Jordan Peterson: Antisocial psy.cho.pathic – and i

Wstching this vid, and hearing Mr. Jordan mention “Afraid of getting caught”, I got inspired to write the following:

“Afraid of getting caught” describes the contemporary justice system to a T, which is why there is so much “crime” (victimless). Legal crime isn’t about doing wrong or harm, but about displeasing some MP. It’s not about committing misdeeds. Which is why people feel no qualms about committing the “crimes”. All punishment for crimes is limited to the consequences of getting caught. Your conscience will not nag at you for any actual wrong-doing, because none has been committed. This will transfer to actual (harm causing) misdeeds, escalating into a dog eat dog criminal society.


Financing cowards

During the notorious school shootings in Columbine and Miami, while defenseless (unarmed) school kids were being killed, the armed “protect and serve brigade” stayed outside, waiting for reinforcement¹.
If the people I hired would pull off such a scam (not doing what they let themselves be hired to do, resulting in many deaths), I’d cancel the contract. But if you cancel the contract and stop paying them, they throw you in jail. “We decide when the contract’s terminated.”
Such is the behaviour of government police.

¹) Bang! Bang! ” Aaaah! Heeelp!”
“Dispatch, this is officer Don Ut, We are at the scene, and there is screaming inside. What’s keeping those reinforcements? Over.”
“Officer Ut, they’re just finishing their coffee. They should be with you in about 15 minutes. Besides, if they’re screaming, they’re not dead, are they?”
“You’ve got a point there, Maxine. We’ll remain on stand-by for another 15 minutes.”
“Right you are, officer Ut. Be safe!”

Thomas Hobbes (1588–1679): The arch conservative

Hobbes was a proponent of the existing form of government in his day: absolute monarchy. That was what he knew and was comfortable with, and thus imagined to be good, because the alternative (change) he considered to be unpleasant.

He would be right if that monarch were some supernaturally disinterrested, self sacrificing, incorruptible superman, one of Thomas Jefferson’s angels. Whose mind would not be warped by the delights of absolute power: ergo who was not human. As the 2 Stans have proven, even if such an extraterrestrial were to arrive on earth and take control, this control would warp the minds of the controlled, because no person (from whatever planet) can be expected to be divinely perfect all the time and everywhere, the unfortunate tendency for people to obey orders from higher authorities, no matter how imperfect (even wrong), means that no authority is the best authority.

Even over 3 centuries after Hobbes, there are still people who wish to believe that our glorious leaders are only out to serve our interests to the best of their abilities, whereas impartial observation reveals other motives and actions on the part of the persons that find themselves compelled to impose their wills on millions of citizens. Surely, giving in to such a calling can’t be good for the soul.

Secession instead of emigration

“If you don’t like it here, then leave! Good riddance!”
Is what some morally/intellectually unflexible persons might say to anyone mentioming the concept of secession (a region splitting off of a certain political unit). To which I say:
I can find no reason to agree with that. Since the state ranks somewhere near the bottom of the hierarchy (well below any citizens), if the state is misbehaving toward me, I’m in my right to change the state. If (out of politeness) I would not wish to impose my will upon millions of others (democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what’s for dinner), then I can always create my own political unit, independent from the origin-state. On the very same patch of earth I’ve always called home.

After all: the state is dependent for its existence on the permission of ‘its’ citizens. So citizens can hardly be expected to have to bow down to the state. Therefore, if citizens are comfortable in a certain geographical region but unhappy with the state; why should they have to move out of that region? It makes much more sense for that region to move out of the state. If the state doesn’t like that, tough mammaries; it should have behaved better.

“Disappointed in capitalism”

You may hear some people say they’re “Disappointed in capitalism.” interestingly, capitalism ain’t what you’re disappointed in, amigo.
Sure, the western societies tend to lean more toward capitalism than to communism. That doesn’t mean they’re properly capitalistic! They’re… statist. This is apparently too fine a point for most socialists since Marx to grasp, because they keep identifying the wrong cause for the world’s misery. Time for progress (what lefties all boast about but appear allergic to), time to limit government to its only proper role: reducing government. (It’s most orderly if a government does that. Going via a minarchist phase into statelessness, a sudden shock in the form of a revolution will offer quick temporary gratification but will result in chaos).
So what these people are most disappointed in, is: the state’s meddling with stuff. That’s what causes the trouble and the inequality.Because the state has a magical authority, it can be co opted by big businesses. If there is no magical power, or institution claiming it (a state), how couod anyone try to seize it for their personal use if it doesn’t exist? Putting it in place, preying on the gullibillity of people might work, but requiees,a lot of patience.
Yes, this applies to you too, #AbbyMartin. Your personal internet show appeared to be in the right track, the title caused expectations: “empire files.” But instead of being critical of the empire, you seemingly adore the idea of an empire, so long as it does what you want it to.
C’mon! That’ll yield exactly what I wrote about above, but then different cronies will determine policy.

Politics is really a battlefield, where all sides lose. If (A) has the power, (B) gets/feels oppressed and (ab)used. So then, when (B) gets power, they use that power to take revenge on (A) and so forth and so on, ad infinitum.
Most recent example of this: after 8 years of Obama, the people were fed up with the abuse by the left. So they voted Trump into power. After Trump, who knows, what democrat will seize power and misbehave just like Trump did? Perhaps Bernie Sanders will have another go at it? The guy’s a jew, AND a socialist, (how confused/ignorant of the facts of one’s adopted ideology can one get?). 100 years since the Russian revolution and he’s still a socialist! It’s been 60 years,since the end of WW2!
People voted Obama because they where fed up with Bush2, even though they thoroughly enjoyed protesting against his wars (something they lost the urge for, when Obama was president and continued killing millions inbl watlrs of vanity), and they were fed up with not getting what they wanted. So they voted for Barry.

Marx and inequality
Celebrating Karl Marx’s birthday! Such a daring feast of being-wrongness can only be executed by the paper that hosts the oft refuted column of Paul #Krugman, who calls himself an economist, yet most of his writings are about how bad Donald #Trump is (there is indeed plenty to complain about with The Don) and how good mrs. Hillary Rodham Clinton is and could I please have a job in your cabinet, miss? So, they’re about politics, not economics.
He’s no more than a very partisan politician.
Being partisan (on the side of the government, not the people) is ofcourse par for the course in politics. Power hungry humanoids.

Mikhail Bakunin was more right than Marx. At least according to the label in the article: “anarchist”. I know that many ancoms (ansrchocommunists) claim that Marx (and Lenin, Stalin) wanted a stateless world.
I have trouble believing tha. Not only because of the horrible?Soviet outcome, but also because Marx proposed a central bank, and there are quotes that refer to the role of the state.
I do not own a copy of Das #Kapital (though I have downloaded some digital versions of it, but their text could have been altered by removing undesirable passages, or adding content) so can in no way speak with any authority on the contents of the book. Which is a problem with holy books that offer instructions on how to live. It is also why #capitalism is the better #ideology: it actually is an ideology, unlike communism, which can be whatever you say it is, or rather: whatever you say lord Karl said. As his word is definitive.

educated liberal opinion is today more or less unanimous in its agreement that Marx’s basic thesis — that capitalism is driven by a deeply divisive class struggle in which the ruling-class minority appropriates the surplus labor of the working-class majority as 😘profit — is correct.

I do consider myself educated, so it is my view, that Marx proposed an ideology that is based on profound inequality, though an ever so slightly different one than existed in his time, but it was even more severe. In Marx’s time, the state colluded with big business, because their interrests alligned. Hence the Prussian model of education, where all children were trained to be around very similar ones (age, intellect, geography, wealth). Because #diversity would not a good regiment of soldiers or tame factory workers make.

Instead Marx proposed a system that could only be imposed by a powerful leader, who would seize power and transfer all power to him, away from the #people, where it rightly belongs. Such political inequality could only lead to economic inequality. Stalin forced people into the #Gulag as slaves that needed to be taught a lesson. And to help fund communism’s #BasicIncomeGuarantee, or #BIG, because slavery was the only way to make the state (pseudo) productive. The only thing the system could produce, was aversion leading to resistance, so the Gulag also served to keep people in line, aka exert political power over them. #Hegel apparently really thought the state was more important than the people.

Marx’s “surplus of the labor” is being taxed away by many a #socialist government, meaning Marx’s basic thesis is being perverted by socialists, that appropriate the surplus profits of the working #caste, for their own pleasures. #IncomeTax.
#Socialism is all about promoting/generating inequality; which is not something to celebrate. New York Pravda editors!
Better to celebrate the lives of Mises, Rothbard etc., because they are the only ones that proposed a system that stands a chance at leading to political (and #economical) equality. But oh no: those are too #progressive for that. Better to celebrate the birth of one of the most #conservative fantasts (alright, call him a thinker if you insist) of history.

Thanks to Brion McClanahan for sending me the link to the New York Pravda article.

Making punishments work

As any good parent will know: sure, some offspring must be threatened with punishment to keep them inline (as in: if you don’t behave on camp, you will get no deserts the entire week), but if the child does misbehave (a bit), the trick is to let them have a desert anyway (occassionally)
Acknowledge you failed (a bit) and don’t take that out on the kid. Hopefully next time they will behave better.
Because the parent knows, there will be a next time, time doesn’t stop. The child will want to live (and has to do so as part of growing up, anyway; the only alternative would be to kill the kid… )

Of course, I intend this as an analogy with the national legal system. Where the state only ever seeks to resort to (threats of), sometimes even deadly violence.
While sometimes the judge acquits a defendant, the sizes of prison populations suggest that it isn’t very often