I Pledge Allegiance to the Tribe

[Swordsmyth]

Define the following:

If

Then

Define the following:


IS

[The Rebel Poet]

Yes, liberty culture to be specific.

It is also my understanding that you have claimed that culture is partly genetic. Is that correct?

[r3volution 3.0]

Territory is different than property

equivocation (noun): the use of ambiguous language to conceal the truth or to avoid committing oneself

When the foreigner receives permission to enter our territory then you can invite him on to your property as a guest and nobody will stop you.

No no no. You don't bomb Venezuela. What the hell is the matter with you? You let them experience the consequences of their actions. You also don't allow your country to become a Venezuela either.

Nowhere did I advocate bombing Venezuela, or for any other specific intervention.

I've been arguing that intervention is justifiable in principle.

Where and when it would actually be justified in practice is an entirely different question, and a much more complicated one.

[Swordsmyth]

It is also my understanding that you have claimed that culture is partly genetic. Is that correct?

No, I have disputed that with some who claim that it is.
My position is that any genetic influence on culture is too small to matter and that we don't need to concern ourselves with the causes of culture because we need only worry about the cultural outcome and the causes will take care of themselves.

[acptulsa]

Define the following:


IS

So you admit lying. Deflection is admission.

It is also my understanding that you have claimed that culture is partly genetic. Is that correct?

Yes, I've seen him do it. But he posts a thousand emojis a day for a reason. He knows the site only displays so many of his old posts.

He doesn't do that because he's willing to stand by what he said last month. Quite the opposite.

[Swordsmyth]

equivocation (noun): the use of ambiguous language to conceal the truth or to avoid committing oneself

LOL

The communists were and are globalists like yourself.

People form groups to protect themselves from criminals and conquerors and they must claim territory in order to do so.

[acptulsa]

People form groups to protect themselves from criminals and conquerors and they must claim territory in order to do so.

Criminals and conquerers claim territory. Libertarians buy it.

[Swordsmyth]

So you admit lying. Deflection is admission.



Yes, I've seen him do it. But he posts a thousand emojis a day for a reason. He knows the site only displays so many of his old posts.

He doesn't do that because he's willing to stand by what he said last month. Quite the opposite.

More lies, I admitted nothing and I have argued with people who claim culture is genetic this thread is one example:

If Culture isn't Genetic and Preservation of Culture is the Goal...

[Swordsmyth]

Criminals and conquerers claim territory. Libertarians buy it.

Not if they inherit it or it is empty.

[RJB]

equivocation (noun): the use of ambiguous language to conceal the truth or to avoid committing oneself








Nowhere did I advocate bombing Venezuela, or for any other specific intervention.

I've been arguing that intervention is justifiable in principle.

Where and when it would actually be justified in practice is an entirely different question, and a much more complicated one.

And you are suggesting that it would be up to some global governing body to decide what world leader or country should be taken out?

[The Rebel Poet]

No, I have disputed that with some who claim that it is.
My position is that any genetic influence on culture is too small to matter and that we don't need to concern ourselves with the causes of culture because we need only worry about the cultural outcome and the causes will take care of themselves.

OK, then I see no reason to call you racist. Have I done that before?

So you admit lying. Deflection is admission.



Yes, I've seen him do it. But he posts a thousand emojis a day for a reason. He knows the site only displays so many of his old posts.

He doesn't do that because he's willing to stand by what he said last month. Quite the opposite.

Can you back up that claim?

[acptulsa]

More lies, I admitted nothing and I have argued with people who claim culture is genetic this thread is one example:

If Culture isn't Genetic and Preservation of Culture is the Goal...

You mean the thread where you said this?

Individual choices accepted and copied by other individuals make the largest contribution, the exact proportions may be debated.

In any case TheVampire isn't interested in solving the problem and his suggestion wouldn't, he is interested in population replacement and white genocide.

Exact proportions may be debated? Liberty-minded people trying to teach their values to imported adoptees "wouldn't solve the problem"?

[Swordsmyth]

OK, then I see no reason to call you racist. Have I done that before?

In neg reps.

I am willing to put it behind us though.

Can you back up that claim?

Here is a thread where I argued my position that I laid out above against the genetic culture theory:

If Culture isn't Genetic and Preservation of Culture is the Goal...

[r3volution 3.0]

And you are suggesting that it would be up to some global governing body to decide what world leader or country should be taken out?

I'm talking about ethics: which actions are just and which are not.

This has nothing to do with who actually makes decisions.

[Swordsmyth]

You mean the thread where you said this?

Yes, that thread, just keep reading and you will come to it.

Exact proportions may be debated?

Yes, unless you have scientific proof with which to nail down the question beyond my opinion or yours or the opinions of those who believe in a significant genetic component.

Liberty-minded people trying to teach their values to imported adoptees "wouldn't solve the problem"?

No it wouldn't and that is not what The Count suggested, he suggested that whites in general solve their fertility problems through adoption, that is not a solution and the adopted children would be raised in the same kleptocracy that has depresses whites' fertility.

[Swordsmyth]

I'm talking about ethics: which actions are just and which are not.

This has nothing to do with who actually makes decisions.

It has everything to do with it.

No man is omniscient or perfect.

[r3volution 3.0]

Exact proportions may be debated? Liberty-minded people trying to teach their values to imported adoptees "wouldn't solve the problem"?

SS truly doesn't define culture genetically, but he might as well.

He conceives of culture as something sui generis, unaffected by environment.

E.G. There's crime is Mexico because Mexicans have "crime culture" (not because of anything to do with material conditions in Mexico), and therefore Mexicans who've come the US won't change their behavior (their innate "crime culture" will remain despite the totally changed material conditions).

A cynic might say that he really does think that culture is genetic, and this nonsensical theory is a cover, but I think he really believes it.

[The Rebel Poet]

I neg reps.

I am willing to put it behind us though.

I checked my reps. No record of calling you a racist there.

Here is a thread where I argued my position that I laid out above against the genetic culture theory:

If Culture isn't Genetic and Preservation of Culture is the Goal...

I was asking @acptulsa to back up his claim. It would be absurd to expect you to prove you didn't say something. He needs to prove you did say something if that's his claim.

[acptulsa]

SS truly doesn't define culture genetically, but he might as well.

He conceives of culture as something sui generis, unaffected by environment.

E.G. There's crime is Mexico because Mexicans have "crime culture" (not because of anything to do with material conditions in Mexico), and therefore Mexicans who've come the US won't change their behavior (their innate "crime culture" will remain despite the totally changed material conditions).

A cynic might say that he really does think that culture is genetic, and this nonsensical theory is a cover, but I think he really believes it.

Think again.

I'm not a racist, you are quite correct that for a variety of possible reasons from culture to multi-generational nutritional deficiencies or even possibly basic genetics any merit/liberty culture based immigration system will end up with disproportionate results but I don't have to worry about the racial aspect, it will take care of itself, if race is the predominant factor then focusing on merit/culture will produce the correct results and if race is not the predominant factor then if the correlations shift after a few centuries then focusing on merit/culture will still produce the correct results.
A racist would get the wrong results if the correlations shifted eventually.

Race is a trap that you don't have to step in because you can get the same or better results by focusing on merit/culture without opening yourself up to demonization.

I'm much too young to be a Boomer and as I told you above I would be perfectly willing to embrace racism if it were shown to be true.
(And I am all for allowing the required studies)

Your example of dogs does demonstrates the point that different genetics can result in widely varying traits but dogs are also an extreme example, very few animals demonstrate as much variation as dogs do.

In the end do the differences between your position and mine really matter?
We both want to design our nation's immigration around the behavior of different groups in relation to liberty and we will both end up with the same results, meanwhile I may be able to get more people to agree to my position which will make implementing and maintaining the policies we desire much easier.

As usual, he says what he does not mean. He even explains why. But the veneer is thin. He does have just enough honesty, however, to refuse to rule race out.

[r3volution 3.0]

As usual, he says what he does not mean. He even explains why. But the veneer is thin. He does have just enough honesty, however, to refuse to rule race out.

Well, either way, since his "culture" is functionally the same as genetics (innate, unchanging), it has the same implications anyway.

Whatever unfortunate consequences flow from a genetic theory also flow from his theory.

It has everything to do with it.

No man is omniscient or perfect.

That's right, and totally irrelevant, since there's no option for imperfect man to not make these decisions.

These decisions will be made; the only question is how, by what criteria.

e.g. "do what is best for liberty" v "muh nashuns"

[Swordsmyth]

SS truly doesn't define culture genetically, but he might as well.

He conceives of culture as something sui generis, unaffected by environment.

E.G. There's crime is Mexico because Mexicans have "crime culture" (not because of anything to do with material conditions in Mexico), and therefore Mexicans who've come the US won't change their behavior (their innate "crime culture" will remain despite the totally changed material conditions).

A cynic might say that he really does think that culture is genetic, and this nonsensical theory is a cover, but I think he really believes it.

Environment is one factor in forming and maintaining culture but culture is a set of beliefs that people carry in their heads wherever they go and it takes generations to change it because they pass them on to their offspring, it takes longer when they come in large groups that shield them from exposure to their new countrymen.

[Swordsmyth]

Well, either way, since his "culture" is functionally the same as genetics (innate, unchanging), it has the same implications anyway.

Whatever unfortunate consequences flow from a genetic theory also flow from his theory.

It is not innate, it is passed on from elders to children and it is not unchanging, it is just very slow to change.

That's right, and totally irrelevant, since there's no option for imperfect man to not make these decisions.

These decisions will be made; the only question is how, by what criteria.

e.g. "do what is best for liberty" v "muh nashuns"

It is very easy to not make such decisions, just don't intervene in foreign countries and you won't have to worry about which ones you should intervene in or not.
That is best for liberty.

[Swordsmyth]

Think again.





As usual, he says what he does not mean. He even explains why. But the veneer is thin. He does have just enough honesty, however, to refuse to rule race out.

I said exactly what I meant and I explained why others should believe as I do.

[Swordsmyth]

I checked my reps. No record of calling you a racist there.

I have received too much rep since then but one was in the thread about porn sites pushing mixed race couples.
I don't really care, I'm perfectly willing to let bygones be bygones.

I was asking @acptulsa to back up his claim. It would be absurd to expect you to prove you didn't say something. He needs to prove you did say something if that's his claim.

I know but proving that I said the exact opposite comes close to proving that I never said such a thing.

[r3volution 3.0]

It is very easy to not make such decisions, just don't intervene in foreign countries

To decide not to intervene is a decision.

[Swordsmyth]

To decide not to intervene is a decision.

But not the same decision as which countries "deserve" intervention.

[r3volution 3.0]

But not the same decision as which countries "deserve" intervention.

The point is, your argument ala "men are imperfect and can make bad decisions, therefore men shouldn't make decisions re intervention" is inane, as it is impossible for men to not make such decisions. They might error in deciding to intervene, or in deciding not to intervene. The general fallibility of man doesn't help your cause. It apples to literally every decision anyone could make about anything and tells us exactly nothing about what decisions people ought to make in any situation.

[Swordsmyth]

The point is, your argument ala "men are imperfect and can make bad decisions, therefore men shouldn't make decisions re intervention" is inane, as it is impossible for men to not make such decisions. They might error in deciding to intervene, or in deciding not to intervene. The general fallibility of man doesn't help your cause. It apples to literally every decision anyone could make about anything and tells us exactly nothing about what decisions people ought to make in any situation.

When deciding whether to tax and draft people to kill other people on the scale of international intervention no man may be trusted with such power.

[r3volution 3.0]

When deciding whether to tax and draft people to kill other people on the scale of international intervention no man may be trusted with such power.

You seem to be saying that, for an action with high costs, the decision should always be to not take that action.

What you're missing is that inaction can also have high costs (the avoidance of which would be the benefit of action).

I'm calling it a day; I suggest you give the nature of decision-making a deeper ponder...

[Swordsmyth]

You seem to be saying that, for an action with high costs, the decision should always be to not take that action.

What you're missing is that inaction can also have high costs (the avoidance of which would be the benefit of action).

I'm calling it a day; I suggest you give the nature of decision-making a deeper ponder...

You think like all statists with a GOD complex, somethings should be left alone because you are more likely to do harm than good if you meddle in them.

You could make the exact same arguments about economic issues and you would be just as wrong.