole. You have to go to East Germany or the USSR to get to this level of physical control over the life of the citizen. These Feedumb advocates want to literally throw you from society, and keep you from using the road to walk away!!! And then 'charge' ie slave labor you for the 'right' of being fined by them! In effect they are promoting a super corrupt banana republic slash corrupt African tribal village, idolized as the highest form of human organization once all the utopian gibberish is striped and the results made clear. :nuts:

Notice: They even claim the right to keep you from using the roads, ANY water at all, ALL land since in their ideal world ALL of these things would be SOMEBODIES property you would have to rent or pay for otherwise else you would be a THIEF, for using WATER! Even the Romans gave their slaves free use of water!  No slave master EVER did half the crazy shit these dingbats talk about doing to those that won't obey their 'contracts' which function just like Civic Law.

They both have the power to kill, jail and collect monetary income out of these acts; but the libertarian one would have a PROFIT motive openly built in, and would assume that EVERYTHING that you use should cost ... since nature cannot be unowned ... and we in fact are 'Self Owners' ( gibberish nonsense that assumes we are property to be bought sold or used ... Atheist double talk for 'we are all potential slaves.' ) ...  Thus they gabber about freedom but it is in the end the freedom to be considered equal to lifeless matter.

So they talk about 'liberty' but woe unto you if you lack the means to PAY for that liberty and WOE unto everyone that lacks the means to pay more than those that might pay to have the system 'find' that they 'owe'!
They further assume that humans are naturally 'good' and nonviolent ... so of course private paramilitaries are NO problem and are better than public ones ... I mean what would or could go wrong with arming private companies and given them a profit incentive to take over Smurf-ville ... What could possible go wrong?  And thus they talk about 'morality' but would either be the worst sort of tyrants or the first people filling the trenches.

Fundamentals of The PC Oligarchy

Fundamentals of The PC Oligarchy

We the modern Western Peoples live under a credit based oligarchy. It rules our society by means of controlling the volume and worth of both the issuance of credit and the commodities traded for that credit. All credit creation gains this oligarchy more power because ALL money created comes with an unpayable percentage of interest that does not exist. The basic formula is

A + X% =/= A; where only A exists in the world of empirical reality. If you think of society like a hamster on a wheel you are not far from the truth. This enormous power has allowed this oligarchy to in effect buy our social institutions in full.

Both parties are on their payroll. All major corporations are their partners or property.

Add caption

The media is a monopoly with the Oligarchies agenda as the ONLY allowed agenda. Education is designed to ensure stupid consumers NOT thoughtful citizens, because consumers are easily controlled by trinkets. IN sum our entire system social, economic, political and otherwise is rigged against you, the common man … and if you are 'majority' and male its doubly against you. This is the reason why it seems that YOU are not in control of your nation's destiny.

It is the reason why electing this or that party will not make any difference. It is the reason you are paying more and more and more for less and less and less while also making less and less and less, even before inflation is factored into the matter. It is the reason you are being empoverished slowly, and not so slowly. Why you are becoming like the Romans whom Tiberius Gracchus once noted were fighting for : “the common air and light' for being 'houseless and homeless they wander about with their wives and children.'thir leaders lied when they said they were fighting for 'defend sepulchres and shrines from the enemy; for not a man of them has an hereditary altar, not one of all these many Romans an ancestral tomb, butthey fight and die to support others in wealth and luxury, and though they are styled masters of the world, they have not a single clod of earth that is their own.”

Sound Familar to anyone you may know? 

For more start here.   Then try this, and I find pictures do the best explaining, and that is that, Folks.  Also for information about a lot of random nonsense.

Food as a means of social control.

Food is the oldest means employed in civilized societies by the few to ensure control over the many, excepting perhaps main violence, but then without main violence who would allow another to control their food; except maybe modern Americans?

In the early river civilizations we see a small elite of nobles and priest taking control of the storage, planting and distribution of the food wealth that allowed these societies to grow in population and specialization. Money is to a large extent symbolic food. Food the one good and service that must be bought, sold, and made for live to continue: Food must be had! Money on the other hand is an illusion as the picture of the stranded man with gold that he cannot eat so vividly shows those of us that are paying attention. A pocket knife is worth more in a survival situation than all the gold in the world, and food has NO monetary value in a survival situation: NONE!

So here we are in the twenty-first century back to the river civilization, and allowing others to control our food resources. How long before this becomes a millstone, I wonder?  How wise is it to allow those--that is the group of inbreed and intertwined corporations and banks that essentially OWN the USA-- that have already off-shored your jobs, and laiden you with debt, to control your food portions? Am I foolish in thinking that Wal-Mart is not here for the average American in its heart of hearts? I think not.

This being said one form of revolt would be to relearn how to provide for the pot for ourselves. I am thinking that having some potatoes in the window could be not only economic, but political, given that every dollar that corporations do not have is a dollar they cannot use politically against the commonality. It seems so simple: Grow a few pots and containers of food, and save money, and gain some minor amount of food security--this is as far most folks need to take the logic of the matter.

I myself have: Potatoes, tomatoes, pole beans, bush beans, sweet peas, bell peppers, onions, and garlic, all going in pots and getting ready to go out after the 21st of March. Of these the potatoes, tomatoes, peppers, beans, onions, and garlic are their own seed stock, meaning you can use the seeds in them as stock or in the case of the bulbs/tubbers plant them whole as seed. It is very easy to do, all you need is any plastic containers, some sort of soil,and water;fertilizers help. Place pots in southward facing window. That is the basics of getting started. Beans are so easy to grow any idiot can grow enough to feed himself, same with potatoes, and tomatoes. In fact if you have potatoes, tomatoes, onions, and garlic you will not starve and will survive decently; and you can have all of these for little effort and save money to boot.

At any rate, I do hope that some of you decide to take your food seriously, as FOOD is paramount.

You will need it three times every day for the rest of your life.  Thus it follows that Food must be secured so that EVERYTHING else can have any meaning.  Dead folk are not very productive folk; and folks that don't control, nor have the knowledge of how to produce, their own food are dead if they displease the master.

That is why I advocate for groups of men banding together to form the nucleus of a new organic social/economic/political model ( to be worked out AFTER the first things are done )

see Here ... basically groups of men band together, pool resources and save up to form legal entities { XYZ self help association } ( legal shield and vetting mechanism ) which will find men that are open to ideas, in need of help, and willing to pull their weight. This entity will save money in legal entities account, while members as persons will find house(s) in rural area to move into in groups ( think jail, barracks or the like and you have the idea). This will help save money, concentrate manpower, and conditions men to art of working as organic whole. These houses will do good works { like farm and provide 'free meals' that sort of thing } in their area to help attract more recruits and or bring over population to neutrality.

Fraternal Org = Association;  LMC = LLC; FA = Farmers Markets/Cooperatives of Markets; Credit Union = Means to greater things than dirt farming.

In the meantime:  The Association will in time use money in the agreed amount of time to buy rural raw land in name of second entity { 123 Farming LLC limited } that will be 'manned' by some fraction of the first men, who will in time move to rural land and with help of Association build farms/industry from the ground.  Then they will work like slaves to produce the foundation upon which to form up, farms and farmers markets, and industry and industrial associations all on the worker-owner model ideally.

Saved money puts people on land and then they labor very very hard, and that produces, housing, food, fiber ( cloth ) and can produce fuel as well ... these can be either used directly, exchanged, or used as raw materials to artifice further products for use or exchange as the case may be.

This will be repeated in targeted rural areas so that groups of these LLC 'farms' will be able to form Cooperatives that favor each other and local business that favors them. These farm/market/cooperatives they are all three at once but from a different aspect will then do two things: Send money back to the mother association, and form up a local association ( charity) to recruit locally.

Notice that all the parts are interlocked and support each other: The Desired Demo supports the FO and LMC originally, then the farms support the LMC, and FO, which both help the Desired Demo, and eventually all this work culminates in a credit union which helps EVERYONE by breaking the back of the usury and making those productive cooperative persons masters of their own destiny.

 And repeat until you have enough persons and skill and savvy to form a Credit Union such that now the 'Association' will have credit power, with which to fund its locals, the LLC's, help those in the targeted areas, purchase papers and radio, and fund local industry growth.

Other than that I have no real ideas at all. 

Foundational Facts

 So to make it plain this follows for EVERY society NO matter the political or economic organization. It is a GENERAL fact that is NOT evadable by nonsense accusations of 'marxism'. Try again losers: 

No Foundation: No edifice. It is just that simple.

 The fact again is that the nuclear family, division of labor by gender, and hierarchy are the stable basis for society; ANY society. If you destroy these you will destroy society in its total. There is NO other way or truth about it. Nature is NOT a debate club.   Once the Roman Plebes could no longer afford to breed the Roman People were doomed. They were replaced by slaves, dignified with the name 'Roman' but having NOT a drop of the blood or a spark of the genius of the Original Stock ... Don't be a Roman Plebe; Don't become the Proles of History. 

And with that we will leave you with this thought: 

 This pattern was the Roman pattern and it is the one we are repeating as I type. Rage against being a Roman!  There is NO dignity in the grave or the pit or in merely being a memory tossed about two thousand years hence. To stop this you must, band together, end usury, and take control of the political machinery upon which the power of the Oligarachy rests in each of the several nations it has engulfed:

 Basically: If anyone is going to have it over you; why not you? 

Logic is the basis for all sound thinking.

Correct reasoning is the basis for all sound thought! 

 THE AXIOMS OF DIALECTIC AND OF
            SYLLOGISM.

There are certain principles known as the Laws of Thought or the Maxims of Consistency. They are variously expressed, variously demonstrated, and variously interpreted, but in one form or another they are often said to be the foundation of all Logic. It is even said that all the doctrines of Deductive or Syllogistic Logic may be educed from them. Let us take the most abstract expression of them, and see how they originated. Three laws are commonly given, named respectively the Law of Identity, the Law of Contradiction and the Law of Excluded Middle.

1. The Law of Identity. A is A. Socrates is Socrates. Guilt is guilt.

2. The Law of Contradiction. A is not not-A. Socrates is not other than Socrates. Guilt is not other than guilt. Or A is not at once b and not-6. Socrates is not at once good and not-good. Guilt is not at once punishable and not-punishable.

3. The Law of Excluded Middle. Everything is either A or not-A; or, A is either b or not-£. A given thing is either Socrates or not-Socrates, either guilty or not-guilty. It must be one or the other: no middle is possible.

The Figures of the Syllogism

As described by Petrus Hispanius.

I	Barbara	all M is P; all S is M: all S is P
I	Celarent	no M is P; all S is M: no S is P
I	Darii	all M is P; some S is M: some S is P
I	Ferio	no M is P; some S is M: some S is not P
II	Cesare	no P is M; all S is M: no S is P
II	Camestres	all P is m; no S is M: no S is P
II	Festino	no P is M; some S is M: some S is not P
II	Baroko Fakofo	all P is M; some s is not M: some S is not P
III	Darapti	all M is P; all M is S: some S is P
III	Disamis	some M is P; all M is S: some S is P
III	Datisi	all M is P; some M is S: some S is P
III	Felapton	no M is P; all M is S: some S is not P
III	Bocardo Dokamok	some M is not P; all M is S: some S is not P
III	Ferison	no M is P: some M is S: some S is not P
IV	Bramantip	all P is M; all M is S: some S is P
IV	Camenes	all P is M; no M is S: no S is P
IV	Dimaris	some P is M; all M is S: some S is P
IV	Fesapo	no P is M; all M is S: some S is not P
IV	Fresison	no P is M; some M is S: some S is not P

The vowels indicate the type of statements:
A - Universal affirmative
E - Universal negative
I - Particular affirmative
O - Particular negative

Conversions of II, III, IV to corresponding I:
S - simple
P - per accidens
M - transpose premises
N - reductio ad absurdum
Daniel Seely Gregory's "Practical logic: or, The art of thinking" (1881) says: "The initial consonant, B, C, D or F, in the last three Figures indicates the mood in the first Figure to which the syllogism reduces. Thus, a syllogism in the mood Cesare, reduces to Celarent. The inserted consonants, s, p, k, f, m, indicate the various processes in reduction. S indicates that the proposition symbolized by the vowel preceding it is to be converted simply; p, by limitation or per aociden; k, by contraposition; f, by infinitation or obversion. The letter m (mutari) indicates that the premises of the preceding judgment are to be transposed. The p in Bramantip shows that, after converting simply, the premises warrant a universal conclusion. The other consonants, b, d, l, n, r, t, are not significant, but are inserted for the sake of euphony, or of the metre in the mnemonic hexameters invented, to keep the moods and figures in mind, by Petrus Hispanus, who died in 1277 as Pope John XXII."

The Traditional Square of Opposition

First published Fri Aug 8, 1997; substantive revision Tue Aug 21, 2012

This entry traces the historical development of the Square of Opposition, a collection of logical relationships traditionally embodied in a square diagram. This body of doctrine provided a foundation for work in logic for over two millenia.
 
The doctrine of the square of opposition originated with Aristotle in the fourth century BC and has occurred in logic texts ever since. Although severely criticized in recent decades, it is still regularly referred to. The point of this entry is to trace its history from the vantage point of the early twenty-first century, along with closely related doctrines bearing on empty terms.
The square of opposition is a group of theses embodied in a diagram. The diagram is not essential to the theses; it is just a useful way to keep them straight. The theses concern logical relations among four logical forms:

NAME	FORM	TITLE
A	Every S is P	Universal Affirmative
E	No S is P	Universal Negative
I	Some S is P	Particular Affirmative
O	Some S is not P	Particular Negative

The diagram for the traditional square of opposition is:

The theses embodied in this diagram I call ‘SQUARE’. They are:
SQUARE

• ‘Every S is P’ and ‘Some S is not P’ are contradictories.

• ‘No S is P’ and ‘Some S is P’ are contradictories.

• ‘Every S is P’ and ‘No S is P’ are contraries.

• ‘Some S is P’ and ‘Some S is not P’ are subcontraries.

• ‘Some S is P’ is a subaltern of ‘Every S is P’.

• ‘Some S is not P’ is a subaltern of ‘No S is P’.

These theses were supplemented with the following explanations:

• Two propositions are contradictory iff they cannot both be true and they cannot both be false.

• Two propositions are contraries iff they cannot both be true but can both be false.

• Two propositions are subcontraries iff they cannot both be false but can both be true.

• A proposition is a subaltern of another iff it must be true if its superaltern is true, and the superaltern must be false if the subaltern is false.

Probably nobody before the twentieth century ever held exactly these views without holding certain closely linked ones as well. The most common closely linked view that is associated with the traditional diagram is that the E and I propositions convert simply; that is, ‘No S is P’ is equivalent in truth value to ‘No P is S’, and ‘Some S is P’ is equivalent in truth value to ‘Some P is S’. The traditional doctrine supplemented with simple conversion is a very natural view to discuss. It is Aristotle's view, and it was widely endorsed (or at least not challenged) before the late 19th century. I call this total body of doctrine ‘[SQUARE]’:

[SQUARE] =_df SQUARE + “the E and I forms convert simply”

where

A proposition converts simply iff it is necessarily equivalent in truth value to the proposition you get by interchanging its terms.

So [SQUARE] includes the relations illustrated in the diagram plus the view that ‘No S is P’ is equivalent to ‘No P is S’, and the view that ‘Some S is P’ is equivalent to ‘Some P is S’.

The periodical recap of things as they stand!

For that periodical recap:

We the Western Peoples live under an oligarchy

This Oligarchy has it over us in all ways:

 

They control our money, our economy and both our political parties.  And thus they have us enslaved to an internationalist system that is NOT to our long term advantage. I propose that we band together based on an Organic Understanding of Society in which we are bound on to another in a series of interlocking circles something like this:


From this understanding of interconnectedness of one man to his brother I propose that we BUILD farms, factories, and all other things needed for life as a team not as adversaries:

I base all of my thinking on the truth that humans live in groups so that we can eat, be housed and clothed and generally survive:

And the other thing I keep in mind is that the FOUNDATION is the most vital part of any edifice, political or otherwise. And for human society that means stable viable families, on land, laboring to keep the kind strong and virile.

AND TO ENSURE THIS it is my feeling that from this:

And its accomplaning usury, corruption and thefts we need and will go to something more like this:

So that we can keep the Circle going:

We must make the Foundation Stable:

By Outlawing Usury:

But to do so we must band together:

Work really hard to create our own farms, factories, credit and economy generally by our OWN LABORS for our own ends:

Or We shall: Die by the hand of the oligarchy.

Some Links to more of my posts:
To Summarize and attempt to systemize
http://newswithviewstoo.blogspot.com/2014/07/to-summarize-and-attempt-to-systemize.html

Just some play lists -- repeat, repeat, repeat and then repeat again.
http://newswithviewstoo.blogspot.com/2014/07/just-some-play-lists-repeat-repeat.html
There are indeed a LOT of digrams, pictures and other visual aids about this blog
 http://newswithviewstoo.blogspot.com/2014/05/it-occured-to-me-that-there-are-indeed.html

10 Points from Oswald Mosley Part One

 


 


There is a part two coming so please follow the link here. Thanks.