Bad Catholic, Marc Barnes, on the great divorce between our selves and our bodies.
Anti-liberal (pre-reactionary?) John C. Wright series On Politics begins here. From Part Two:
The three natural truths which form the axioms of politics can be summed up as three rules. The Rule of Adam says that man is mortal and must toil and till to earn his bread. The Rule of Eve says that it is not good for man to be alone, and that women needs a mate to protect and rear children. The Rule of Cain says that man is a murderer, and is ever tempted to prey on his brother.
If this is too clear and colorful for modern tastes, I can phrase the same rules in the colorless and inaccurate language preferred by pseudo-scientists. The first is the rule of labor, which says that labor is a scarce resource always in demand to bring forth the goods and services needed to preserve vital energies. The second is a rule of cooperation, which says that it wastes less of this scarce resource if men cooperate so as to take advantage of specialization of labor. The third is a rule of self-interest or rent-seeking, which says that men will turn to force and fraud to achieve the benefits of the labor of others if not hindered by a system of social cooperation whose sanctions deter and discourage force and fraud.
The system of social cooperation whose sanctions deter force and fraud is called civilization.
Turd Ferguson gives an uplifting podcast for gold bulls whose lack of faith in the Bernanke may be wavering. He remains confident of, and makes a compelling case for, QE∞. That should be good for gold… eventually… as well as Bitcoin.
Audacious Epigone runs the correlations between state obesity rates and googling “weight loss”. Well, that’s a start.
Elusive Wapiti argues for a well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, in “Citizens” Safer Than Police.
Free Northerner looks at divorce risk across many variables. Highlights (or lowlights depending on how you look at it):
Number of prior sexual partners (p.18):
0: 20%
1: 46%
2-4: 56-60%
5-15: ~70%
16+: ~80%
He also points us to the handy and dandy Divorce Probability Indicator. When all is said and done, everyone’s a Bayesian.
Athelron points out the rarely remarked upon remarkable facility certain protestors have in English and with Western cultural references. If you didn’t know any better, you’d almost think they were protesting for American (and BBC) cameras or something. But you know better. See also.
As you almost surely know already, Lord Moldbug popped up his head with 8500 words of lunatick raving about the NSA, grepping, and Roissy.
That’s it for now… til next “week”… The Reactivity Place, Over and Out.
“When all is said and done, everyone’s a Bayesian.”
Maybe, but the calculator itself is kind of asinine. So many cofounding variables. I’d much rather a human divorce insurance adjuster come to my home and do a thorough, holistic evaluation. Also, no questions about dominance.
LikeLike
I wonder if you can actually buy divorce insurance? Of course, you can insure anything… I bet the underwriters for that know more about human nature than almost anyone!!
[Addendum: “We offer a 20% spanking discount!”]
LikeLike
Re the Marc Barnes piece, allow me to add another reactionary voice in favour of actual dancing. I’ve hesitated to bring it up in the past, because the old-fashioned stately dances were mostly denounced when new as licentious aberrations that, if not stopped, would lead to all manner of disasters, all of which have now happened.
It is still possible though, and indeed this evening I will be leading my wife around the ballroom in tango, foxtrot, and what have you, and it is at least a point of contact with the continuity of culture. The linked article gives me an excuse to plug the concept.
LikeLike
Not sure I’d categorize Barnes as a reactionary… pre-reactionary perhaps, but he’s young.
Yes absolutely about the dancing… I dunno much about the history of dancing but I suspect that constant drumbeat of intergenerational denunciation is a bit of an exaggeration, and may well be isolated to the Victorian era… in which Progressivism was already regnant.
But my homeschooled, very traditionally reared, kids are learning to actually dance… not stand around sheepishly, and DEFINITELY not simulate sex acts. My mantilla-wearing, latin-loving 18yo daughter loves swing dancing in fact… and various kinds of polite dancing are very much in vogue at Christendom and TAC. We’ve encouraged our girls to give some status points to men who can dance well. (And our boys to consider it important… boys willing and able to dance tend to benefit from… I’d call it… structural alpha.)
So there is hope. Traditional dancing does not make one a reactionary… but you cannot be reactionary without traditional dancing!
[Addendum: … and without good whiskey and fine tobacco products!]
LikeLike