Wednesday, September 21, 2016

The Shepherd Simulation

What is a shepherd if he loses his sheep?

Perhaps in desperation to maintain his role, he grabs random sheep from here and there to make a flock.

Surely, though, he had some responsibility to maintain the original flock.

How will he be judged successful?

Wouldn't this have ramifications, whether you run a country, or a local church?

You started with a particular group of people. Do you have any of them left? What about their children?

Do you labor with those who were entrusted to your care, or have you lost all of them?

Do you retain the appearance, but lack the charge?

Friday, September 16, 2016

An Apparent Mandate Of Heaven

In a way that reminds us cuckoldry, many pro-life voters are discovering the power of not voting now, precisely when they can't vote for a candidate who pretends to be a loyal servant to them while flagrantly helping the left push their agenda forward. Now, cut off from their preferred cheating bastard candidates, they begin to realize that, at least in theory, they might be noticed if they stay home.

This won't effect Trump. It would effect many, many would-be Republican candidates desirous of a chance to have a decent political career. There are people who look at the numbers and doing polling. This is not Trump.

No, a block of non-voters who may be potential voters is going to interest politicians at the margins, like perhaps a local politician who figures out he can get a few more voters to the polls if he advocates for people being able to keep chickens within city limits.

Yes, I know. You want to be more special than the back-to-the-land hipsters who can't make it out of the ersatz neighborhood, but you've been voting for the wrong people for years, and you've got some penance coming your way.

Anyway, let me get to what the title refers.

We've got no great symbology of the demise of the American Empire. We've got no Berlin wall- in fact, if we get walls, they will be a sign of finally reigning ourselves in. We've got no Yeltsin.

But we do have this interesting effect of Trump showing up to the party, and everybody else just sort of imploding.

We can, at the very least, take this as a suggestion that the mandate of heaven has most certainly been removed from the decrepit hegemony.

It is also quite amazing that Trump seems to take no serious damage from apparent mistakes.

The ways seem to be made smooth for him.

Your Method of Governance Must Accord With Biology

It is currently fashionable, in some quarters, to go on about sovereignty and perhaps even absolutism with an air reminiscent of some sort of spiritual quality.

What is usually lacking in this discussion is a real understanding of what the inter-generational effects are of these ideas. The kings who managed to promote themselves as absolute did not realize they were ushering in the age of the bureaucrat- they merely thought they were consolidating power. But by creating a pretext via which an 'expert' can usurp the desires of an owner- well, they planted the seeds of their own destruction as well as the modern, cancerous state.

What ever authority exists must be passed on to the next generation, just like whatever property exists must be passed on to the next generation. If they aren't passed on, they will soon not exist, or return to a state of nature.

The degeneracy that exists now is, in some ways, worse than a state of nature, because there are rewards to dysgenic behavior while it lasts.

A state of nature is what we rose up out of- the mind-numbingly slow business of increasing IQ over time happened in Christian Europe- slowly, over time- and this happened because the effects of governance at the time selected for it.

So, instead of natural selection, we want, at the very least, the level of selection we had in Christendom.

So, the sovereign must exercise the same right as anyone else- the right of ownership. It must be a difference in degree, but not in kind. Selection for the traits of good ownership should prevail. This requires the need for all to be able to rise, but also, for all to be able to fail. While it may seem unstable in theory, in practice it would be more robust. Hopefully, each new generation would become better at administrating property- and finding the particular family member who actually ought to be administering. Indeed, this process tends to produce more geniuses than we do at present- and geniuses are wasted on such simple matters. Geniuses are also often temperamentally unsuited to such things.

Thursday, September 15, 2016

Universal Suffrage Inherently Violates Private Property Rights

The nature of private property is that it is a form of governance. Unfortunately, this is one of the things the left can often see, while abusing horribly, but many on the right seem to have imbued property with transcendent properties. In the real world, perhaps unfortunately, the way you figure out who owns what is by observing and talking to people.

The 'conservative' myopia on this is roughly similar to the idea that wages are driven by productivity of labor, a view often touted as scientific by various economists, and one I also subscribed to until listening to Steve Keen and realizing he was describing the reality I have seen, though I suspect we differ somewhat on objectives. In my opinion, well, of course, productivity should drive wages- this is how you have functional organizations that are successful. And yet, even the most hardcore libertarian economist can find some bureaucrat somewhere who is making a lot of money- yet is not only unproductive but also often downright harmful to institution he or she is working for. Wages are, to a large extent, predicated on politics- whether it is politics within the government or within the firm, it is still political in nature. No doubt this also means that firms are a lot less healthy than we imagine the could be if they were actually capable of properly rewarding productivity. What it also means is that conservatives have been ridiculous failures counteracting the left's incursions with regard to wages.

By imagining an ought to be an is, conservatives essentially sidelined themselves, leaving the left to take over this area.

A similar situation exists with private property. Since it is the most fundamental form of governance, all subsequent political organization should be made to conform to it. Instead, we see an accretion of various and sundry political structures that contradict property rights, not least of which is universal suffrage. A beleaguered minority ends up paying for whatever was decided by 'the people.' The 'people' directly contradict the owner's rights in his property, for now he has to give up some portion of his property in order to pay for whatever nonsense the 'people' wanted.

Which would be different, of course, from property owners receiving rents for the use of their lands. Not to mention the ancient tendency for owners to dictate what sort of behavior was acceptable on his land, and to act as a judge when issues come up between people on his land.

Tuesday, September 6, 2016

Hypothesis: Social Media Companies Weaker Than The Old Media Companies Were

The old media companies merely needed you to watch. The new social media companies need you to react in their respective (walled or not) gardens.

Views are not enough. They want comments, or better still, new content created. Yet meanwhile, some of them have embarked on SJW censorship. Vox day talks about a project he has under wraps, called the Big Fork, which is a reference to what is done in free software when enough developers disagree over the direction of a project.

Which shows one of the strictures social media is in- they desperately want reaction, but not that sort of reaction. They don't want you to take your ball, go build a new place to play, and beat them.

I also wonder how effective they are in the long term as a venue for self-improvement. Why? On a fundamental level, self-improvement leads to less reactivity.

Friday, September 2, 2016

Worried I May Have To Give Up Health 'Insurance'

Apparently there's some crap afoot. They are going to jack up the prices anyway, but they really promise to jack up the price if I don't go for a 'wellness' appointment. A long time ago, I went to a doctor because I was in pain. They tested a lot of things, and said all the test came up fine, but obviously you are still in pain, so we'll just call it xyz syndrome.

Then there were, of course, offers for drugs that don't do anything good, unless you are Big Pharma, in which case those drugs would have almost certainly caused me to have symptoms for which they have a plethora of other drugs.

I got tired of the appointments scheduled every three months, the offers for flu shots, and an ever growing collection of 'patient declined' on a really crappy and misleading record.

So, I started going to the gym. I figured out how to get blood tests for the things that worry me.

And they are telling me to go get this wellness crap again or I get to pay an extra $100 a month. This is completely stupid. The insurance company has been making money off of me for years. I am a net contributor.

Additionally, when you look at what they are doing, well, they are going to increase their costs, because, when the doctor gets a person in the door, that doctor is going with the standard of care. He's going to dole out some sort of drug- usually statins or blood pressure medication- and most people are not going to be well informed enough to say no. So you increase the number of prescriptions, increase the number of side effects, and increase the insurance company's costs.

There's more I don't know about yet. Usually benefits just roll over; now we have to meet with someone to talk about something. The only reason I kept it for the past few years is because I'd prefer to have it if I ended up in an accident or something.

I'm still in pain, but I'm stronger. I don't seem to have to be out of the office anywhere near as often as my colleagues.

Wednesday, August 31, 2016

Shall All Fall To The Immigration Scam?

At, Daryl Withycombe suggests all will succumb to the pressure to allow immigration:

The resistance Japan and South Korea put up against mass immigration is stronger than that in Europe and the United States, but it seems inevitable that they too will import millions of people from third world countries to prop up their stagnating economies. Having learned from Europe’s experience, they will probably look for non-Muslim migrants, perhaps from the Philippines or India. Propaganda in the media and the education system will serve to normalize the experience of being replaced and to place a stigma on those who find it upsetting, just as it does in the West.

Probably. I've seen a few articles suggesting Japan will open up some, anyway. I don't know if it something they'll be dedicated to long term, or if it is a prelude to the Olympics being held there in 2020. They are going to want to have an awesome Olympics, if nothing else, so they'll want more people who can speak English- something apparently quite hard for the Japanese to do. Even among those who learn English, there appears to be some trouble with actually being able to speak it.

Anyway, if they were actually talking about it in Jackson hole, I suppose there's American pressure as well as internal pressure.

It would be nice to see them at least implement an IQ test, if not a battery of tests. We've got genetic testing now- and you know if people are coming to your country to live, well, they are probably going to be breeding there as well. Why not make sure your immigrants are a net positive to your posterity?

Indeed, I suspect many first worlders would be willing to go to places like Japan and South Korea, especially if they knew they wouldn't be followed by the low IQ people their governments have imported.